18/04/2026
๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ | The Supreme Court, in the case of ๐ถ๐น๐ถ ๐๐โ๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐กโ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ก๐๐, ๐๐ก ๐๐., ๐ฃ. ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ก ๐๐., ruled that sounds incident to the operation of an educational institution, those arising from a schoolโs regular activities, are not considered a nuisance and cannot make the school liable for damages. The Supreme Court emphasized that there is no nuisance if an ordinary person would not find the sound disturbing, even if someone else is unusually sensitive to it. It explained:
โLiving in a densely populated country such as the Philippines, where houses and businesses are situated in close proximity, amplifies peopleโs sensitivity to noise. However, not all kinds or levels of noise are actionable. Particularly, the Civil Code regards noise as a nuisance only when it reaches an intensity that injures or endangers the health or safety of others, or annoys or offends the senses.โ
The Supreme Court added that damages cannot be claimed for alleged abuse of rights under the Civil Code. It found that the school did not intend to harm or annoy the residents and had taken steps to reduce the noise. There was no evidence that the school caused the noise willfully, with malice or bad faith.
๐๐๐๐ข๐๐ ๐๐จ๐๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง:
Unit C-02, Valencia Building, Magallanes Residences, Bolton Ext. St. (front of Bolton Elementary School), Davao City
๐๐จ๐ง๐ญ๐๐๐ญ ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ซ๐ฆ๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง:
(082) 308-2301
0999-802-0051
