Servitude Enforceability Against Subsequent Purchaser

The case concerned a dispute arising from an agreement where one party purported to grant a right of passage to another over their property, which was subsequently sold to a third party who refused to recognize the right, leading to litigation over the enforceability of the initial grant against the new owner. The court ultimately rejected the appeal, reasoning that a servitude established unilaterally by the owner of the dominant estate or through a simple agreement that was not properly constituted as a real right binding on future owners, particularly one not recorded as required by property law, could not be opposed to a subsequent purchaser acquiring the servient estate without notice of such an unregistered right.