Persons and Family Relations against the family.
Pre-final Examinations  Mandatory – No, because marital obligations are
Title III - RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS BETWEEN
HUSBAND AND WIFE
Essential marital obligations:
1. The husband and wife are obliged to live together,
observe mutual love, respect and fidelity, and render
mutual help and support. (Article 68)
2. The husband and wife shall fix the family domicile. In
case of disagreement, the court shall decide. (Article
69)
3. The spouses are jointly responsible for the support of
the family. (Article 70)
4. The right to administer and manage the household
shall be the right and duty of both spouses. (Article 71)
Note: Except for support, the courts cannot compel the
husband and wife to do these duties. It is the moral
obligation of the spouses that should constitute the
motivating factor for making them observe the said duties
and obligations which are highly personal.
This means that there can be no action for damages merely
because of a breach of marital obligation.
Reason for the rule: The Conjugal property will be
made to answer for the damages.
Exception: If the property regime is complete
separation of property, one can seek damages under
Article 19, 20 & 21 of the Civil Code (Abuse of Rights)
Remedies if one of the spouses neglects his duties or
commits acts which tend to bring danger, dishonor or injury
to the other or to the family:
a. When the inability falls under psychological
incapacity – declaration of nullity of marriage
(Article 36)
b. When the spouse designated as the administrator of
conjugal or community property is guilty of some
acts of mismanagement - the other spouse can ask
the court for receivership. (Article 101)
c. The aggrieved spouse can ask the court that he or
she be the sole administrator of the conjugal or
community property. (Article 101)
d. Judicial separation of property. (Article 101)
e. When the spouse is guilty of physical, psychological,
economic abuse directed against the other, the
aggrieved spouse can ask the court for temporary
or permanent protection order (VAWC)
f. Criminal charges if acts of the other spouse amount
to a crime
- In our jurisdiction, a husband can rape his wife
under the Anti-VAWC Law
g. Injunction – Mandatory (commands the
performance of an act) and prohibitory (enjoins or
prohibits the commission of an act) injunction
Can the court issue a mandatory injunction directing the
offending spouse to perform his marital obligations or
prohibitory injunction enjoining the offending spouse from
performing an act?
 Prohibitory – Yes, the court can issue a prohibitory
injunction against the offending spouse for acts
which tend to bring dishonor, danger or injury
personal and consensual in nature. (Except
support – failing to do so would lead to contempt
of court)
On Profession
Either spouse may exercise any legitimate profession,
occupation, business or activity without the consent of the
other. The latter may object only on valid, serious and moral
grounds.
Who will answer or shoulder the debt incurred in the
exercise of their respective occupations?
IMMORAL/ILLEGTIMATE occupation without consent:
Article 73
 When objection is raised by the other spouse:
- The court will decide if there is basis on the
objection (valid, serious or moral grounds)
 If the court finds it to be immoral:
- The court will determine if benefit redounded to the
family before or after the objection was made.
If before: The debt or obligation incurred by the spouse in
pursuit of an immoral profession shall be chargeable only
against the spouse concerned. (Article 73)
- For this to apply, the innocent spouse must have
no knowledge of the other spouse’s engagement
in an immoral activity such that he could not have
interposed any objection.
If after: Any debt or obligation incurred by the spouse in
pursuit of the immoral profession may be charged against
the conjugal or community property.
- This is what is known as the Equitable Principle of
Estoppel where one could not avoid responsibility
and yet continue receiving the benefits. This will
make sure that the other spouse, who did not
object, should likewise share in the liability.
MORAL/LEGITIMATE occupation without consent:
Article 94 par 3 (ACP) or Article 121, par 3 (CPG)
Distinguish between two factual situations:
1. Obligation or loss incurred from an isolated transaction
Rule: Any obligation cannot be charged against the ACP
or CPG but to the separate, exclusive properties of the
debtor spouse. In order for the obligation to be
chargeable against the ACP or CPG, there should be
proof of actual benefit that redounded to the benefit of
the family.
1
 Ayala Investment v. CA and Spouses Ching
Facts:
 The husband was the vice-president of Philippine Blooming
Mills. When the corporation was suffering from financial
difficulty, the corporation applied for a loan with Ayala
Investment. As a condition for the approval of the loan
application, Ayala required the husband to execute a surety
agreement to guarantee the payment of the corporation’s
corporate loan. The husband as vice president executed a
surety agreement, binding himself jointly and severally with
the corporation. When the corporation failed to pay the loan,
Ayala went to court and filed an action for collection of sums
of money not only against the corporations, but also against
the husband.
 The trial court ruled in favor of Ayala and pending appeal, the
court granted the execution.
 The wife objected, contending that the obligation did not
redound to the benefit of the family and therefore, the CPG
should not be held liable to satisfy the judgement of the Court.
Ruling:
 The Supreme Court sustained the wife’s argument. The
contract entered into by the husband is of such nature that is
not normally expected to benefit the family. The husband was
not the recipient of the loan obligation, but only a guarantor.
The beneficiary being the corporation and not the family.
 The only way the CPG may be held liable to satisfy the
judgment is to show that the family actually benefited out of
the obligation. There should be proof of actual benefit to the
family
2. Obligation or loss is incurred in pursuit of an ordinary
transaction – normally expected to produce benefit to
the family by its very nature.
Rule: Any obligation incurred may be charged against
the ACP or CPG. It is not required that there should be
proof of actual benefit to the family.
G Tractors Inc. v. CA and Spouses Nicacio (?)
Facts:
 Involves a contract between the husband and G Tractors Inc,
allegedly without the consent of the wife where the husband
leased some heavy equipment from G Tractors, Inc. in pursuit
of his logging business.
 For failing to pay the stipulated rental for the equipment, G
Tractors went to court and filed an action for the collection of
sums of money. The court ruled in favor of G Tractors.
 The wife contended that the obligation incurred by the
husband arising from the contract with G Tractors is a
personal debt of the husband because it was entered into
without her consent and involvement.
Ruling:
 The Supreme Court rejected the argument of the wife, holding
that the contract entered into by the husband is of such nature
that it is normally expected to produce benefit for the family. It
is an exercise of business, normally presumed to be intended
for the benefit of the family. Therefore, it is not required that
there should be actual benefit that redounded to the family,
even if losses are incurred in pursuit of such legitimate activity.
TITLE IV – PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN
HUSBAND AND WIFE
Chapter 1: General Provisions
Article 74
The property relations between husband and wife shall be
governed in the following order:
1. By marriage settlements executed before the
marriage;
2. By the provisions of the Code; and
3. By the local customs.
Marriage Settlements (Article 75-81):
A contract between the would-be spouses before the
celebration of the marriage, embodying the terms and
conditions of their agreement as the manner by which their
property relations is to be governed.
Without a marriage settlement or when the regime is void,
the default property regime is the system of absolute
community of property.
Any modifications, in order to be valid, must be made before
the celebration of the marriage subject to the following
provisions:
a. Article 66
b. Article 67
c. Article 128
d. Article 135
e. Article 136
The marriage settlement shall be in writing, signed by the
parties and executed before the celebration of the marriage.
