Encroachment Dispute: Balancing Property Rights and Abuse of Right Doctrine

A property owner sued a neighbor whose construction encroached upon the dividing line, seeking removal of the encroachment and damages, but the lower court permitted the structure to remain, deeming the trespass minimal and a forced demolition unduly severe, relying on the principle of abuse of right to justify retaining the structure in exchange for damages. The high court upheld the decision, reasoning that the trial court correctly balanced the property owner's right to claim restoration with the neighbor's right to continue construction, concluding that compelling demolition when the encroachment was minor and demolition would cause disproportionate harm amounted to an abuse of the property owner's right, thus justifying the award of monetary compensation instead of forced removal.