Property Relations (3/3 MT) Flashcards
ACP, Co-Ownership, CPG
Property relations shall be governed in the ff; order
- marriage settlments executed BEFORE the marriage
- provisions of this Code (FC)
- Local Customs
kinds of property regimes in marriage
- ACP
- CPG
- CSP
- any other regime mixed up of cmobingation of those above.
- special or limited co-ownership
how to prejudice/bind 3rd parties w/ the MS?
the MS must be registered in the LCR [and] RoP where the MContract is recorded
Franz marries Jessa and obtains a personal loan without consent from Jessa and used the money for gambling and did not benefit the family.
[a]
loan obligation fell due. can Creditor go after the property regime of the marriage between franz and jessa?
[b]
what if the personal loan benefited the family?
No, it can only be satisfied by the personal/separate property of Franz
[b]
then it is chargeable to the common fund.
Franz and Jessa got married, and they signed a MS stipulating that Franz’s condo unit will remain his exclusive property
During the marriage, Franz took out a PERSONAL PERSONAL loan and it fell due and his condo unit was not enough to satisfy the debt
Can the creditors validly go after the common funds of franz & jessa?
Yes, while the registration of the MS prejudices 3rd parties, the C may validly go after the common fund for advances subject to reimbursement in case the debtor-spouse insufficient property to satisfy the his personal obligation
Art 80
If there is no contrary stipulation in the MS,
property relations of spouses shall be governed by Phil law [regardless of the place of celebration of the marriage] & their residence except:
- where both spouses are aliens (nationality theory)
- A couple from Japan marries in the Philippines but lives in Japan. Their property relations would be governed by Japanese law.
- w/ respect to extrinsic validity of contracts NOT situated in PHil [and] executed in country where property located (
- contract executed abroad relating to property outside phil
- If a Filipino couple enters into a contract regarding property in the U.S., the U.S. law will govern the formal requirements of that contract (like signing, notarization, etc.).
- w/ respect to extrinsic validity of contracts entered into in the Phil [but] affecting property situated in foreign country whose laws require different formalities for its extrinsic validyt.
- (contract executed in Phil for property outside)
- Example: If a Filipino couple signs a contract in the Philippines involving property in Japan, but Japanese law requires different formalities (e.g., notarization, specific witnesses), those requirements must be followed.
MS has been registed in the RoP & LCR but marriage did not take place. what is the effect?
GR: non celebration renders all stipulations in the MS void
XPN: provisions independent of celebration of marriage, even if no marriage, is still valid.
ex.
whereas (1) - donation by reason of marriage VOID
whereas (2) - support for common children VALID
What is the Rule on Donation by Reason of Marriage
- made by 3rd party in favor of either or both spouses
- SEPARATE deed of donation & governed by rules on ordinary donation
- NOT governed by the more than 1/5 limitation [but] subject to rule on reservation for sustenance and legitime
- VALID even in absence of MS
- REVOCABLE by donor in case marriage does not materialize/happen iow still valid
- Made between future spouses
- made in a valid MS
- MS must stipulate a property regime other than ACP
- property donated must NOT BE MORE THAN 1/5 of the donor’s present property
- if no marriage, then donation revoked by operation of law
who can be a donor in a donation by reason of marriage?
- 3rd party donating to either spouse or both of the would-be-spouses
- the other spouse can donate to the other spouse
is there donation between spouses not made in a MS?
Yes, provided that the MS stipulates a property regime other than the ACP, a donation by reason of marriage in a separate deed of donation between spouses is possible with the effect that
- donation is not governed by the 1/5 limit of present property,
- if marriage does not materialize it is simply revocable still valid
Instances where donation by reason of marriage may be REVOKED (Art. 86)
CCLAIR
- if marriage is NOT celebrated [or] judicially declared void ab initio [except] donations made in MS, which shall be governed by Art. 81
- contemplates ONLY donation in a SEPARATE DEED OF DONATION (if donation incorporated in the MS & no marriage, then is void ab initio not revoable)
- when marriage takes place without consent of the parent/guardian as required by law (Art 45(1) 18-20 w/o PC)
- when marriage is annulled (presupposes voidABLE) & donee in bad faith
- Art 43(3) is the more consistent application, that is, revoked by operation of law
- upon legal separation, the donee being guilty spouse
- exc when ground is adultery/concubinage, then void donation
- If donation is with a resolutory condition & condition is complied with
- Donee committed an act of ingratitude as specified by provisions of CC on donations in general
- if 2nd marriage is VOID (based on Art. 40 in rel’n to 52, 53), donation shall be revoked by operation of law when donee acted in BAD FAITH
- void marriage under Art. 44 (both in bad faith)] AND one previously obtained declaration of presumptive death, donation is VOID by operation of law
instances where donation by reason of marriage is revocable > 1
franz engaged to be married to jessa on june 2024 and donates in a separate deed of dination, a house later it was found that franz is already married to another and the marriage w/ jessa was judicially declared void.
until how long can franz revoke his donation to jessa? what is the prescriptive period?
- prescriptive period is 5 years from time right of action accrues (date of marriage was supposed to be solemnized)
so franz has 5 years from june 2024 to revoke his house donation and will be barred by july 2029
instances where donation by reason of marriage is revocable > 2
if donee (recipient) does not want to return the property donated, what is the remedy of the donor and its respective prescriptive period?
ex. franz in bad faith knowing that his 1st wife is still alive obtains declaration of presumptive death and contracts 2nd marriage with Jessa. Jessa donated a car to franz but later foudns out that his 1st wife is alive.
what is jessa’s remedy insofar as revoking donation is concerned
action to RECOVER [&] right of action accrues (begins) from finality of court order of DANM subject to the ff; prescriptive period
[personal property]
- 8 years from finality
[real property]
- 30 years from finalty
difference between donation on void marriages in
Art. 40 & 44 (void)
Art. 35, 36, 37, 38, 52, 53, etc (void)
art 45 (voidABLE)
40 & 44
- donation is revoked by operation of law
- bad faith is relevant
other grounds void grounds
- donation is revocable at the instance of the donor
- bad faith irrelevant
voidable grounds
- revocable & does not require annulment before revocation can be had
A & C are in an illicit rel’t of concubinage and adultery. can they still validly donate to one another?
no, DBM donations made between spouses living together in an illicit or immoral relationship (adultery/concubinage are VOID) at the time of donation is VOID
Marriages void under 52 where spoues previously obtained a DANM (Art. 40) but faulted to comply with the requirement under 51 & 52, is the donation by reason of marriage void as it is art. 40 based or revocable?
It is revocable with 5 years from finality of decision of nullity as prescriptive period
only on marriages void under 40 & 44 and donations by reason of the same are given, those donations are void, any other void marriages donation is revocable
can a bf & gf living together as husband or wife without a valid marriage donate to each other validly?
what if their marriage is declared void, can they now doneate?
No, every donation or grant of gratuitous title between spouses during the marriage shall be void except moderate gifts. this prohibition also apply to persons living together as husband and wife without a valid marriage. (art. 87)
even if marraige declared void (perez v. senerpida) the donation is void
which provision should prevail?
art. 43 (3)
“donations by reason of marriage shall remain valid, except that if the donee contracted the marriage in bad faith, such donation is revoked by operation of law”
art 86 (3)
“DBM may be revoked by donor in the ff cases:
3. marriage is annulled & donee acted in bad faith.”
Art. 43 which declares the donation revoked by operation of law is more consistent with the purpose of an annulment which is to penalize the guilty party (Dean Sta. Maria)
GR: L.S. the guilty spouse the donation is revocable with 5 years prescriptive period from decree of L.S.
XPN
if the ground was adultery/concubinage, donation is void
Rule on Ordinary Donation Between Spouses During Marriage
GR: OD (ordinary donation) is VOID regardless of property regime & regardless of the extent (if more of if less than 1/5) in proportion to the value of the present property
XPN: moderate gifts DURING family rejoicing
What is the rule on donations by either spouse of a common property to a 3rd party?
Art. 98
GEN: donation of common property requires consent of other spouse
XPN: no consent required for the donation of common property for;
- moderate donations
- for charity
- occasions for family rejoicing or family distress
Formalities required for DBM
[personal propety]
5k below - oral
5k above - written
[real]
public instrument
Rule on Contract of Sale between Spouses during marriage
so while donations between them are void, how about sale?
GR: husband & wife cannot sell property to each other
in donation, even if it is exclusive property, it is VOID to prevent undue influence
XPN;
- separation of property is agreed upon in the MS
- there is judicial separation of property
When does ACP govern?
- if stipulated in the MS
- no MS except where CSP is mandatory
- when agreed property regime is void (like when stipiulate that neither ACP/local custom shall govern) except when CSP is mandatory
when does ACP commence
at the precise moment marriage is celebrated & any contrary stipulation is VOID
what compromises ACP or how does it govern property?
unless otherwise provided in the FC [or] stipulated as exclusive in the MS,
ALL properties owned by the spouses before, during, and after marriage is common
what properties are excluded from the ACP?
i. properties stipulated in MS to be exclusive (CONTRACTUAL Exclusion)
ii. those enumerated in ARt. 92 (STATUTORY exclusion)
- property acquired DURING marriage by gratuitous title [&] its fruits & income (unless) stipulated by donor, testator, grantor that they will form part of acp
- property for personal & exclusive use (except) jewelry
- property acquierd BEFORE mrg. by either spouse who has a legitimate descendant by a former marraige [&] fruits & income if any
Franz & Jessa married & Franz’s father died leaving estate. Is the estate part of their ACP?
GR: No, the estate will not be part of the ACP and will be exclusive to Franz
XPN: if the testator provides that the inheritance be for the ACP
TN: distinguish property acquired by gratuitous title BEFORE & AFTER marriage
[situatino 1]
1. franz marries
2. inherits vast land
[situation 2]
1. inherits vast land
2. franz marries
in the 1st, the land inherited is exclusive as
in the 2nd situation, the land inherited is common because of ACP unless otherwise provided by the will
Suppose Jessa inherited pieces of jewelry from her mother for her exclusive & personal use. What will become of the pieces of jewelry in the APC with franz?
par. 1 provides that property acquired by gratuitous title is exclusive however par. 2 provides that jewelry is common.
prevailing view is that jewelry inherited is considered common considering its value & based on the interest of the spouses & family
Art 92 (3)
> A & B marry w/ 2 legitimate kids. B dies A marries C.
[a]
what is the status of the house of A & B in rel’n to the 2nd wedding of A w/ C?
[b]
what if the descendants were illegitimate
[c]
what is the property regime of the 2nd marriage if A fails to liquidate properties of the first
GR: 92(3) the house is exclusive and separate property of A.