And in order to not prejudice third persons, they must be
registered in the local civil registrar as well as the proper
registries of property. If there is a donation of an immovable
property, the marriage settlement must be a public
instrument, i.e. it must be notarized.
The following must be weighed in ascertaining the fairness
and reasonableness of the provisions of the marriage
settlement:
a. The relative situation of the parties
b. their respective ages, health and experience
c. their respective properties
d. their respective family ties and connections
e. the spouse’s needs
f. other factors that tend to show that the agreement was
understandingly made
If a person, upon whom a sentence of civil interdiction has
been pronounced or who is subject to any other disability,
the guardian appointed shall be made a party in the
marriage settlement executed by the said person.
In the absence of a contrary stipulation in the marriage
settlement, the property relations shall be governed by
Philippine laws, regardless of the place of the celebration of
the marriage and their residence.
Exceptions to this rule:
a. When both are aliens
b. With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts
affecting property not situated in the Philippines and
executed in the country where the property is located
c. With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts
2
 entered into the Philippines but affecting property gain of the done
situated in a foreign country whose laws require The donor may not donate Not subject to the 1/5
different formalities for its extrinsic validity. more than 1/5 of their limitation.
present property. - In this case, there is
Most importantly, everything stipulated in the marriage - A marriage settlement no possibility of undue
settlements shall be rendered void of the marriage does not is just like an ordinary influence because
take place. contract which this is a unilateral act
undergoes the and there is no
Chapter 2: Donations by Reason of Marriage process of process of negotiation
negotiation.
2 kinds of Donations: - The exercise of undue
a. Donations Propter Nuptias – donations in influence is a common
consideration of marriage occurrence. This
b. Ordinary donations – done during the existence of the limitation is imposed
marriage by law to avoid this
undue influence.
Donation by reason of marriage If the marriage does not If the marriage does not
A kind of donation incorporated in the marriage settlement, take place, the donation is take place, donation is not
because normally a donation is executed through a void. rendered void. It is only
separate deed of donation. revocable and under
- Simply a donation, the consideration of which is Article 86, only voidable 5
marriage. years from the time the
- Executed before the marriage marriage was supposed to
- Can be done by a third-party in favor of one or both take place.
spouses OR one would-be spouse in favor of the
other spouse Note: The rules under Title III of Book III of the Civil Code
must be observed. That is:
Donations by reason of marriage made by a third-party in - The donation must be accepted by the done
favor of one or both of the would-be spouses: personally or through an SPA
Rules: - The donation must be made during the lifetime of
1. Can only be done in a separate deed of donation both parties
2. Valid even if the would-be spouses do not execute a - Donation of a movable may be made orally or in
marriage settlement writing
3. Not governed by the not more than 1/5 limitation –
because it is a pure act of liberality, no negotiation On Ordinary Donations (Article 87)
and no danger of undue influence Executed DURING the marriage by one spouse in favor of
4. The donor cannot donate all his properties – should the other or by one spouse in favor of a third party with or
retain some enough for his sustenance and for his without consent of the other spouse
compulsory heirs. If he donates all, it can be subject to
collation to the extent that it impairs the legitime. Rules:
5. Revocable at the option of the donor only when the 1. Neither spouse may donate to the other during the
marriage does not materialize marriage, regardless of the value of the property or the
property regime that governs their property relations.
Donations by reason of marriage made by one would-be 2. Donations made by either spouse in favor of a
spouse third party involving a property belonging to the ACP
This donation may be done through: or CPG is considered a form of disposition which
a. Marriage settlement requires the consent of the other for purposes of
b. Separate deed of donation validity. If without consent: Donation is void.

Marriage Settlement Separate Deed of Exception (to both): Moderate donation or gift on the
Donation occasion of family rejoicing. Moderate depends on the
There must be a marriage There should also be a capacity of the donor.
settlement that must marriage settlement.
stipulate a property regime This prohibition shall also apply to persons living together
other than ACP as husband and wife without a valid marriage.
- Because if it is ACP, it Cirila Arcaba v. Tabancura, et.al.
would be a useless Facts:
donation for the donor  This involved an old man who stipulated a donation to his
would end up being alleged house help who turned out to be his lover.
the owner just the Ruling:
same  The Supreme Court ruled that the donation was void under
- Donation is a mode of Article 87 of the Family Code.
acquiring property
which stipulates a loss
of the donor and a
3
Instances where a donation by reason of marriage is
rendered voidable at the instance of the donor (Article
86):
1. If the marriage is not celebrated:
Distinguish between donations by reason of marriage
executed in a marriage settlement from that executed in a
separate deed of donation:
Marriage settlement: Donation is void.
Separate deed of donation: Donation is revocable
at the instance of the donor
2. If the marriage is judicially declared as void
General rule: Donation is revocable, 5 years from the finality
of the decision of the court declaring the marriage void.
Applies regardless of whether the donee acted in bad faith.
Exceptions:
a. If the marriage is declared void on the ground of
Article 40 (subsequent marriage entered into
without the benefit of a judicial declaration for the
absolute nullity the previous marriage) - revoked
by operation of law if donee acted in bad faith as
stipulated in Article 50 in relation to Article 43
b. If the marriage is judicially declared void under
Article 44 (one of the spouses who was previously
married but his/her spouse was declared
presumptively dead but that spouse and the
subsequent spouse knew at the time that the
subsequent marriage was celebrated that the
missing spouse was alive which means they acted
in bad faith) – revoked by operation of law
c. If the marriage is declared void by reason of
being bigamous Article 35 par 4 (subsequent
marriage is bigamous and void because the first
marriage is valid) - not revocable but void by
reason of public policy (also refer to Article 739
which provides that donations made by persons
who were guilty of adultery or concubinage at the
time of the donation is void)
Prescription period (for revocable): 5 years from the time of
the finality of the decision declaring the marriage void
If the donee, in a donation revoked by operation of law,
refuses to return the property, the donor should file an
action for reconveyance of the property donated, within
eight years when it is a movable property or thirty years if it
involves real property.
3. When the marriage takes place without the consent of
the parents of one or both of the contracting parties
- Again, within 5 years.
4. When the marriage is annulled
In conflict with Art 50 in relation to Art 43 – which states that
donations made to the donee who acted in bad faith
are revoked by operation of law.
Tw o conflicting views:
a) Art 86 should prevail over Art 50 and 43 because
it is the later provision
b) Art 43 is more consistent with the purpose of the
law – punish the donee who acted in bad faith
(This is Sir T’s opinion as well)
5. When there is a decree of legal separation
Exception: If donee acted in bad faith - revoked by
operation of law
6. When the donation by reason of marriage is subject to
a resolutory condition and the resolutory condition is
complied with.
- If the donation by reason of marriage is subject to
a resolutory condition, it is immediately valid and
effective. But when the resolutory condition takes
place, it is revocable.
- A Resolutory Condition, which means it is
immediately demandable at one but deemed
extinguished upon the happening of the condition.
- In comparison with Suspensive Condition, which
is an obligation that is not demandable until and
unless the condition is complied with.
7. When the donee is guilty of acts of ingratitude
Article 765 of the Civil Code:
a) Commission of any crime of the donee against the
person, property of honor of the donor or his wife
or children
b) Imputation by the donee of any crime against the
donor
c) Any acts involving moral turpitude against the
donor, his wife or children
d) Unjustifiable refusal to support on the part of the
donee if the donee is morally and legally obliged
to give support
Chapter 3: System of Absolute Community
What constitutes community property (Article 91):
The community property shall consist of all the property
owned by the spouses at the time of the celebration of the
marriage or acquired thereafter.
Exception:
1. Properties indicated to be exclusive in the
marriage settlement
2. Properties excluded pursuant to Article 92
Properties excluded from the Community Property
(Article 92):
1. Property acquired during the marriage by gratuitous
title by either spouse, and the fruits as well as the
income thereof
Gratuitous title – properties acquired without burden to
the person who acquired it. The property is acquired by
pure liberality. Ex: Donated, inheritance.
Remember, only those acquired during the existence
of the marriage. If it was acquired before the marriage,
it becomes part of the Absolute Community.
Except: If it is expressly provided by the donor, testator
or grantor that they shall form part of the community
property
2. Property for personal and exclusive use of either
4
 spouse, acquired before or during the marriage.
Except: Jewelry shall form part of the community
property. Actually, anything that is valuable.
3. Property acquired before the marriage by either
spouse who has legitimate descendants by a former
marriage, and the fruits as well as the income of such
property.
Abregana v. Abrenica
This case involves a lawyer, Atty. Abrenica, who was sued by
his partners for failing to account of the proceeds of the
partnership. Atty. Abrenica lost in the case. Subsequently, his
house and lot and his 2 cars were levied in execution when the
judgment became final.
Atty. Abrenica and his wife argued that these were part of the
community property. However, it was then known that Atty.
Abrenica was previously married but it was dissolved. In the
first marriage, there were 3 children.
Applying the 3rd paragraph of Article 92, these properties were
acquired by him before the marriage and he has legitimate
descendants by the former marriage. These properties are
then exclusive. Therefore, are answerable of the personal
liabilities of Atty. Abrenica.
What happens when the property acquired during the
marriage by gratuitous title was exchanged, bartered or
sold? What will become of the proceeds of the sale of the
exclusive property?
Two conflicting views:
a. Whatever property that the spouse receives during
the marriage in exchange of his or her exclusive
property, will become common.
- The property now acquired does not fall under the
statutory and contractual exclusions.
- Also consistent with the general rule that those
acquired during the marriage are part of the
community property.
Charges Upon and Obligations of the Absolute
Community of Property (Article 94):
Charges, obligations and liabilities that ACP is required by
law to settle.
1. Support for the spouses, for the common children and
for the legitimate children of either spouse
- Support for illegitimate children is not chargeable
against the common property. It is the personal
obligation of the parent spouse concerned.
However, in case of absence or insuffiency of
the personal properties of the parent spouse to
support the illegitimate child, it may be taken
from the common property by way of advances
subject to reimbursement, to be charged
against the parent spouse concerned at the time
of liquidation.
2. All debts and obligations incurred during the marriage
by the designated administrator spouse for the benefit
of the community. Or the debt and obligation incurred
by the non-administrator spouse, with the consent of
the other, which redounded to the benefit of the family.
3. All debts and obligations incurred by either spouse
without the other's consent but redounded to the
benefit of the family.
- Refer to the 2 situations under Moral Occupation
4. Taxes, liens, charges and expenses including major or
minor repairs upon the common property.
5. All taxes and expenses for preservation during the
marriage upon the separate properties of either spouse
used by the family.
- If the separate property is not being used for
the benefit of the family, this provision does not
apply
6. Expenses to enable either spouse to complete any
profession for self-improvement
7. Antenuptial debts or debts incurred before the
marriage which redounded to the benefit of the family.
- There must be actual benefit that redounded to the
benefit of the family for antenuptial debts to be
charged against the ACP.
8. The value of the property donated or promised by birth
spouses to common children for the purpose of
completing a vocational or professional course for self-
improvement
9. Personal to the debtor spouse a) antenuptial debts
which did not redound to the benefit of the family b)
support of the illegitimate children and c) liability
arising from crime or quasi -delict when the separate
properties of the debtor spouse are insufficient
(advance reimbursement mechanism)
10. Litigation expenses between spouses unless the suit is
groundless.
If the assets or properties of the ACP are not sufficient
to satisfy all the obligations, (except par9) the spouses
are solidary liable of the balance of the obligation with
their respective separate properties.
Solidary obligation - when the obligation may be
demandable against more than one debtor. The creditor
can demand the fulfillment of the entire obligation from any
of the debtors.
Example: The creditor can compel either the husband or
the wife to pay the entire obligation. However, the spouse
who was compelled to pay the entire obligation can demand
from the husband his share in the obligation.
Note:
This solidary obligation principle imposed on either spouse
with respect to their separate properties applies only insofar
as the obligations mentioned in Article 94, except par 9.
Because par 9 are personal liabilities - the only principle
applicable is the advance reimbursement mechanism.
Obligations incurred during the marriage by either
spouse without the consent of the other and which did not
redound to the benefit of the family -- not covered under
5
 par 9. (Only antenuptial debts are covered)
Efren Pana v. Heirs of Jose Juanete
 advances are made
Illustrative of the principle of advance reimbursement mechanism.
Involves a criminal case for murder initially filed against the
husband along with other alleged co-conspirators. But during the
trial, only the wife was convicted, but the husband was acquitted.
The wife was also adjudged civilly liable.
When the civil liability was sought to be enforced against the ACP,
the husband objected considering that civil liability arising from
crime is exactly the item mentioned in par 9 -- personal to the wife,
hence should not be enforced against the community.
The Supreme Court ruled that while it is not chargeable against the
community, the ACP however is obligated by law to advance.
However, it was argued that this advance should be made when
the liquidation should be done. But the SC said that there is no
necessity for liquidation first before advance could be made.
Go v. CA
Illustrates an obligation which arose from a breach of contract
consisting of damages imposed by the court. Involves a video-
taking service during the marriage of spouses Ong. The wife was
engaged to take the video of the wedding. Ho ever, she was not
able to deliver the video recording. It was erased, allegedly. An
action for damages was filed. Court sustained the plaintiff and an
award of damages was adjudged against the wife.
But when the civil liability was sought to be enforced, the ACP was
levied for execution. It was argued that the liability should not be
enforced against the community because it was the personal
obligation of the wife. This argument was sustained by the SC.
Supreme Court said that while either spouse may pursue a
legitimate profession, business or activity, in this case the contract
was purely between the wife and spouses Ong. The SC said that it
is the personal obligation of the wife and therefore cannot be
enforced against the ACP. The issue on advance reimbursement
mechanism was not taken up in the case, although the issues are
essentially the same.
Note:
The SC in Go v. CA invoked Art 94 par 3 mentioned that
any spouse may pursue any legitimate profession, business
or activity. If this is the kind of activity, this is presumed to
be for the benefit of the family and therefore chargeable
against the ACP even when the transaction results in
losses, as distinguished from an isolated transaction.
Go v. CA - video shooting is an occupation presumed to be
for the benefit of the family, consistent with the ruling in
Tractors Inc. But the SC saw it the other way. SC may have
in mind par9. Problem is, it forgets the advance
reimbursement mechanism.
The Supreme Court emphasized the principle of contracts
but overlooks the charges on ACP. The principle that only
parties are liable - true in ordinary contract. But when it
involves liabilities sought to be enforced in the ACP -
provisions of the Family Code.
Atty.T's personal take - ruling in Go is not accurate.
Principle of Advance Reimbursement Mechanism
ACP - this principle applies without need for securing the
obligations which pertain to the absolute community -
CPG - this mechanism may only be resorted to if the
obligations which pertain to the conjugal partnership are
already covered by the assets of the CPG. In other words,
the obligations pertaining to the partnership are secured
first before the assets of the partnership may be charged
with the personal debts of either spouse under the advance
reimbursement mechanism.
Reason for distinction: In ACP, the spouses have fewer
exclusive properties. In CPG, the spouses are normally
expected to have more separate properties.
Game of chance (Article 95)
Whatever may be lost during the marriage in any game of
chance, betting, sweepstakes, or any other kind of
gambling, whether permitted or prohibited by law, shall be
borne by the loser and shall not be charged to the
community.
Except: Winnings therefrom shall form part of the
community property.
Ownership, Administration, Enjoyment and Disposition
of the Absolute Property (Article 96 for ACP and Article
124 for CPG)
Rules:
1. Administration and enjoyment of ACP shall belong to
the spouses jointly. Joint administration by the
husband and the wife. BUT in case of disagreement,
the decision of the husband prevails, subject to the
right of the wife to go to court to annul the transaction
entered into by the husband implementing his decision.
2. Any transaction entered into by the husband over the
objection by the wife, is revocable - the wife has the
right to question the transaction within 5 years from the
date of the contract implementing the decision. If the
wife does not question within that period, then the
contract is valid.
Note: The status of the transaction, disposition or
encumbrance, administration of property - revocable only
within 5 years.
Sole power of administration (2nd par of Article 96):
In the event that either spouse is incapacitated or unable to
participate in the management, the other spouse may go to
the court through a summary proceeding and ask for the
sole power of administration.
- This sole power of administration does not include
the right to dispose or encumber any common
property. Only acts of administration and not acts
of disposition or encumbrance.
Requirement for disposition or encumbrance to be valid:
1. There must be consent of the non-participating
spouse
2. If incapacitated to give consent, court authority is
required.
In the absence of a written consent or court order, any
6
disposition or encumbrance is VOID.
How to distinguish 2nd par from 1st:
Legarda and Mauis:
An opinion was expressed that the first par of 96 and 124,
pertains only to acts of administration. The rule that says in
case of disagreement, the decision of the husband prevails,
subject to the right of the wife to go to court within 5 years -
- applies only if the acts performed by the husband
pertaining to acts of administration. So that if the acts
pertain to disposition or encumberance, there is only one
rule- without the consent of the other spouse, the
disposition or encumberance is VOID.
Criticized the Supreme Court when it decided the case of
Ravina v. Abrille -- exactly illustrates the 1st par of 96.
Ravina v. Abrille
Both the husband and the wife jointly administered the
community property but when the husband decided to dispose
of the common property, the wife objected to the extent that she
even sent a letter to the prospective buyer making clear her
objection to the sale.
The SC ruled that the contract entered into by the husband and
the buyer is revocable. The sale was entered into by the
husband without the consent of the w ife.
Applying the 1st par of Art96 - transaction is only revocable w
ithin 5 years from the date of the contract implementing the
decision. The filing of the action to nullify the transaction by the
w ife was within the prescriptive period. The SC did not rule that
the transaction is void even if it was entered into even without
the consent of the w ife -- Consistent w ith the 1st par of 96 and
124. If there is objection, the contract is only revocable --
because the parties exercised joint administration of the
properties.
Mario Schuzi v. Guzon, Fuentes v. Roca and Giang v.
Giang
Demonstrative of the 2nd par. One of the spouses sold a
common property without the consent of the other spouse
because the latter was unable to participate in the
administration -- separated de facto for 30 years.
The SC, consistent w ith the 2nd par succinctly ruled that the
contract was VOID because of lack of consent of the other
spouse.
Based on these existing jurisprudence, it is now established
that:
1st par - joint administration of the property regime, with the
knowledge of the other spouse but with objection, thereby
resulting in disagreement. -- ONLY REVOCABLE
Disposition made without the knowledge of the other
spouse even if joint administration -- VOID (because of the
absence of the chance for objection)
However, while VOID, the transaction is considered a
continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse and
the third party which may be perfected as a binding contract
the moment the court authorizes the transaction or
acceptance by the other spouse.
Most authors are of the opinion that when the non-
consenting spouse eventually gives consent or when the
court authorizes the transaction -- the contract is an
altogether NEW contract.
It is not accurate to say that a void contract is ratified --
because a void contract cannot be ratified. (Hence it is more
of a voidable contract since it is a continuing offer)
When the disposition is made by the wife
First paragraph: Administration jointly exercised by both.
And in case of disagreement, husband's decision prevails.
This contemplates of a situation where the encumbrance or
disposition is from the initiative of the husband.
If the disposition or encumbrance is made by the wife over
the objection of the husband -- DO NOT apply the 1st par
of Art 96
Sta. Maria's opinion: The transaction entered into by the
wife over the husband's objection can be assailed as:
a. unenforceable (because of lack of authority)
b. can be assailed as void on the ground that it was
made contrary to law or policy
Second paragraph: Only one is administering the common
property because the other spouse is incapacitated either
due to illness, absence.
Doesn't matter who makes the disposition or encumbrance
= still void
Dissolution of the Absolute Community Regime (Article
99):
The absolute community terminates:
1. Upon the death of either spouse
2. When there is a decree of legal separation
3. When the marriage is annulled or declared void
4. In case of judicial separation of property during the
marriage under Articles 134 to 138.
Separation in Fact (Article 100)
The separation in fact between husband and wife shall not
affect the regime of absolute community.
Exceptions:
a. The spouse who leaves the conjugal home or
refuses to live therein, without just cause, shall not
have the right to be supported
b. When the consent of one spouse to any
transaction of the other is required by law, judicial
authorization shall be obtained in a summary
proceeding.
c. In the absence of sufficient community property,
the separate property of both spouses shall be
solidarily liable for the support of the family.
