Short answer. Yes. Article 638 of the Civil Code subjects the banks of rivers and streams, even when privately owned, to a public-use easement within three meters of their margins, covering navigation, floatage, fishing and salvage. The public can lawfully use that three-meter strip for those specific purposes regardless of who holds title to the land.
What the law says
The banks of rivers and streams, even in case they are of private ownership, are subject throughout their entire length and within a zone of three meters along their margins, to the easement of public use in the general interest of navigation, floatage, fishing and salvage.
Civil Code, Article 638 — The Three-Metre Bank Zone. Read the full provision →
Private title does not remove the strip
Article 638 says the banks of rivers and streams are subject to a public-use easement even in case they are of private ownership, running the entire length of the bank and reaching three meters inland from the margin. So owning the title to riverside land does not clear that strip of the public's right to use it — the easement exists precisely because the article contemplates private ownership as the normal case, not an exception to the rule.
What the easement is actually for
The public's use within that three-meter zone is limited to the purposes the article names: navigation, floatage, fishing and salvage. These are the general interests the easement was created to serve. Someone fishing from the bank, or using it to pass along the river or recover something from the water, is exercising a right the article grants regardless of title. The article does not describe the easement as a general right of public access for any purpose whatsoever — it is tied to those specific interests.
A separate, additional easement for navigable rivers
Article 638 goes further for certain rivers: estates adjoining the banks of navigable or floatable rivers are, furthermore, subject to the easement of towpath for the exclusive service of river navigation and floatage. This towpath easement is distinct from the three-meter fishing-and-passage strip and applies specifically to land next to rivers that are navigable or floatable, serving navigation and floatage in particular rather than the fuller list of purposes covered by the general bank easement.
When occupying the land requires payment
Where the towpath easement actually requires occupying private land, the article does not leave the owner uncompensated: if it be necessary for such purpose to occupy lands of private ownership, the proper indemnity shall first be paid. So while the three-meter zone itself is not something the owner is paid for, an actual physical occupation of privately owned land beyond that zone, for towpath purposes, triggers a right to indemnity before it happens.
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.
- Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (Mmda) vs. Diamond Motor Corporation, G.R. No. 203386, October 11, 2023 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Corazon S. Cruz under the name and style, Villa Corazon Condo Dormitory vs. Manila International Airport Authority, G.R. No. 184732, September 9, 2013 — read the decision on LawPhil →