Test to determine noise as a nuisance – The test is whether rights of property, of

health or of comfort are so injuriously affected by the noise in question that the
sufferer is subjected to a loss [i.e. Actual Physical Discomfort]which goes
beyond the reasonable limit imposed upon him by the condition of living, or of
holding property, in a particular locality in fact devoted to uses which involve
the emission of noise although ordinary care is taken to confine it within
reasonable bounds; or in the vicinity of property of another owner who, though
creating a noise, is acting with reasonable regard for the rights of those affected
by it.

Action to abate private nuisance; incapable of pecuniary estimation – an action

to abate private nuisance, even where the plaintiff asks for damages is one
incapable of pecuniary estimation

FACTS: AC enterprises (Petitioner) is a corporation owns a 10-storey building in

Makati City. Frabelle (Respondent) is a condominium corporation who's
condominium development is located behind petitioner. Respondent
complained of the 'unbearable” noise emanating from the blower of the air-
conditioning units of petitioner.

ISSUES:

(1) Is it a nuisance as to be resolved only by the courts in the due course of

proceedings or a nuisance per se?

(2) Is an action for abatement of a private nuisance, more specifically noise

generated by the blower of an air-conditioning system, even if the plaintiff
prays for damages, one incapable of pecuniary estimation?
(3) What is the determining factor when noise alone is the cause of complaint?

HELD:

(1) It is a nuisance to be resolved only by the courts in the due course of

proceedings; the noise is not a nuisance per se. Noise becomes actionable only
when it passes the limits of reasonable adjustment to the conditions of the
locality and of the needs of the maker to the needs of the listener. Injury to a
particular person in a peculiar position or of especially sensitive characteristics
will not render the house an actionable nuisance–– in the conditions, of present
living, noise seems inseparable from the conduct of many necessary
occupations.

Test to determine noise as a nuisance – The test is whether rights of property, of

health or of comfort are so injuriously affected by the noise in question that the
sufferer is subjected to a loss [i.e. Actual Physical Discomfort]which goes
beyond the reasonable limit imposed upon him by the condition of living, or of
holding property, in a particular locality in fact devoted to uses which involve
the emission of noise although ordinary care is taken to confine it within
reasonable bounds; or in the vicinity of property of another owner who, though
creating a noise, is acting with reasonable regard for the rights of those affected
by it.

Action to abate private nuisance; incapable of pecuniary estimation – an action

to abate private nuisance, even where the plaintiff asks for damages is one
incapable of pecuniary estimation

FACTS: AC enterprises (Petitioner) is a corporation owns a 10-storey building in

Makati City. Frabelle (Respondent) is a condominium corporation who's
condominium development is located behind petitioner. Respondent
complained of the 'unbearable” noise emanating from the blower of the air-
conditioning units of petitioner.

ISSUES:

(1) Is it a nuisance as to be resolved only by the courts in the due course of

proceedings or a nuisance per se?

(2) Is an action for abatement of a private nuisance, more specifically noise

generated by the blower of an air-conditioning system, even if the plaintiff
prays for damages, one incapable of pecuniary estimation?

(3) What is the determining factor when noise alone is the cause of complaint?

HELD:

(1) It is a nuisance to be resolved only by the courts in the due course of

proceedings; the noise is not a nuisance per se. Noise becomes actionable only
when it passes the limits of reasonable adjustment to the conditions of the
locality and of the needs of the maker to the needs of the listener. Injury to a
particular person in a peculiar position or of especially sensitive characteristics
will not render the house an actionable nuisance–– in the conditions, of present
living, noise seems inseparable from the conduct of many necessary
occupations.

Test to determine noise as a nuisance – The test is whether rights of property, of

health or of comfort are so injuriously affected by the noise in question that the
sufferer is subjected to a loss [i.e. Actual Physical Discomfort]which goes
beyond the reasonable limit imposed upon him by the condition of living, or of
holding property, in a particular locality in fact devoted to uses which involve
the emission of noise although ordinary care is taken to confine it within
reasonable bounds; or in the vicinity of property of another owner who, though
creating a noise, is acting with reasonable regard for the rights of those affected
by it.