[b]
however, should the descendant be illegitimate, then it will form part of the ACP of A & C
[c]
1. 1st marriage dissolved by DEATH (not court order)
2. surviving spouse contract 2nd marriage w/o liquidating properties in the 1st marriage, the 2nd marriage property regime shall be mandatorily governed by CSP (complete separation of property regime)
knowledge check:
in contracting a 2nd marriage, when is it valid and when is it void when the surviving spouse fails to liquidate the properties
valid - cause of dissolution is DEATH but mandates the property regime of the 2nd as CSP
void - cause of dissolution is COURT ORDER & no compliance
Teodulo Sison did not liquidate the conjugal property of the terminated marriage within one (1) year after the DEATH of his wife in 1989. In 1992, he contracted a second marriage to Perla Sison. In 1994, he sold a conjugal property of his previous marriage without the consent of his second wife.
is the disposition valid?
Yes, as the property regime governing between Sison & his 2nd spouse is CSP
On the issue of the validity of the sale of Teodulo’s share without the consent of his second wife Perla, the Supreme Court ruled that the sale was valid because Perla’s consent was not necessary. Since the subsequent marriage of Teodulo and Perla was governed by mandatory regime of complete separation of property, Teodulo’s undivided interest in the conjugal property in the previous marriage is
his exclusive property.
What is the nature of property acquired using separate/exclusive property in ACP?
forms part of ACP in spite of the fact that it was acquired using separate/exclusive property (sta. Maria) because;
- art. 92 is silent unlike CPG
- property acquired during marriage is presumed to belong to the community, [unless] otherwise provided
- only exceptions provided are contractual & statutory exclusions & no other
in ACP, spouse sell exclusive property, what becomes of the proceeds of the sale?
Franz inherits land during marriage w/ Jessa (exclusive) but then sells his land & earns 5 million. What becomes of the 5 million? Common or Exclusive?
There are (2) two views
- If the exclusive piece of land is converted to another like exchanged for a car, it will now become common because statutory exclusions are exclusive so that if the exclusive property is converted into another property not part of Art. 92, then it becomes common.
IOW, proceeds of the sale of land is not acquired by inheritance but derived from contract of sale, which is NOT an exemption to the ACP’s scope.
- conversion will not make it fall under ACP as this would circumvent the purpose of art. 92 which is to exclude properties from being part of the ACP
Charges upon & obligation of the APC (Art. 94)
- support of spouses, their common children, & legitimate children of either spouse
- ALL debts & obligation contracted DURING the marriage by the designated administrator spouse for the benefit of the community or by both spousoes or by one spouse w/ consent of the other
- debts & obligations contracted without consent only to the extent the family was benefited
- all [tlce] taxes, liens, charges & expenses including minor & major repair upon the community property
- all [tlce] for the mere preservation made DURING marriage upon separate property of either spouse used by the family
- expenses to enable spouse to complete professional or self-imporvement activity
- antenuptial debts of either to the extent that it benefitted the family
- value of what is donated or promised by both spouses in favor of their common | legitimate children for exclusive purpose of completing a professional course
-
antenuptial debts of either spouse other tahn those in par. 7
- support of ILlegitimate children
- liabilities incurred by either spouse by reason of crime/ quasi-delict
in case of INSUFFICIENCY/ABSENCE of the exclusive property of the debtor-spouse, the payment made from the ACP will be advances to be deducted specifically upon liquidation of the community of the debtor spouse
10. expenses of litigation between spouses [unless] suit is groundless
Franz previously married with a legitimate child. enters validly into a 2nd marriage. Is the support of Franz’s child of the 1st marriage chargeable to the funds of the 2nd marriage?
Yes, Art. 94 (1)
Franz & Jessa both entered into a contract to sell but it showed no benefit to the family. is the payment chargeable to the ACP?
Yes, 94 (2). Even if no benefit was given to the family, what makes it chargeable is the fact that it was simply made by the spouses
same scenario > immoral profession >
RULE ON OBJECTION? Whose property should the obligation be charged with?
what if objection was made AFTER/BEFORE the benefit to the family from the immoral profession?
If the benefit accrued to the family BEFORE OBJECTION, the resulting objection is chargeable to the ACP/CPG
If the benefit came AFTER OBJECTION, the resulting obligation is chargeable to the exclusive property
Jessa engaged in prostitution secretly without her husband Franz knowing. She entered into an obligation incurred by an immoral profession
Can a creditor run after her? can it be charged in the ACP?
The operative fact in this case is if the immoral profession benefitted the family. If it did benefit the family, the resulting obligation is charageable to the ACP.
what makes ACP liable is the fact that there is benefit to the family.
Wife holds supervisory role in Rustans. She pocketed money all for herself and was sued
There was no objection from the husband
there was no actual benefit to the family
Can the obligation by the wife as an employee be charged to the common fund?
In the case of Zapanta v. Rustans, while the rule must be there is actual benefit to hold the common funds liable but there is the presumption inured to the benefit of the family. so the SC ruled where a spouse engaged in an illegal transaction, under Art. 73, if the benefit came AFTER OBJECTION, then it is chargeable to the separate property but in this case since there was no objection, it is chargeable to the common fund.
Wife charged with violation of BP 22 for issuing 11 bouncing checks. Criminal cases were dismissed & only the civil aspect was resolved
no consent on husband
no benefit to the family
is the wife’s property regime liable for the loans obtained?
In the case of Teresita v. Ty the SC ruled that the obligation is characterized as a debt or obligation
since the debt was contracted w/o consent [&] no proof that such debt redounded to the benefit of the family, the civil aspect cannot be satisfied against the conjugal properties
What is the rule on ISOLATED TRANSACTIONS
Ayala v. Ching
- husband had an isolated transaction
- benefit went to the corp
Ruling:
- Isolated transactions which are entered by a spouse NOT their usual occupation, business, or activity thus chargeable exclusively
- Benefit must be actual & direct to the family
if it had been usual, it would be charged to the common fund
What is the rule rule if the properties of the ACP are not sufficient to settle the ACP debts?
