CRUZ V. PANDACAN HIKERS CLUB, INC. GR No. 188213 January 11, 21! "AC#S$ Herein petitioner, Natividad Natividad Cruz, was the Punong Barangay or Chairperson of Barangay 848, Zone 2, City of Manila !n one o""asion, she approa"hed person playing #as$et#all in the #as$et#all "ourt, saying% “Bakit nakabukas ang (basketball) court? Wala kayong karapatang maglaro sa court na 'to, barangay namin ito! xxx xxx xxx Wala kayong magagawa. Ako ang cairman ito. "ga walangiya kayo, patay gutom! #ini ako natatakot! $aya kong panagutan laat!% &he gave an order to the other petitioner, Barangay 'anod 'anod Ben(a)in dela Cruz, to destroy the #as$et#all ring #y "utting it up with a ha"$saw whi"h *ela Cruz pro)ptly "o)plied with 'he a"ts of petitioners pro)pted the filing of a Co)plaint +for Mali"ious Mis"hief, rave Mis"ondu"t, Condu"t Pre(udi"ial to the Best !nterest of the &ervi"e and -#use of -uthority. #efore the Prose"utor/s 0ffi"e and the 0ffi"e of the 0)#uds)an #y the group that "lai)s to #e the #as$et#all "ourt/s owners, herein respondents Panda"an Hi$er/s Clu#, !n" and its president Pris"ila !lao Cruz alleged alleged that the #as$et#all #as$et#all "ourt affe"ted affe"ted the pea"e in the #arangay #arangay and was the su#(e"t su#(e"t of )any "o)plaints fro) residents as$ing for its "losure &he alleged that the playing "ourt #lo"$ed (eepneys fro) passing through and was the site of ra)pant #ettings and fights involving persons fro) within and outside the #arangays &he "lai)ed that inno"ent persons have #een hurt and property had #een da)aged #y su"h ar)ed "onfrontations, whi"h often involved the throwing of ro"$s and i)provised 1)olotov #o)#s &he also averred that noise fro) the ga)es "aused la"$ of sleep a)ong so)e residents and that the pla"e/s fre3uent visitors used the "o))unity/s fen"es as pla"es to urinate 'he 0ffi"e of the 0)#uds)an dis)issed the "o)plaint filed #y !lao, et al finding that the a"t of destroying the #as$et#all ring was only )otivated #y Cruz and *ela Cruz perfor)ing their sworn duty, as define defined d in the o"al overn overn)en )entt Code Code !t found found the a"t to #e a )ere response response to the "la)o "la)orr of "onstituents 'he offi"e found that though the "utting of the ring was 1drasti", it was done #y the #arangay offi"ials within their lawful duties, as the a"t was only the result of the unauthorized re)oval of and failure to return the steel #ar and padlo"$ that were earlier pla"ed thereon 'he appellate "ourt reversed the 0)#uds)an5s *e"ision stating that Cruz and *ela Cruz perfor)ed an a#ate)ent of what they thought was a pu#li" nuisan"e #ut did the sa)e without following the proper legal pro"edure, thus )a$ing the) lia#le for said a"ts Moreover, it held Cruz to #e without the power to de"lare a thing a nuisan"e unless it is a nuisan"e per se !t de"lared the su#(e"t #as$et#all ring as not su"h a nuisan"e and, thus, not su#(e"t to su))ary a#ate)ent 'he "ourt added that even if the sa)e was to #e "onsidered a nuisan"e per a""idens, the only way to esta#lish it as su"h is after a hearing "ondu"ted for that purpose 'hus, this petition ISSUE$ 6hether or not there is a nuisan"e whi"h the Barangay Chairperson )ay su))arily a#ate HELD HELD$$ 'here is a nuisan"e when there is 1any a"t, o)ission, esta#lish)ent, #usiness, "ondition of property, or anything else whi"h% +7. in(ures or endangers the health or safety of others or +2. annoys or offends the senses or +9. sho"$s, defies or disregards de"en"y or )orality or +4. o#stru"ts or interferes with the free passage of any pu#li" highway or street, or any #ody of water or +:. hinders or i)pairs the use of property But other than the statutory definition, (urispruden"e re"ognizes that the ter) 1nuisan"e is so "o)prehensive that it has #een applied to al)ost all ways whi"h have interfered with the rights of the "itizens, either in person, property, the en(oy)ent of his property, or his "o)fort - nuisan"e is "lassified in two ways% +7. a""ording to the o#(e"t it affe"ts or +2. a""ording to its sus"epti#ility to su))ary a#ate)ent -s for a nuisan"e "lassified a""ording to the o#(e"t or o#(e"ts that it affe" affe"ts, ts, a nuisan nuisan"e "e )ay either either #e% +a. a pu#li" pu#li" nuisan"e, nuisan"e, ie, ie, one whi"h 1affe" 1affe"ts ts a "o))un "o))unit ity y or
neigh#orhood or any "onsidera#le nu)#er of persons, although the e;tent of the annoyan"e, danger or da)age upon individuals )ay #e une3ual or +#. a private nuisan"e, or one 1that is not in"luded in the foregoing definition whi"h, in (urispruden"e, is one whi"h 1violates only private rights and produ"es da)ages to #ut one or a few persons - nuisan"e )ay also #e "lassified as to whether it is sus"epti#le to a legal su))ary a#ate)ent, in whi"h "ase, it )ay either #e% +a. a nuisan"e per se, when it affe"ts the i))ediate safety of persons and property, whi"h )ay #e su))arily a#ated under the undefined law of ne"essity or, +#. a nuisan"e per a""idens, whi"h 1depends upon "ertain "onditions and "ir"u)stan"es, and its e;isten"e #eing a 3uestion of fa"t, it "annot #e a#ated without due hearing thereon in a tri#unal authorized to de"ide whether su"h a thing does in law "onstitute a nuisan"e it )ay only #e so proven in a hearing "ondu"ted for that purpose and )ay not #e su))arily a#ated without (udi"ial intervention !n the "ase at #ar, none of the tri#unals #elow )ade a fa"tual finding that the #as$et#all ring was a nuisan"e per se that is sus"epti#le to a su))ary a#ate)ent -nd #ased on what appears in the re"ords, it "an #e held, at )ost, as a )ere nuisan"e per a""idens, for it does not pose an i))ediate effe"t upon the safety of persons and property, the definition of a nuisan"e per se Culling fro) e;a)ples "ited in (urispruden"e, it is unli$e a )ad dog on the loose, whi"h )ay #e $illed on sight #e"ause of the i))ediate danger it poses to the safety and lives of the people nor is it li$e pornographi" )aterials, "onta)inated )eat and nar"oti" drugs whi"h are inherently perni"ious and whi"h )ay #e su))arily destroyed nor is it si)ilar to a filthy restaurant whi"h )ay #e su))arily padlo"$ed in the interest of the pu#li" health #as$et#all ring, #y itself, poses no i))ediate har) or danger to anyone #ut is )erely an o#(e"t of re"reation Neither is it, #y its nature, in(urious to rights of property, of health or of "o)fort of the "o))unity and, thus, it )ay not #e a#ated as a nuisan"e without the #enefit of a (udi"ial hearing But even if it is assu)ed, e; gratia argu)enti, that the #as$et#all ring was a nuisan"e per se, #ut without posing any i))ediate har) or threat that re3uired instantaneous a"tion, the destru"tion or a#ate)ent perfor)ed #y petitioners failed to o#serve the proper pro"edure for su"h an a"tion whi"h puts the said a"t into legal 3uestion