Abandonment or failure to comply with obligations to
the family (Article 101):
If a spouse, without just cause, abandons the other or fails
7
to comply with his or her obligations to the family, the
aggrieved spouse may petition the court for:
1. Receivership
2. Judicial separation of property
3. Authority to be the sole administrator of the
absolute community
A spouse is deemed to have abandoned the other when
one has eft the conjugal dwelling for a period of 3 months
without any intention of returning. (Failed to give any
information as to his or her whereabouts)
follow. This is done in a special proceeding involving the
settlement of the estate of a deceased person.
The Estate may be settled in two ways:
1. Probate testate proceedings – If a person died with a
will, the will shall be probated and the estate distributed
according to the terms and conditions of the will
2. Intestate proceedings – if a person died without a will,
the estate will be settled in court and intestacy and
rules on intestate succession will follow

Liquidation of the Absolute Community Assets and
Liabilities:
Takes place when the ACP is terminated.
When is ACP terminated? (Article 99)
1. Death of either spouse
2. Decree of legal separation
3. Annulment or nullity
4. Judicial separation of property
Upon the dissolution of the absolute community, the
following procedure shall apply (Article 102 and 129):
1. Inventory has to be prepared -- all the common
properties belonging to the ACP and all the separate
properties of either spouse.
2. Personal obligations of the parties shall be paid out of
their separate properties and the obligations pertaining
to the absolute community shall be paid out of the
common property.
- In case of insufficiency of the ACP to cover all
liabilities -- apply solidary obligation on the
part of the spouses (any balance of the ACP
shall be paid by their respective separate
properties)
3. If after deducting all the debts, there remains properties
belonging to them separately -- these shall be returned
to them.
4. If there remains properties belonging to the ACP (net
assets) -- divided equally between the spouses.
Unless:
a. A different proportion or division was agreed upon
in the marriage settlement
b. There has been a voluntary waiver of such share
The same proceedings will be applied when the person who
died is married. The surviving spouse is required to
liquidate the estate within one year upon the death of
the other spouse as required by law.
This can be done:
a. Extrajudicially – Preparing a document
denominating the extra judicial settlement of the
estate of the deceased person. The property there
will be adjudicated in favor of the estate, payment
of debts and the remaining property will be
distributed to the surviving heirs. Done only if the
parties can agree.
b. Judicially – If the parties could not agree, the court
will decide as to which portion of the property goes
to whom.
Effects of non-compliance of liquidation within 1 year from
death of the deceased Art 103 and 130:
1. Any disposition of the property belonging to the ACP or
CPG shall be void.
2. If the surviving spouse contracts a subsequent
marriage without complying with the requirement of
liquidation – mandatory that the property regime that
will govern the subsequent marriage is complete
separation of property regime.
First effect: Disposition is void
The SC interpreted this provision in an entirely different
way.

5. The presumptive legitimes of the common children

shall be delivered upon partition. This shall not
prejudice future inheritance.

6. The conjugal dwelling and the lot on which it is situated

shall be adjudicated to the spouse with whom the
majority of the common children choose to remain.
(Only applies to ACP or CPG)

What is the effect if the property regime is terminated

by death? (Article 103 and 130)

Rule 103 and 130: - where marriage is extinguished by

death, the natural process of settlement of the estate will
8
 Heirs of Protacio Go v. Ester Servacio
Involves a property left by the deceased who was married.
Without liquidation of the CPG, the surviving spouse (husband)
along with one of the children, Rito Go, sold a portion of the
estate left by the deceased (wife). When the other children
knew of the sale, they filed an action to annul the transaction
invoking the provision which says that any disposition of the
property belonging to the ACP or CPG without complying with
the requirement of obligation is VOID.
The Supreme Court ruled that if a portion of the property
belonging to the ACP of CPG is sold without complying with the
requirement of liquidation, the disposition is not necessarily void
– especially if after liquidation it will be determined that the other
heirs who did not participate in the disposition still gets their own
share. Because obviously, the requirement of liquidation is for
the purpose of protecting the interests of the creditors and the
heirs.
If at the end of the day, it can be determined that the other heirs
are still able to get their respective shares, then there is no
problem. In this case, the portion sold by two is even lesser than
what they are entitled to get.
On the rules of co-ownership, a co-owner has the right to
encumber or dispose the share even without the consent of the
other. (Article 493 of the NCC)
103 – What is only void is the portion belonging to the
other non-consenting heirs
The rule now: the disposition made without liquidation is
void in so far as the interest of the non-consenting heirs.
Chapter 4 – Conjugal Partnership of Gains
Otherwise known as the relative community property
regime. Should be stipulated in the marriage settlement.
Jointly owned by the parties.
What governs CPG:
1. Marriage settlement
2. Rules on contract of partnership
3. Family Code
Properties that form part of the conjugal partnership:
1. Under this regime, the husband and wife place in a
common fund the proceeds, products, fruits and
income from their separate properties and those
acquired by either or both spouses through their efforts
or by chance.
- What is acquired by them before and at the time
of the marriage, remains theirs.
- Fruits: Any improvement or addition to the
personal property. Can be industrial (ex:
buildings), natural (ex. Piglets, plants), civil (Ex:
rental) fruits.
2. Any acquired by the spouses through their efforts or by
chance
- Salary, winnings in gambling, hidden
treasures.
3. Upon the termination of the marriage, the net assets
that either spouse obtained will be conjugal.
The following specific properties are conjugal partnership
properties (Article 117):
1. Properties acquired through onerous title during the
marriage by either spouse
- Onerous: acquired for valuable consideration
other than the generosity of the grantor
2. Properties acquired by work, labor, industry, profession
or occupation. (Income as a lawyer, any business, etc.)
3. Fruits and income of the common properties and net
fruits of the exclusive properties.
Net fruits – already took into consideration in producing
the fruit.
4. Share in the hidden treasure
Rule in Article 483 of the NCC - owner of the property
where the property was found gets everything. But if a
finder is a third party, the finder gets 50% and the
owner of the property gets the other half
- If found in the exclusive properties – CPG
- If either spouse is only a finder and the
property belongs to a third party - the finder
spouse gets 50% and goes to the CPG
5. Property acquired through occupation - fishing or
hunting
- Occupation here is not profession.
- The difference is in the mode of acquisition -
there is no previous owner (Civil Code
definition)
- There is an element of chance
6. Livestock existing at the time of dissolution in excess
of those brought into the marriage by each
7. Anything acquired by chance, betting, sweepstakes,
gambling, whether legal or illegal. Winnings form part
of the CPG. Losses are suffered by the debtor spouse.
Note: Any or all properties acquired during the marriage
under the CPG are presumed to be conjugal. This
presumption holds true even if the property is registered
under the name of one spouse only and even if it was
acquired during a cohabitation with another party and
registered to the paramour. (Article 116)
9
 Procopio Villanueva v. CA
Husband was separated de facto with his wife to cohabit with
Pacita. Husband acquired various properties during the
cohabitation registered under the name of Pacita.
Whether or not the property is Pacita's or that of the CPG or
ACP of the valid marriage.
SC ruled that whatever property acquired during the existence
of the ACP or CPG, is presumed to be the property of the CPG
or ACP, even if acquired during cohabitation.
Same principle in the case of Bell Codero v. CA and Josefina
v. Iron Works
Exclusive property of each spouse (Article 109):
1. Properties brought by either spouse into the marriage
2. Properties acquired during the marriage by gratuitous
title
Substantially the same as Art 92 ACP statutory
exclusions, but actually different.
CPG - property acquired during the marriage by
gratuitous title is always exclusive property of the
spouse who acquired it without exception)
ACP- property acquired during the marriage by
gratuitous title is exclusive property of the spouse who
acquired it except when the grantor provides that it be
part of the common property.
3. Property acquired by right of redemption, barter or
exchange using the property belonging solely to the
spouse
Redemption – right to get back one’s property where it
was earlier conveyed to another.
Example: Before the marriage, the husband obtained a
loan from the bank and by way of collateral, he
mortgaged his property. For failure to pay, the bank
foreclosed the property and sold in favor of a third
party.
Under the law, if a property mortgaged in foreclosed,
the mortgagor owner has one year to redeem the
property sold at the foreclosure sale.
Rule if the 1 year period falls during the existence of
the marriage: (Property was foreclosed before the
marriage but the redemption period falls due during the
marriage)
- The property acquired by redemption will not
form part of the CPG by express provision of
law
Barter - Same principle holds if either spouse receives
another property during the marriage in exchange or
substitution of his or her own exclusive property
Rule in ACP is different: When an exclusive property
is exchanged with another property, the property will
be part of the common property
Sale during the marriage: What will become of the cash
or the purchase price?
Conflicting views:
a. Exclusive – because a sale transaction is
essentially a barter transaction
b. Conjugal – because cash in exchange of the
property is the proceeds of the exclusive property
c. If the exclusive property sold during the marriage
for profit the original value is exclusive and the
excess/profit conjugal because it is considered as
a fruit or income
4. That which is purchased with exclusive money of the
husband or the wife
Example: Spouse inherited a bank deposit from
parents and purchases a property using such money
Rights of Spouses with regard to their exclusive
properties:
1. They retain the ownership, possession, administration
and enjoyment of their exclusive properties. (Article
110, par.1)
2. May, during the marriage, transfer the administration of
his or her exclusive property to the other by means of
a public instrument, which shall be recorded in the
registry of property of the place where the property is
located. (Article 110, par.2)
3. May mortgage, encumber, alienate or otherwise
dispose of his or her exclusive property, without the
consent of the other spouse, and appear alone in court
to litigate with regard to the same.
Installments (Article 118):
Property bought on installment paid partly from exclusive
funds of either or both spouses and partly from conjugal
funds.
The ownership depends:
- If the ownership is vested upon the delivery of the
property which happened before the marriage,
then is it exclusive.
- If it is vested on the last payment which happened
during the marriage, then it is conjugal subject to
reimbursement.
Note: Always remember that if the property became
conjugal, the spouse who owned it shall be reimbursed.
Note: The buyer may become the owner without the full
payment.
Absolute Contract of Sale – a kind of contract whereby the
property is transferred to the buyer upon the delivery
regardless of whether the purchase price has not been fully
paid
Contract to Sell – ownership is given to the property only
upon the payment of the full purchase price
10

Note: If paid out of the exclusive funds, falls under the 3 rd
kind of exclusive property and not in this Article.
Credits (Article 119)
If either of the spouses extended loan to someone else but
the payment was made during the marriage. (The loan is
exclusively owned by either spouse but the payment is
received during the marriage)
Rules:
1. If payment is received during the marriage
corresponding to the principal amount = EXCLUSIVE
PROPERTY
2. Payment received during the marriage corresponding
to the interest that accrued before the marriage =
EXCLUSIVE
3. Payment received during the marriage corresponding
to the interest that accrued during the marriage =
CONJUGAL (essentially considered fruits of the
exclusive)
How about a property is acquired using money borrowed by
either spouse from a third party? Say, husband borrowed
money from a friend and using such money husband
purchased a property. What is the status of the property
purchased?
Rule: Any property acquired during the marriage using the
exclusive money of either spouse = Exclusive
Determining factor: The ownership of the money used in the
repayment of the loan.
 If paid out of the exclusive money = property is
exclusive
 If paid out of conjugal money - property is conjugal
Wong v. IAC
Transaction entered into by the husband who are separated de
facto with his wife. Husband borrowed money from his friend to
buy a property. The wife also borrowed money from which she
was charged for estafa. To satisfy the civil liability, the sheriff
levied on execution the property purchased by the husband
using the money he borrowed from his friend.
Issue: Whether or not the property of the husband acquired
through the borrowed money can be levied for execution to
satisfy the obligation which was personal to the wife.
The SC ruled that any property acquired during the marriage is
presumed to be conjugal and there was no evidence that the
money used for the repayment of the loan belongs exclusively
to the husband. Therefore it is a conjugal property and can be
levied for execution.
In a litigation, either spouse obtains a judgment award in
the form of damages adjudicated by the court. Who gets to
own the damages?
Zulueta v. Pan American World Airways
Husband filed a case against the airline company for breach of
contract of carriage. They won and damages were awarded.
Issues: Whether or not the damages awarded by the court
forms part of the conjugal partnership.
The Supreme Court ruled that if the damages awarded by the
court arose from a transaction financed by the conjugal
partnership = Conjugal. It was established that the plane tickets
were purchased using conjugal funds. Hence, the damages
should be conjugal.
Lilius v. Manila Railroad
Involves a suit for quasi-delict filed against manila railroad
arising from a vehicular accident. The plaintiffs were awarded.
Issue: Whether or not the damages awarded by the court
should form part of the conjugal partnership. The Supreme
Court ruled that the damages arose from physical injuries which
are personal to the person concerned. Hence, it is a personal
property of the one whose injury was compensated.
Insurance
Suppose a car by the husband with a fire insurance is lost,
who gets to own the insurance proceeds?
Determining factor: the money used for the procurement of
the insurance premium
 If paid out of exclusive money- exclusive
 If paid out of conjugal money – conjugal
Retirement benefits (Article 115)
Rule if during the marriage, either spouse received
retirement benefits, depends on the nature of the retirement
benefit:
 If onerous (when the amount is the accumulation
of the portions of the spouse's salary of the years
deducted from his monthly salary) – conjugal
 If gratuitous (extended out of pure liberality by the
giver) - exclusive
If improvement is introduced to the separate property
(Article 120)
Can be at the expense of the CPG or through the effort of
either or both spouses.
Note: The law discourages different ownership over the
land and the building. Ownership should be uniformly
owned by one person.