Spouses are solidarily liable for the unpaid balance with their separate proeprty (Art. 94 last par.)
1M ACP properties and 2M is the ACP debt. how will the balance of 1m be settled?
spouses will be solidarily liable such that the creditor may go after either spouse for the amount of 1M. the paying spouse has the right to demand reimbursement
Art 94 - ACP liable for the mentioned grounds > Art 94 (9)
DEBTS chargeable against the EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY of the debtor-spouse
Art 94 (9)
- Antenuptial debts that do not redound to the benefit of the family
- support of illegitimate children
- liabilities incurred by either spouse arising from crime or quasi-delict
- losses in games of chance (gains however are common property )
What is the rule if
Debtor-spouse has insufficient property to pay his exclusive debt under Art. 94 (9) ?
⚠️ — QUALIFY
advances reimbursement mechanism (ARM) shall apply where advances shall be made by the common property to be deducted from the SHARE of the debtor-spouse upon liquidation of the community
dissolution takes place when marriage is dissolvedby death/decree of separation
ex. 10mil but debtor-spouse has 5mil. his 5 mil will be used to settle but the balance of the remaining 5 mil will be shouldered by the common funds,
when does liquidation occur?
- judicial separation of property
- legal separation
- dissolved by death
obligation is made during marriage
no consent
no benefit
can ARM apply?
⚠️
No, ARM applies only to sitautions contemplated in Art. 94 (9). the list is very specific
if debt contracted by one spouse w/o consent & did not redound to the benefit of the family, the debt shall be paid by the exclusive property of the debtor-spouse. the ACP/CPG cannot be compelled to advance its payment even when debtor-spouse has no separate property left.
Ownership, Administration, Enjoyment, & Disposition of the Community Property (Art. 96)
while the administration of common property is joint, should there be disagreement the husband’s shall prevail.
what is the remedy/recourse of the spouse?
within 5 years from date of contract implementing such decision, shall an action to rescind the contract on the ground that the transaction entered into is prejudicial to the family or the ACP
husband had a stroke making him incapacitated to administer the property. other spouse exercises sole administration.
[a]
can she sell the property without the consent?
[b]
what is the effect if an act of ownership is done without consent?
[c]
does that mean a void contract is ratifiable?
No, there are 2 rules different rules;
- for acts of administration, she may exercise them solely
- for acts of ownership, she requires court authority [or] written consent of the other spouse
should she sell the property she will require either a court order [or] written consent from the other spouse
[b]
the sale will be void [but] will be construed as a continuing offer on part of the consenting spouse & 3rd person [and] may be perfected upon acceptance by the other spouse or authorization of the court before offer is withdrawn
[c]
no, the previous transaction is not ratified; the eventual consent or court authority does not retroact to the time of the initial transaction. what happens is that there will now be a meeting of the minds
insofar as Court approval is concerned, is that required in all scenarios?
No, it is only required when the other spouse is
- incapacitated, or
- unable to participate in the administration of common properties
i. absent
ii. separated in fact
iii. abandoned the other
iv. consent is withheld/cannot be obtained
TN: if husband is insane wife should obtain consent OF THE GUARDIAN as without consent, it is void
the fact is ACP is a special kind of co-ownership. Art. 493 allows co-owner to sell or dispose of the undivided share without need of consent
since marriage ACP is a co-ownership, will this rule apply?
No, that rule does not apply in community property
what are the exceptions to disposition of community property requiring consent?
- sale/disposition made for hospitalization & medical expenses [AND] other spouses **unreasonably withheld consent. the sale is valid insofar as the SHARE of the CONSENTING spouse
- either spouse may dispose his SHARE/INTEREST in the community property IF the disposition is in the nature of a disposition mortis causa [AND] made in a will
- takes effect once the spouse dies and since dead, community is dissolved & no longer subject to restrictions thus dissolved, consent is no longer required
- court does not declare VOID the ENTIRE disposition of the conjugal property despite absence of consent bceause of the subsequent death of the consenting/disposing spouse
- since conjugal partnership was terminated upon death, no need to invalidate the share of the disposing deceased spouse.
franz & jessa are married under ACP, franz can’t unilaterally sell HIS SHARE in the community property so he writes a will (a mortis causa disposition) leaving HIS SHARE to his brother.
is this disposition valid?
GR: consent is required
XPN: either spouse may dispose of their share in the interest in a will or a mortis causa disposition.
Yes, as it will only take place after death which the property regime has ended and prohibition on disposition (consent/court order) is no longer required
Franz and Jessa were married under the (ACP) regime. Franz, without Jessa’s consent, sold a piece of community property to a third party, Sam.
After acquiring the property, Sam donated the property to his friend, Ben.
Jessa, upon learning of the sale, filed a suit to annul the sale, claiming that it was void due to the lack of her consent.
Before the case was decided, Franz passed away.
Jessa argued that the entire property should be recovered, including Franz’s share, because the sale was void.
ISSUE:
Can Jessa recover the entire property, or is the disposition of Franz’s share valid after his death?
GR: consent is required in the disposition of community property
XPN: the court does not declare void despite absence of consent because of the death of the consenting spouse
as illustrated in the case of Carlos v. Tolentino 2018
DISSOLUTION OF ACP REGIME
ACP is terminated or dissolved;
- death of spouse
- legal separatoin
- annulment [or] nullity
- judicial separation of property DURIG mrg.
only 4 instances property regime is dissolved; exclusive enumeration
Liquidation of the APC Assets & Liabilities
what is the liquidation procedure?
