Short answer. Yes, if it is indispensable to the work — and after you pay him. Article 656 obliges the owner of the adjoining estate to permit materials to be carried through and scaffolding to be raised, but only after receiving payment of the proper indemnity for the damage caused him.
What the law says
If it be indispensable for the construction, repair, improvement, alteration or beautification of a building, to carry materials through the estate of another, or to raise therein scaffolding or other objects necessary for the work, the owner of such estate shall be obliged to permit the act, after receiving payment of the proper indemnity for the damage caused him.
Civil Code, Article 656 — Temporary Passage for Building Works. Read the full provision →
Indispensable, not merely easier
The whole right turns on that word. It means the work genuinely cannot be done otherwise — a wall flush on the boundary that can only be reached from the far side, a roof with no approach from your own lot, a site with no room to stand scaffolding. It does not mean the neighbour's yard is the convenient place to keep materials, that using it would save on equipment, or that your contractor prefers it. Where the job can be done from within your own property at greater cost or difficulty, the passage is not indispensable and the neighbour may refuse.
Payment comes first, and that sequence is deliberate
The obligation to permit arises after receiving payment. The neighbour is not required to open his land on a promise to settle for any damage afterwards, which is what would otherwise happen and why the Code put it in this order. In practice that means the indemnity has to be quantified before the work starts — an estimate of what will be damaged or lost by the intrusion, agreed and paid. It is also why simply beginning the work and offering to pay later leaves you in the wrong even where the access was indispensable.
A temporary access, on the narrowest terms
This is not a right of way and it does not become one. It lasts for the work, covers only what the work requires, and ends when the job does. So the reasonable scope is the route the materials must take, the footprint the scaffolding needs, and the hours the crew must be there — not general use of the neighbour's land for storage, spoil, parking or a site office. Damage beyond what the permitted act causes is an ordinary claim against you, and the indemnity paid at the outset does not license it.
Settle it in writing before the crew arrives
Write to the neighbour with the plans, the reason no other approach is possible, the exact area and duration needed, and the offer of indemnity. Photograph and record his property's condition on the day access begins — plants, paving, fencing, structures — because that record is what prevents an argument about what was already damaged. Keep the receipt for the indemnity. If he refuses despite payment being tendered, that written record is the foundation of any application to compel him, and it is far better assembled beforehand.
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.
- Ama Land, Inc. vs. Wack Wack Residents' Association, Inc, G.R. No. 202342, July 19, 2017 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Fausto R. Preysler, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 158141, July 11, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →