Short answer. Only on strict conditions. Article 629 forbids him to impair the servitude in any manner whatsoever. He may relocate it if the original place has become very inconvenient to him or blocks important works, but at his own expense, offering a place equally convenient, and causing you no injury.
What the law says
The owner of the servient estate cannot impair, in any manner whatsoever, the use of the servitude.
Civil Code, Article 629 — The Servient Owner May Not Impair the Easement. Read the full provision →
The rule is a prohibition with a narrow release
Start with the first sentence, because it is the default and it is absolute in its terms — no impairment, in any manner whatsoever. Narrowing the passage, gating it, surfacing it badly, parking across it or making its use conditional are all impairment, and none of them becomes acceptable because the way still technically exists. The rest of the article is an exception to that prohibition, not a general power of management. A servient owner who relocates first and justifies afterwards is in breach whether or not the new route would have qualified.
What has to be true before he may move it
Three requirements, and every one of them must be met. The original place or manner of use must have become very inconvenient to him, or must prevent important works, repairs or improvements — ordinary inconvenience, or a preference for a tidier layout, is not enough. He bears the cost of the change himself. And the substitute must be equally convenient and cause no injury to the dominant owner or to anyone else entitled to use the way. Equally convenient is judged by the use, so a longer, steeper or narrower route is not a substitute merely because it reaches the same road.
The others who may have a right to use it
The article protects not just the dominant owner but those who may have a right to the use of the easement, which is worth remembering where the way serves several parcels or where a dominant estate has since been subdivided. A relocation acceptable to one user may be useless to another whose access comes from a different direction. Agreement with the neighbour who complains loudest does not settle the position of the others, and a servient owner who deals with only one of them has not obtained the consent that matters.
Fix the existing way on paper before it changes
The dispute is usually about what the original easement actually was, so get its terms from the instrument that created it or from the annotation on the title — width, route, permitted use — and have the route as it exists located by survey. Photograph and date the present condition of the passage. Where the servient owner proposes a change, ask for it in writing with the reason and the proposed alternative, and have both routes surveyed; comparing two plans is a far better way to test equal convenience than arguing about it on site.
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.
- 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 →
- Bogo-Medellin Milling Co., Inc., vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 124699, July 31, 2003 — read the decision on LawPhil →