Conjugal - When the cost of improvement and the resulting
increase in value are more than the value of the property at
the time of the improvement (real owner is entitled to
reimbursement during liquidation)
Example:
Land – 2M
Building – 2m
Resulting increase in value – 1M
11
 Add the resulting increase 1M to the cost of
improvement 2M = 3M
3M > value of the land 2M
Exclusive - When the cost of improvement and the resulting
increase are not more than the value of the property
exclusively owned by the spouse at the time of the
improvement (CPG is entitled to reimbursement during
liquidation)
How to determine the greater value
Example: Land belonging to husband exclusively is 2M. Out
of the conjugal funds, a building was constructed during the
marriage on such land. The cost of improvement is 2M.
Land 2M, Building 2M = 4M
Cost of improvement and resulting increase in value of the
property: Due to the improvement, the land now may cost
5M. (1M – resulting increase in value)
Note: Ownership will only be transferred either to the CPG
or to the spouse upon reimbursement is made during
liquidation.
Rules:
 If the property is to be awarded to the CPG, the land
remains to be owned by the spouse before the
reimbursement is made at the time of liquidation.
Significance: Before the ownership is transferred, the
property which remains under the ownership cannot be
levied on execution to satisfy an obligation pertaining to the
CPG.
 If the property is to be awarded to the spouse, the land
is considered to be part of the CPG before the
reimbursement is made at the time of liquidation
Significance: The spouse who owns the land cannot insist
that he or she be paid rental for the occupancy of his land,
even if the building belongs to a third party, the CPG.
Because whatever rental that may be due would just the
same end up as a common fund – interest income of the
spouse exclusive property.
Charges and Obligations of the CPG (Article 121):
1. The support of the spouse, their common children, and
the legitimate children of either spouse; however, the
support of illegitimate children shall be governed by the
provisions of this Code on Support
2. All debts and obligations contracted during the
marriage by the designated administrator-spouse for
the benefit of the conjugal partnership of gains, or by
both spouses or by one of them with the consent of the
other;
3. Debts and obligations contracted by either spouse
without the consent of the other to the extent that the
family may have benefited;
4. All taxes, liens, charges, and expenses, including
major or minor repairs upon the conjugal partnership
property;
5. All taxes and expenses for mere preservation made
during the marriage upon the separate property of
either spouse;
6. Expenses to enable either spouse to commence or
complete a professional, vocational, or other activity for
self-improvement;
7. Ante-nuptial debts of either spouse insofar as they
have redounded to the benefit of the family;
8. The value of what is donated or promised by both
spouses in favor of their common legitimate children for
the exclusive purpose of commencing or completing a
professional or vocational course or other activity for
self-improvement; and
9. Expenses of litigation between the spouses unless the
suit is found to groundless.
The charges and obligations of the CPG are slightly
different from that of ACP [Art 94 (ACP) v. Art121 and 122
(CPG)]
Main difference: In case the debtor spouse has insufficient
exclusive separate properties to satisfy his or her debts or
obligations:
ACP Art 94 - Advances subject to reimbursement (no need
to first cover the obligations of the ACP)
CPG Art 121 and 122 - The CPG can only be made to make
the advances once the obligations of the CPG are satisfied
(principle of exhaustion)
Reason for distinction: In ACP, the spouses have fewer
exclusive properties. In CPG, the spouses are normally
expected to have more separate properties.
However, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Pana v.
Heirs of Juanete that there is no need to wait for liquidation
for advances to be made in the conjugal partnership
12
 Efren Pana v. Heirs of Jose Juanete
Illustrative of the principle of advance reimbursement
mechanism. Involves a criminal case for murder initially filed
against the husband along with other alleged co-conspirators.
But during the trial, only the wife was convicted, but the
husband was acquitted. The wife was also adjudged civilly
liable.
When the civil liability was sought to be enforced against the
CPG, the husband objected considering that civil liability arising
from crime is exactly the item mentioned in par 9 -- personal to
the wife, hence should not be enforced against the conjugal
partnership.
The Supreme Court ruled that while it is not chargeable against
the community, the CPG however is obligated by law to
advance. However, it was argued that this advance can only be
made if the other obligations pertaining to the CPG are covered.
And this can only be determined upon liquidation.
But the SC said that for purposes of the advance mechanism
requirement, it is not necessary to wait for liquidation. Because
the law only says “covered”, meaning it is enough that at the
time the advances is made, the properties of belonging to the
CPG are enough to cover the obligations pertaining to the CPG.
What can be done is a provisional or informal liquidation. The
danger there is that the possibility cannot be discounted that
the liquidation is actually made, the properties belonging to the
CPG may not be sufficient to satisfy the obligations of the CPG.
Rule now: There is no necessity for liquidation first before
advances could be made in Conjugal Partnership.
Administration of the Conjugal Partnership Property
The rule is the same with Absolute Community. Art 96 –
ACP
Art 124 - CPG
Liquidation of Conjugal Property (Article 129):
1. Inventory - In the listing of the inventory of properties if
the CPG, any advances made shall be included in the
list of properties belonging to the CPG as an asset. (par
2)
 Whatever amount the CPG owes to either spouse,
shall be listed as the exclusive properties of either
of the spouses.
2. Come up with list of obligations - personal obligations
and obligations of CPG
 Each spouse shall be reimbursed for the use of
his/her exclusive funds in the acquisition of
property or for the value of his/her exclusive
property, the ownership of which has been vested
by law in the conjugal partnership
3. Deduct the personal obligations from the separate
properties and deduct the conjugal obligations from the
conjugal properties, etc.
Chapter 5 – Judicial Separation of Property
Three instances where the regime of complete separation
of properties governs the marriage:
1. If stipulated in the marriage settlement
2. Article 103 and 130: If previous marriage was
terminated by death and spouse contracts a
subsequent marriage without complying with the
requirement of liquidation
3. When during the existence of the marriage, the parties
resorted to judicial separation of property
Judicial separation of property: Always require court
approval whether voluntary or involuntary
A. Voluntary - Does not require any cause: mutual
agreement of the parties. Filing of a petition for
voluntary separation of their properties (both should
file)
B. Involuntary - When there is cause (aggrieved party is
the one filing the petition)
Grounds that require final judgment by the court:
i. Civil interdiction
ii. Absentee
iii. Loss of parental authority
Grounds that don’t require final judgment by the court:
iv. Abandonment for 3 months
v. Mismanagement
vi. Separation de facto for 1 year
Revival of Property Regime (Article 141):
Suppose the court granted the judicial separation of
property, may the parties agree to revive their property
regime?
YES. Grounds for revival: (depends on the kind of judicial
separation)
 Involuntary - may be revived if the ground for the
involuntary judicial separation ceases
 Voluntary – the parties can always file a joint motion for
the revival of the previous property regime
Can the revived property regime be in turn dissolved again
voluntarily or involuntarily?
 If the judicial separation was decreed involuntarily and
was revived – may be dissolved again involuntarily if
there is another ground
 If the judicial separation was decreed involuntarily and
was revived – may be dissolved again voluntarily
 If the judicial separation was decreed voluntarily and
was revived –may be dissolved again involuntarily
 If the judicial separation was decreed voluntarily was
revived – may NOT be dissolved again voluntarily
13
Note: Voluntary can only be availed of once.