- Inventory of the common [and] separate properties
-
payment of all COMMUNITY debts.
- in case of insufficiency, sps. solidarily liable with their separate properties
- whatever remains of separate will be delivered to the spouse owner
- NET REMAINDER of the ACP shall constitute the NET ASSETS, which shall be divided equally [unless] a sharing scheme is agreed upon in the MS - delivery of presumptive legitimes to the COMMON children upon partition
- [unless] agreed in the partition of properties, the CONJUGAL DWELLING & LOT shall be adjudicated to the spouse with whom majority of COMMON children choose to remain
- child <7 presumed to choose mother unless court decides otherwise
- if no majority, court will decide
Procedure for liquidation of ACP > 4 conjugal home
in what instance will award of CD be applied in
only applied in VALID marriages. valid marriages only have 2 property regimes that is
1. ACP
2. CPG
If the marriage is dissolved by DANM, will Art. 102 apply? (Liquidation of ACP liabilities & assets)?
No, it shall not apply since the property regime existing in a VOID marriage is NEITHER ACP/CPG but co-ownership under 147 & 148
147 (special co-ownership) 148 (limited co-owernship). in either case, properties acquired in a VOID marriage such as the family dwelling shall be divided between the spouses. it will not be adjudicated to one spouse pursuant to Art. 102
As an exception, when can a VOID marriage have the property regime of ACP/CPG apply thereby warranting the adjudication of the family home to one spouse?
GR: void marriages are governed by 147 or 148 (co-ownership
XPN;
- void mrg. (art. 40)
- mrg. annulled under (art. 45)
40
- when declared void, the property regime was either ACP/CPG to begin with so in addition to the judgment of nullity, there must be also be dissolution & liquidation of spouses property, delivery of presumptive legitime in the order, custody & support of children
- so conjugal dwelling (CD) will be given to the spoue where majority of common children choose to stay
Art. 103 | dissolution of the ACP upon death of either spouse
if marriage is terminated by death, the community of property shall be
- liquidated in the same proceeding for settlement of the estate of the deceased
if NO judicial settlment is instituted, the surviving spouse shall liquidate it judiciall or extrajudicially w/in 1 yaer from death.
3 Modes of Liquidating the Estate of the Deceased Spouse
- special proceeding for judicial settlement of the estate of the deceased sposue
- special civil action for partition
- extra-judicial partition among heirs
EFFECTS if no liquidataion is made w/in 1 year from death
- disposition is VOID to the extent of the SHARES of the non-conseint co-heirs/co-owners
but if disposition does not affect their SHARES, sale is valid
Franz died, 2 children & jessa survived. jessa filaed to comply with liquidation w/in a yaer.
on rule of succession, property inherited by wife & 2 children is under Co-ownership.
jessa disposed her share and both the shares of her children. is the disposition valid?
insofar as her share is concerned, it is valid, insofar as the children’s share is concerned, it is void.
EFFECTS of Non-Liquidation on the 2ND marriage
if surviving spouse contracts 2nd marriage WITHOUT LIQUIDATION, the property regime will mandatorily be Complete Separation of Property CSP
Property Regime of Unions without marriage (Chap 7 of FC) Art. 147
IOW, what marriages’ property regime fall under Special Co-Ownership
Art. 147 Special Co-Ownership
a. man & woman W/I CAPACITY to marry live exclusivelyy as husband & wife (common law marriage/live-in)
b. man & woman WITH CAPACITY to marry live as husband & wife under a VOID marriage
i. Art. 36
i. art 40 (absence of consent, authority of SO, ML, MCeremony thus VOID but capacitated to marry)
- so that if one is suffering from a L.I. due to absence of a requirement, then property regime is not co-ownership
c. Art. 53 (void 2nd marriage for failure to comply with liquidation requirement)
For purposes of Art. 147 & Art. 4, capacity to marry refers only to ;
- age
- relatinoship (incestuous, public policy)
- status (single)
- if any or both has lack of legal capacity because of age, relationship, or status, they have NO CAPACITY TO MARRY & the rule on co-ownership is NOT 147 but on 148!
147 special co-ownership are for void marriages that has capacity to marry
What property regime governs the property relation between spouses in a VOID marriage? ⚠️
There are 3 possible scenarios on whicih property regime will govern the spouses in a VOID marriage
[prop rel’n governed by ACP/CPG] ⚠️even when VOID ⚠️
- only when marriage void under Art. 40 for failure to comply with prior judicial declaration of nullity of a prevoius marriage
- since decree of nullity may be issued only upon complicance with the liquidation, partition, distribution & delivery of presumptive legitime under Art. 50 & 51
- when separation is agreed upon in MS (Art. 50 in rel’n to Art. 43)
[prop rel’n governed by Special Co-ownership 147]
If the parties has legal capacity to marry then it will be governed by 147 (Special Co-Ownership) such as those void marriages under Art. 36, 4 (absence of authority of SO, ML, MC, absence of consent)
[prop rel’n governed by 148 limited co-ownership]
however, should the void marriage be characterized as one without capacity to marry due to Age, Relationship (incestuous, public policy prohibition) or Status (bigamous) then the rule governing property relation is Art. 148 (Limited Co-Ownership)
in both co-ownership rules, liquidation is not required
⚠️ what is the Structure of Property Relations Under Art. 147?
