JRL GENERALLY, THE POWER OR AUTHORITY FOR CLOSURE AND OPENING OF ROADS IS VESTED TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

Section 21 of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE provides: Closure and Opening of Roads. (a) A local government unit may, pursuant to an ordinance, permanently or temporarily close or open any local road, alley, park, or square falling within its jurisdiction: Provided, however, That in case of permanent closure, such ordinance must be approved by at least two-thirds (2/3) of all the members of the sanggunian, and when necessary, an adequate substitute for the public facility that is subject to closure is provided.

A PRIVATE LAND ONCE DONATED; OWNERSHIP IS ALREADY TRANSFERRED TO THE GOVERNMENT; AND SUBJECT LAND IS THUS CONVERTED TO NATURE OF PUBLIC ROAD, AND FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. In the case of the City of Manila vs. Juan Entote (G.R. No. L-24776) the Supreme Court upheld the CA decision: Contrary, however, to Appellants position, the above-quoted provision, which requires the passage of an ordinance by a local government unit to effect the opening of a local road, can have no applicability to the instant case since the subdivision road lots sought to be opened to decongest traffic in the area namely Rosemallow and Aster Streets have already been donated by the Sun Valley Subdivision to, and the titles thereto already issued in the name of, the City Government of Paraaque since the year 1964 (Annexes 2 to 7 of Appellees Brief). This fact has not even been denied by the Appellant in the proceedings below nor in the present recourse. Having been already donated or turned over to the City Government of Paraaque, the road lots in question have since then taken the nature of public roads which are withdrawn from the commerce of man, and hence placed beyond the private rights or claims of herein Appellant. Accordingly, the Appellant was not in the lawful exercise of its predicated rights when it built obstructing structures closing the road lots in question to vehicular traffic for the use of the general Public. Consequently, Appellees act of passing the disputed barangay resolution, the implementation of which is sought to be restrained by Appellant, had for its purpose not the opening of a private road but may be considered merely as a directive or reminder to the Appellant to cause the opening of a public road which should rightfully be open for use to the general public

[Type text]

JRL AS A PRIVATE OWNER OF AN AGRICULTURAL LAND, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXCLUDE ANY PERSON FROM ENJOYMENT OF YOUR PROPERTY. Article 429 of The Civil Code of the Philippines provides: The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has the right to exclude any person from the enjoyment and disposal thereof. For this purpose, he may use such force as may be reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his property. (n) BUT EVERY RIGHT HAS ITS LIMITATION. Art. 431. The Civil Code of the Philippines provides: The owner of a thing cannot make use thereof in such manner as to injure the rights of a third person. (n)

WHEN SOMEONE OBSTRUCTS OR INTERFERES WITH THE FREE PASSAGE OF ANY PUBLIC HIGHWAY OR STREET, HE/SHE MAY BE CONSIDERED AS A NUISANCE. ANY PERSON INJURED MY RECOVER OR FILE AN ACTION FOR THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE. The Civil Code of the Philippines provides: Art. 694. A nuisance is any act, omission, establishment, business, condition of property, or anything else which: (1) Injures or endangers the health or safety of others; or (2) Annoys or offends the senses; or (3) Shocks, defies or disregards decency or morality; or (4) Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any public highway or street, or any body of water; or (5) Hinders or impairs the use of property. Art. 695. Nuisance is either public or private. A public nuisance affects a community or neighborhood or any considerable number of persons, although the extent of the annoyance, danger or damage upon individuals may be unequal. A private nuisance is one that is not included in the foregoing definition. Art. 699. The remedies against a public nuisance are: (1) A prosecution under the Penal Code or any local ordinance: or (2) A civil action; or (3) Abatement, without judicial proceedings. Art. 703. A private person may file an action on account of a public nuisance, if it is specially injurious to himself.

[Type text]

JRL Art. 704. Any private person may abate a public nuisance which is specially injurious to him by removing, or if necessary, by destroying the thing which constitutes the same, without committing a breach of the peace, or doing unnecessary injury. But it is necessary: (1) That demand be first made upon the owner or possessor of the property to abate the nuisance; (2) That such demand has been rejected; (3) That the abatement be approved by the district health officer and executed with the assistance of the local police; and (4) That the value of the destruction does not exceed three thousand pesos. Art. 705. The remedies against a private nuisance are: (1) A civil action; or (2) Abatement, without judicial proceedings. Art. 706. Any person injured by a private nuisance may abate it by removing, or if necessary, by destroying the thing which constitutes the nuisance, without committing a breach of the peace or doing unnecessary injury. However, it is indispensable that the procedure for extrajudicial abatement of a public nuisance by a private person be followed.

[Type text]