Facts
The appellant [A.] and the respondent [B.] are owners of properties in the municipality of [S.] . Between their properties, there is a right of way that was established in 1867. The respondent sued for deletion of the right of way, while the appellant requested dismissal of the action and the respondent's obligation to keep the paths clear for pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
The Regional Court and the Higher Court of the Canton of Bern granted the respondent's action and deleted the right of way. The appellant filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Considerations
1. Admissibility of the complaint
The complaint is admissible because it is directed against a decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Bern, which concerns a civil matter and exceeds the value in dispute of CHF 35,000.
2. Interpretation of the right of way
The right of way was established in 1867 and includes a pedestrian and vehicular right of way. The parties agree that it is a pedestrian and vehicular right of way, but they dispute the purpose and route of the right of way.
3. Purpose of the right of way
The Higher Court found that the purpose of the right of way is to enable the transport of goods and merchandise for residential and agricultural purposes. However, the appellant argues that the right of way may also be used for other purposes, such as recreation.
4. Route of the right of way
The route of the right of way is disputed. The appellant argues that the right of way should run across the respondent's meadow, while the respondent and the Higher Court argue that the right of way should run along the main right of way and then over the access road to the communal road.
5. Interest in the right of way
The Higher Court found that the appellant no longer has an interest in the right of…