- salaries & wages shall be owned by them in EQUAL SHARES, even if earned by one alone (co-ownership)
- property acquired by EITHER exclusively by his own funds belongs to such party provided there is proof of acquisition by exclusive funds is (exclusive)
- property acquired by BOTH thru work/industry shall be governed by rule on co-ownership. Consequently, EITHER spouse may alienate (dispose/sell) in favor to the other spouse his shareex under Art. 493
- franz & jessa eloped & work together to buy a house. franz may sell his share in the house to jessa validly
- property acquired is presumed to have been by JOINT EFFORTS & owned by them in EQUAL SHARES. Party who did not participate in the acquisition is deemed to have contributed jointly IF effort’s consisted in the care & maintenance of the family & household
- the FRUITS (exclusive) of the couple’s SEPARATE property are NOT part of co-ownership
- neither can encumber or dispose intervivos (while alive) his share acquired DURING COHABITATION [and] OWNED IN COMMON, without consent of the other [only until tho] the termination of cohabitation, [but] either may alienate in favor of the other spouse his share in the co-owned
- properties acquired AFTER cohabitation not co-owned
- when ONLY ONE TO A VOID MARRIAGE, is in good faith, the share of the one in bad faith is forfeited to;
i. common children/descendants
ii. respective surviving descendants
iii. innocent spouse
Art 147 or special co-ownership enjoys 2 disputable legal presumptions
- presumption of co-ownership of properties during cohabitation
- presumption of equal share in the co-ownership
what is the property regime of a married couple whose marriage is void under Art. 36 (PI)f insofar as salary is concerned?
Their salary is co-owned as that void marriage is governed by Art. 147
Property is acquired through the exclusive funds of one spouse, under Art. 147, is it co-owned?
Yes, Art. 147 enjoys the presumption that property acquired during cohabitation is co-owned but can be challenged.
Marriage is void under Ar. 36 before filing, they separaetd de facto & no longer were sharing the same roof.
while living separately, they acquired property through their work & industry. Later, PI was granted
husband who saw how much the wife acquired claimed that the property is co-owned and he has a share. is it tenable?
No, co-ownership is synonymous to cohabitation. After their cohabitation, arat. 147 does not apply and its scope is during cohabitation.
Art. 493 (Ordinary Co-Ownership)
vs
Art. 147 (Special Co-ownership)
Main difference is that 147 requires consent to dispose of the co-owned property while 493 does not need consent insofar as his UNDIVIDED share is concerned
493
- co-owner can validly dispose of his UNDIVIDED SHARE in the common property w/o consent of others (even w/o partition, co-owner can dispose of his UNDIVIDED share)
147
- as long as cohabitation lasts, no dispostion inter vivos (while alive) of the UNDIVIDED SHARE is validly made except with consent of the other (even more so for the ENTIRE property)
A & B cohabit and acquired properties such as a condo unit
Later they stopped cohabiting.
B mortgage the condo unit without consent of A
is the mortgaged valid?
Yes, it is valid insofar as the UNDIVIDED share of B of that common property is concerned applying now the rule on ordinary co-ownership (Art. 493)
During cohabitation, tArt. 147 takes effect such that B’s mortgage is invalid without the consent of A however since the cohabitation terminated, the governing rule is now Art. 493 and B can validly mortgage the condo unit insofar as his undivided share of it is concerned.
Art. 147
A & B have 5 children during cohabitaiton
they separate
insofar as the house is concerned, who should it be adjudicated to?
Neither. Since this is govern by co-ownership, the house shall be divided among them equially folowing the rules on ordinary co-ownership
Rule on Forfeiture
A. L.S.
B. Guilty Spouse in Art. 147
A
- forfeit insofar as the NET PROFIT
B. [1 party in a VOID marriage is in good faith]
- ENTIRE share is forfeited to the
i. common children/descendants
ii. surviving descendants
iii. innocent spouse
Art. 148 (Limited Co-Ownership)
What type of persons & void marriages fall under this ?
Persons
- without capacity to marry
- [and] live without benefit of marriage
Void Marriages
- Art 41 (bigamous 2nd marriage)
- 37 (Incestuous)
- 38 (Public Policy)
- 4 (Age, Sex, Bigamous)
- 44 (Santos v. Santos) [both bad faith 2nd marriage]
- Multiple alliances
A & B are married but B secured an declaration of presumptive death of A and B & C married in which they both know the whereabouts of A
how wll the property relations of B & C’s void marriage be governed?
It will be governed in Art. 148 as they do not have legal capacity
Franz has 5 women & over the years alternately cohabit with each of them. THERE IS NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENT. They acquired properties
how should the property relations be governed?
Even if there is no legal impediment, this is a case of Multiple Alliances thus is governed by Limited Co-Ownership
in 147, it provides that they must live together EXCLUSIVELY
Difference between
Special Co-Ownership
vs
Limited Co-Ownership
Limited has
- NO presumption co-ownership [&} needs to be proved (not enough to take care of the household-requires actual contribution)
Does SSM fall under Art. 148?
There are 2 views on the matter
[1]
Yes, SSM is covered by Art. 148 as it applies to UNIONS other than those under 147 (Legarda, Family Law, 2020 Ed.)
[2]
No, SSM is NOT covered by Art. 148 as it is intended to apply only between a man and a woman as expressly provided for under Art. 147 (Rabuya)
- thus Ordinary Co-Ownership applies Art. 493 (Victoria v. Pidlaoan)
J and Stan are living together exclusively. J went abroad & Stan stayed in Phil.
Without consent, Stan disposed the properties they acquired together in the pihlippines.
