Dear PAO,
My parents have a piggery in our backyard. My Ninang and some of her friends recently

complained in our barangay regarding the noise and sanitation issue of our piggery alleging that it is a nuisance in our community.
Having a piggery is very common in our town as almost every other house in our area has one.

We have been managing our piggery for more than 26 years already and it is only now that we are receiving complaints. Our barangay even told our Ninang that our piggery does not have any problem in our community. Is there a way that we can be protected from the complaints of my Ninang? Does my Ninang have a basis on her complaint?

Thank you in advance and more power to your office!
Alice

Dear Alice,
 To answer your query, we must first define nuisance according to the provisions of the Civil Code of the Philippines.

“Art. 694. A nuisance is any act, omission, establishment, business, condition of property, or anything else which:

(1) Injures or endangers the health or safety of others; or (2) Annoys or offends the senses; or (3) Shocks, defies or disregards decency or morality; or (4) Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any public highway or street, or any body of water; or (5) Hinders or impairs the use of property.”

In addition to the definition cited, the law also provides that nuisance is either a public or private nuisance. It is considered a public nuisance if it affects a community, neighborhood or any considerable number of persons; otherwise, it is a private nuisance (Art. 695, Civil Code of the Philippines). Thus, it can be inferred from the number of complaints about your piggery, that the allegations of your Ninang, is that of a public nuisance.

 With regard to the length of time of your piggery’s operations, the law provides that the lapse of time cannot legalize any nuisance (Art 698, Ibid). Therefore, assuming that your piggery is indeed a nuisance, your Ninang’s complaints may be justified notwithstanding the previous years of operation of your piggery. This is further supported by a specific provision of the law allowing individual persons, such as your own Ninang, to file a complaint over the alleged nuisance, which states:

“Art. 703. A private person may file an action on account of a public nuisance, if it is specially injurious to himself.”

 However, it is upon the district health officer to determine whether your piggery is a nuisance, and whether there is a necessity for its abatement (Art 702, Ibid). Your Ninang cannot on her own abate the perceived nuisance since it is required that there should be prior approval from the district health officer and it must be executed with the assistance from the local police (Art. 704, Ibid). Thus, your Ninang must first follow the procedures set by law in the determination and abatement of the alleged nuisance before she proceeds with further actions against your piggery.

Should your Ninang act on her own to abate her perceived nuisance of your piggery, she may be held liable for damages if she causes unnecessary injuries or if it is later ruled by the courts that there is no real nuisance (Art 707, Ibid).

 Again, we find it necessary to mention that this opinion is solely based on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. The opinion may vary when the facts are changed or elaborated.

 We hope that we were able to enlighten you on the matter.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.