Short answer. Often yes. Under the Civil Code, a visible sign of an easement — such as a drainage channel built by the common owner before the properties were split — is treated as the title creating the easement once the properties pass to different owners, unless the sale documents say otherwise or the sign was removed beforehand.
What the law says
The existence of an apparent sign of easement between two estates, established or maintained by the owner of both, shall be considered, should either of them be alienated, as a title in order that the easement may continue actively and passively, unless, at the time the ownership of the two estates is divided, the contrary should be provided in the title of conveyance of either of them, or the sign aforesaid should be removed before the execution of the deed.
Civil Code, Article 624 — Apparent Sign Between Two Estates. Read the full provision →
A visible sign can do the work of a written contract
Article 624 addresses a common situation: one owner holds two adjoining lots and sets up something like a drainage channel, a shared driveway, or a window overlooking the other lot, then later sells one of them. Once the lots belong to different owners, that visible, physical arrangement is treated by law as the title establishing the easement — meaning you do not need a separate written easement contract for it to bind both properties, actively for the benefiting lot and passively for the burdened one.
What has to be true for this to apply
The rule only works where the sign was apparent — visible on inspection, not hidden or merely inferred — and where it was established or maintained by the single owner while both lots were still his. It has to exist at the moment the properties are divided between different owners, whether by sale or otherwise. A drainage arrangement that a tenant or neighbor improvised without the common owner's involvement does not fit this description, and neither does something built only after the properties were already separately owned.
The two ways this can be defeated
Article 624 sets two outs. First, the deed transferring either property can expressly say the easement will not continue — if the conveyance states the drainage arrangement is not to bind the new owners, that provision controls. Second, if the visible sign is physically removed before the deed is executed, there is nothing left to serve as the title. So the timing and the wording of the sale documents both matter: check what your deed actually says, and whether the drainage feature was still there when the property changed hands.
Why this also applies beyond a sale
The same principle extends to co-owned property that is later divided among the co-owners, not just to an outright sale to a stranger. If co-owners partition a lot that had an apparent drainage arrangement running across what becomes two separate parcels, the sign again stands as the title for the easement between the newly separate owners, subject to the same two exceptions. If your dispute involves a partition rather than a sale, the same evidence — what the partition documents say, and whether the sign was visible and intact at the time — is what will decide the question.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Sps. Tedy Garcia and Pilar Garcia vs. Loreta T. Santos, Winston Santos and Conchita, G.R. No. 228334, June 17, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Spouses Rudy Fernandez and Cristeta Aquino vs. Spouses Merardo Delfin and Angelita Delfin, G.R. No. 227917, March 17, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Heirs of the late Joaquin Limense vs. Rita vda. De Ramos, et al, G.R. No. 152319, October 28, 2009 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Privatization Management Office vs. Legaspi Towers 300, Inc, G.R. No. 147957, July 22, 2009 — read the decision on LawPhil →