Rights and Obligations of Spouses after their Property
Regime Is Judicially Dissolved by Judicial Separation
Effect: Property relations between spouses is now to be
governed by complete separation of property regime
Chapter 6 – Complete Separation of Property Regime
Rights:
1. Article 145: Either spouse has absolute right to enjoy,
administer, use, dispose, and encumber any of his or
her property without the consent of the other.
2. Article 145: To each spouse shall belong all earnings
from his or her profession, business or industry and all
fruits, natural, industrial or civil, due or received during
the marriage from his or her separate property
3. Can engage in any profession without the consent of
the other
Obligations (Article 146):
1. Jointly responsible for family expenses in proportion of
their income (in case of insufficiency or default thereof,
to the current market value of their separate properties)
2. Solidarily liable with their respective separate
properties with their creditors relating to family
expenses (veco, pldt bills)
Chapter 7 – Unions without marriage or under a void
marriage
Article 147 and 148 Property Regimes of Void
Marriages (Co - Ownership)
What is covered by Articles 147 and 148:
Article 147:
1. A union between a man and a woman cohabiting with
each other, without the benefit of marriage but are
capacitated to marry each other.
2. Union under a void marriage; Capacitated to marry but
under a void marriage. Void marriages other than void
because of incapacity to marry. (Age, sex, legal
impediment)
3. Void for absence of essential and formal requisites
(except lack of capacity to marry due to age, sex, legal
impediment)
4. Void for psychological incapacity
5. Void under Art 53 -- marriage dissolved under Art 40 or
annulled under Art 45 but one of the parties failed to
comply with the requirement of liquidation, partition and
delivery -- subsequent marriage is void
6. Void under Art 44 where a spouse obtained a judicial
declaration of presumptive death of his former spouse.
Both spouses in the subsequent marriage acted in bad
faith - therefore their marriage is void
Structure of Property Relations of Article 147 (Co-
ownership):
1. Wages and salaries earned during the cohabitation -
co owned by both even if earned only by one of them.
2. Properties acquired during the cohabitation by either
spouses using his or her exclusive money - exclusive
separate property (there must be proof that the money
used exclusive belongs to the spouse who purchases
the property)
3. Properties acquired by both through their effort or
industry -- co ownership
4. If only one of the parties is acting in good faith, the
share of the party in bad faith on the co-ownership is
forfeited:
- Order of forfeiture is different from the rule in
Article 43: a) common children or descendants
then b) party's respective descendants
5. Income and fruits of the separate exclusive properties
-- exclusive
Note: Before the partition of the properties owned in
common, neither of the parties may dispose nor encumber
any property owned in common to a third party. BUT either
of the spouse encumber his or her share to the other co-
owner.
Article 148:
1. Union between a man and a woman, cohabiting as
husband and wife but are incapacitated to marry each
other
2. Married but marriage is void because they are not
capacitated to marry each other:
a. Void marriage by reason of Art 4 -- essential
requisite on legal capacity (same sex, below 18)
b. Void marriage under Art 37 incestuous marriage
c. Void marriage due to public policy Art 38
d. Void marriage under Art 35 par4 bigamous
marriage (first marriage valid, subsequent
marriage void and bigamous)
Note: Article 40 - void marriage but falls under ACP or CPG
14
 Valdez v. RTC and Dino v. Dino 4. It is indispensable that the party should show proof of
actual contribution
Property regime of void marriages shall be governed by Art
147 and 148 except when it is void by reason of Art 40. 5. If the party who acted in bad faith is validly married -
salaries and wages during the cohabitation belong to
The Supreme Court ruled that when the marriage is declared the ACP or CPG of the valid marriage
void, the property regime existing in the marriage is either that
- Any property acquired during cohabitation -
under 147 or 148 and so such regime shall be liquidated in
accordance with the rules on co-ownership. The only exception
belongs to the ACP or CPG existing in the valid
is when the marriage is declared void by reason of Art 40. marriage
- If the party who acted in bad faith is not married -
share in the properties is forfeited
Do not be misled by the case of Carino v. Carino, where the
Supreme Court committed a very patent mistake Distinction: Art 43 from Art 147 and 148:
1. Art 43, what is forfeited is the share of the party in bad
Carino v. Carino faith in the net profits. In 148, the entire share is
forfeited
Involves a policeman named Juanito. His first wife was Susan
Igdao and the second wife is Susan Yi. Without obtaining a 2. In 43, order of forfeiture is different (common children
judicial declaration of nullity of marriage of his previous
only) In 147 and 148 (common children and
marriage, he contracted a second marriage. Juanito died. The
tw o wives scrambled over a piece of Juanito’s estate. Claiming
descendants)
that everything should go to her, the second w ife filed an action
in court for the collection of a sum of money. In support of his 3. In 43, second in line is the descendants of the guilty
position, the second wife assailed the validity of the first spouse, in 147 and 148 party's respective descendants
marriage for lack of marriage license which was duly
established. Structure of Property Relations:
Article 147 Article 148
Issue: Who gets to own the estate left by Juanito?
Wages and Co-owned even Exclusive
Salaries if earned by one
The Supreme Court ruled that the first marriage is void for lack
of marriage license but it does not mean to say that the second
of them only
marriage is valid just because the first marriage is void, Properties Exclusive but Exclusive but
because under Art 40, without the judicial declaration of nullity acquired using needs proof that does not need
of marriage, the subsequent shall likewise be void for being exclusive money the money used proof
bigamous. Susan Yi therefore cannot claim to be the legal wife. exclusively
belongs to the
Since the second marriage is void for being bigamous, the spouse who
property regime should be governed by Art 148 (co-ownership). purchases the
Under 148, only the properties which are acquired by the property
parties through their actual joint contribution. In this case, the Properties Co-ownership Co-ownership
property left by Juanito consists of his salary, acquired by acquired by both without need to but there must
Juanito alone. Susan Yi therefore got nothing. through their prove actual be proof of
joint effort or participation actual
The Supreme Court made a mistake because the marriage industry participation in
between Juanito and Susan Yi is exactly the marriage the acquisition
contemplated under Article 40 because the subsequent Spouse acted in Share in the net If married –
marriage was entered into without the benefit of the judicial bad faith profits is salaries and
declaration of nullity of the first marriage. Hence, the property
forfeited wages during
regime should have been liquidated according to the rules of
the cohabitation
either Art 102 or 129 pursuant to Art 43.
belong to the
ACP or CPG of
Structure of Property Relations under Article 148: the valid
1. Wages and salaries are exclusive to the party who marriage
earned them
If unmarried –
rule on forfeiture
2. Properties acquired using exclusive money are Income and Exclusive Exclusive
exclusive fruits of the
separate
3. Only properties acquired through actual joint exclusive
contribution in money, property and industry can form properties
part of the co-ownership
/rmgc2015
Exam Date: September 26, 2015
15