J questioned the legality claiming that he is a co-owner of the property.
what governs the property relation in this void marriage? how will you rule
The rule governing their property relation is Art. 493 on ordinary co-ownership which provides that the co-owner may dispose his UNDIVIDED SHARE over the common property without the consent of the other co-owners.
Art. 148 must be read in relation to Art. 147 in that it must be between a man and a woman thus cannot be applied since this is a Same sex union. (Elmer Rabuya)
Art. 493
Each co-owner shall have the FULL OWNERSHIP OF HIS PART [and] fruits & benefits pertaining to his part
he may [maas]alienate, assign, or mortgage his part [and] even substitutte another person in its enjoyment (except) when personal rights are involved
Effect of [a.m.] alienation or mortgage, with respect to the other co-owners, shall be LIMITED TO THE PORTION ALLOTED TO HIM in the division upon the termination of the co-ownership
Structure of the Property Regime under 148
⚠️
is it entire share?
- salaries & wages are SEPARATELY owned [and] if any of the spouses is VALIDLY married to another, his salary is property of ACP/CPG to that valid marriage
- property acquired SOLELY by funds of each party is exclusive
- ONLY properties acquired by BOTH thru their actual joint contribution shall be co-owned in proportion to their contribution (presumed equal contribution)
- if one of the party is validly married, his SHARE shall accrue to the ACP/CPG of that existing marriage
-
IF party who acted in bad faith IS NOT validly married, HIS SHARE will be forfeited in favor of;
i. common children/descendants
ii. respetive descendants (of the party in bad faith)
iii. innocent spouse
Jakob & Sam who are siblings live exclusively as husband and wife. they both earned salaries
However, Jakob is married to Rhea. (obviously Jakob in bad faith but in a valid marriage)
what happens to the salary of Sam
Pursuant to Art. 148, Sam’s salaries [and] shares shall accrue to the ACP/CPG
Jakob & Sam who are siblings live exclusively as husband and wife. they both acquired a condo unit worth 1million
However, Jakob in bad faith to Sam is alraedy married to Rhea however it was proven that his marriage to Rhea is void
what happens to the condo unit worth 1 million Jakob & Sam acquiredi?
Pursuant to Art. 148, since Jakob is in bad faith and his previosu marriage is void. his share in the condo unit will be forfeited to;
- common children/descendants bet. him & Sam
- respectie descendants of bad faith party (Jake)
- or innocent spouse
however, being a bigamous marriage, Jakob & Sam are BOTH in bad faith. what happens to the condo unit suppose that there are no common children/descendants or no respective descendants of the party in bad faith?
no forfeiture takes place
A man abandons his legitimate family & cohabits with another woman.
During cohabitation, he acquired properties
The man dies and a dispute over the properties acquired in the cohabitation arises.
as the court, how will you rule?
Since he is validly married, pursuant to Art. 148, his share in the co-ownership of property is forfeited to the ACP/CPG of the valid marriage unless duly proven by the cohabited woman that the property is exclusive property to her
CONJUGAL PROPERTY OF GAINS
what is under the CPG? IOW, in a CPG, husband & wife place in a common fund (contract of partnership ni) the;
[A]
- proceeds
- products
- fruits
- income
of their separate properties
[B]
acquired by either or both spouses through effort [or] by chance
[C]
upon dissolution of the marriage [or] of the partnership, the NET GAINS/BENEFITS obtained by either [or] both shall be divided between them
in a CPG, franz owns a condo unit and marries jessa. the condo unit remains his exclusive property
what about the fruist of its monthly rentals?
they are common in a CPG regime
Franz and Jessa agreed to CPG.
during their marriage, Franz contracted things.
is the thing common?
Yes, under CPG, it is common [unless] otherwise proven
TN: explains why it is called “GAINS” because what you gain is common
Properties Belonging to CPG ⚠️
- properties acquired by onerous title DURING marriage
- property obtained through labor, industry, work, or profession DURING marriage
- FRUITS of common & NET PROFITS of SEPARATE properties of each spouse
- the share of either spouse in hidden treasure
- properties acquired DURING marriage by occupation
- livestock existing upon dissolution in excess of what was brought into marriage
- properties acquired by gambling or chance
Exclusive Properties of Each Spouse in a CPG
- Properties brought into the marriage as separate
- but fruits/income is common
- properties acquired by gratuitous title (donation, gift, succession)
- acquired through right of redemption, by barter or by exchange with property belonging ONLY TO ONE SPOUSE
- so if the redemption, barter, conversion belonged to both, then obviously its conjugal) - property purchased with exclusive money
Compare
ACP gratuitous title
CPG gratuitous title
ACP
- if acquired before marriage, it is common once married
- if acquired during marriage, it is exclusive [and] FRUITS ARE SEPARATE
CPG
- if acquired before marriage, up to him if separate
- if acquired during marriage, it is exclusive but the fruits are common
Franz owns a condo unit inherited by his father during the marriage with Jessa
how will the fruist be governed?
It will depend on the property regime
[ACP]
- condo unit is exclusive and so will the fruist (art. 92)
[CPG]
- condo unit is exclusive BUT fruits is common
What is the rule in case of DONATION in favor of either spouse JOINTLY
- if donation is w/ designation of determiante SHARE (undivided/pro-indiviso)- there is right of accretion
- RoAccreetion (death of jessa, franz can exercise right of accretion)
- if donation is w/ designation of determinate PROPERTY - NO right of accretion accrues.
CPG > what is the rule on Retirement Benefits, Gratuity, Pensions, Annuities, & Usufruct
if not by gratuitous title, it is CONJUGAL
if it is gratuitous, exclusive
Spouse retired & obtained retirement benefits.