Action to abate private nuisance; incapable of pecuniary estimation – an action

to abate private nuisance, even where the plaintiff asks for damages is one
incapable of pecuniary estimation

FACTS: AC enterprises (Petitioner) is a corporation owns a 10-storey building in

Makati City. Frabelle (Respondent) is a condominium corporation who's
condominium development is located behind petitioner. Respondent
complained of the 'unbearable” noise emanating from the blower of the air-
conditioning units of petitioner.

ISSUES:

(1) Is it a nuisance as to be resolved only by the courts in the due course of

proceedings or a nuisance per se?

(2) Is an action for abatement of a private nuisance, more specifically noise

generated by the blower of an air-conditioning system, even if the plaintiff
prays for damages, one incapable of pecuniary estimation?

(3) What is the determining factor when noise alone is the cause of complaint?

HELD:
(1) It is a nuisance to be resolved only by the courts in the due course of
proceedings; the noise is not a nuisance per se. Noise becomes actionable only
when it passes the limits of reasonable adjustment to the conditions of the
locality and of the needs of the maker to the needs of the listener. Injury to a
particular person in a peculiar position or of especially sensitive characteristics
will not render the house an actionable nuisance–– in the conditions, of present
living, noise seems inseparable from the conduct of many necessary
occupations.

Test to determine noise as a nuisance – The test is whether rights of property, of

health or of comfort are so injuriously affected by the noise in question that the
sufferer is subjected to a loss [i.e. Actual Physical Discomfort]which goes
beyond the reasonable limit imposed upon him by the condition of living, or of
holding property, in a particular locality in fact devoted to uses which involve
the emission of noise although ordinary care is taken to confine it within
reasonable bounds; or in the vicinity of property of another owner who, though
creating a noise, is acting with reasonable regard for the rights of those affected
by it.

Action to abate private nuisance; incapable of pecuniary estimation – an action

to abate private nuisance, even where the plaintiff asks for damages is one
incapable of pecuniary estimation

FACTS: AC enterprises (Petitioner) is a corporation owns a 10-storey building in

Makati City. Frabelle (Respondent) is a condominium corporation who's
condominium development is located behind petitioner. Respondent
complained of the 'unbearable” noise emanating from the blower of the air-
conditioning units of petitioner.

ISSUES:
(1) Is it a nuisance as to be resolved only by the courts in the due course of
proceedings or a nuisance per se?

(2) Is an action for abatement of a private nuisance, more specifically noise

generated by the blower of an air-conditioning system, even if the plaintiff
prays for damages, one incapable of pecuniary estimation?

(3) What is the determining factor when noise alone is the cause of complaint?

HELD:

(1) It is a nuisance to be resolved only by the courts in the due course of

proceedings; the noise is not a nuisance per se. Noise becomes actionable only
when it passes the limits of reasonable adjustment to the conditions of the
locality and of the needs of the maker to the needs of the listener. Injury to a
particular person in a peculiar position or of especially sensitive characteristics
will not render the house an actionable nuisance–– in the conditions, of present
living, noise seems inseparable from the conduct of many necessary
occupations.

(2) Yes, the action is one incapable of pecuniary estimation because the basic
issue is something other than the right to recover a sum of money.

(3) The determining factor is not its intensity or volume; it is that the noise is of
such character as to produce actual physical discomfort and annoyance to a
person of ordinary sensibilities rendering adjacent property less comfortable
and valuable.
(2) Yes, the action is one incapable of pecuniary estimation because the basic
issue is something other than the right to recover a sum of money.

(3) The determining factor is not its intensity or volume; it is that the noise is of
such character as to produce actual physical discomfort and annoyance to a
person of ordinary sensibilities rendering adjacent property less comfortable
and valuable.

(2) Yes, the action is one incapable of pecuniary estimation because the basic
issue is something other than the right to recover a sum of money.

(3) The determining factor is not its intensity or volume; it is that the noise is of
such character as to produce actual physical discomfort and annoyance to a
person of ordinary sensibilities rendering adjacent property less comfortable
and valuable.

(2) Yes, the action is one incapable of pecuniary estimation because the basic
issue is something other than the right to recover a sum of money.

(3) The determining factor is not its intensity or volume; it is that the noise is of
such character as to produce actual physical discomfort and annoyance to a
person of ordinary sensibilities rendering adjacent property less comfortable
and valuable.