Is the retirement benefit conjugal/exclusive?
If the retirement benefits were given as a gratuitous title, it is exclusive
but if the same were given consist of salary accummulated over the years, that is conjugal
normallly, retirement policies are onerous & are part of the benefits that were dedicated over the years (GSIS, SSS) not given solely for appreciation of service because it is a product of your work, industry, or profession
Compare
Conversion in ACP
Conversion in CPG
CPG
- thru gratuitous title, franz inherits land and converts it to a sports car, that sports car is still exclusive (109)
ACP
- thru gratuitous title, franz inherits land during marriage and is deemed separate property, he converts it into a sports car, that sports car is COMMON
TRADE-IN
Ma & Pa is CPG
the x-trail of papa is separate worth 300k.
it was traded-in for a subaru worth 500k, the balance 200k was taken from the CPG
what is the status of the subaru?
the status of subaru is conjugal however, papa is entitled to reimbursement as a trade-in is a different legal transaction.
What is the rule if Exclusive Property is sold during the CPG marriage
⚠️
- so WHICH is it?
- proceeds remain EXCLUSIVE if the exclusive property, applying by analogy rule on barter/exchange/conversion; proceeds here is the substitute for the exclusive property sold
- proceeds become CONJUGA applying ordinary meaning of proceeds referring to “fruits, income”
- proceeds equivalent to the value of the exclusive property at the time of the marriage shall remain exclusive, but any profts resulting from the sale is CONJUGAL considered as fruits
Ex. DURING marriage, exclusive property is worth 1milloin and sold for 1.5million.
how will the profit/proceeds be divided?
1million remains the exclusive property
the excess/profits is CONJUGAL
You inherited millions by gratuitous title
you are married under CPG
you purchase house & lot using;
[a] only exclusive property
[b] partly exclusive property | partly conjugal
[c] only conjugal
[a]
the house is exclusive
[b]
house is conjugal [but] spouse entitled to reimbursement
[c]
house is conjugal
If property house bought under CPG is bought using BORROWED MONEY from bank, is the property conjugal or exclusive?
if the money used in the re-payment of the loan is exclusive, then it is exclusive
if conjugal, then conjugal
if partly both, then conjugal but spouse is entitled to reimbursement.
CPG Rules on Insurance Proceeds
- insurance policy taken out during marriage & premium paid by conjugal – proceeds are conjugal
- if premium paid partly exclusive & partly ocnjugal –it is conjugal
- if there is designated beneficiary proceed goes to that designated beneficiary
- if they have a son, even if policy & premium was paid out of the CPG, the insurance proceeds goes directly to the son as the designated beneficiary
TN: premium means monthly/quarterly payment
CPG rule on ownership of property bought on installment
⚠️
- how can there be CPG before marriage?
- if bought using exlcusive funds - it is eclusive
- if partly;
- if title transfered BEFORE marriage, property is exclusive, but CPG reimbused upon liquidation
- if title transferred AFTER marraige, property is conjugal, but Spouse reimbursed of what he paid
Tracy bought a one bedroom unit while single payable in 5 years. she DP 30% & 70% spread over the 5 payable years.
She got married on the 3rd year. Full payment of purchase price is completed thus title was transferred during the marriage
who gets to own the property?
If it was all exclusive even during marriage, then it is exclusive
if it was partly exclusive and parlty conjugal, the CPG owns the property but Tracy is entitled to reimbursement of the 30% and/or exlcusive funds she paid
CPG rule on Payment of Credit Received During Marriage
- Payments made [during] the marriage on the PRINCIPAL - exclusive
- payments made [during] the marriage on the INTEREST - conjugal
interest is considered fruist
CPG rule on damages
- Damages awarded out of a contract solely financed by the CPG is conjugal
- of course if exclusive money, then it is exclusive
- damages awarded as a result of physical injuries is exclusive
Zulueta was bumpedd off his good seat in a plain for a white man. he filed for damages and was awarded by the SC
who gets to own the damages?
if the plain ticket was purchased using CPG, then it is conjugal,
if it was purchased using exclusive, then it is exclusive even if no physical injuries occur
CPG What is the rule on improvement
ownership of improvement made on the [[SEPARATE]] property at the expense of the CPG [or] efforts of either or both shall be governed by the ff. rules
- if cost of the improvement [&] resulting increase in value is more than the value of the separate property at the time of improvement, that separate property shall belong ot the conjugal property
- if cost of the improvement [&] resulting increase in value IS NOT MORE THAN alue of the separate property at the time of improvement, it is owned by the owner-spouse
building is 500k. hired world-reknown contractor for 10mil and building becomes 20mil, that belongs to CPG
building is 500k. hired world-reknown contractor for 10mil and building becomes 20mil, that belongs to CPG
- when is ownership transferred?
- what is the effect on creditors in the mean time reimbursemenet is made?
franz retains ownership even with the improvement until he is reimbused of the original value of the property that is 500k. once transferred, it now belongs to the conjugal property
the property cannot be used to satsify a conjugal debt YET [unless] conjugal funds are insufficient in which case SEPARATE properites are solidarily liable
note: rentals is still conjugal here, we are discussing insofar as ownership of improvement is concenred
CPG: Rule in case of Dispositon/Sale/Encumberance of CONJUGAL property
- sale w/o knowledge [and] consent is VOID
- sale w/ knowledge [but] w/o consent sale is VALID but ANNULLABLE at the option of the wife *5 yrs from contract implementing decision
- in case of incapacity of other spouse [or] inability to participate [and] disposition/conveyance is without consent or court authority, sale is VOID but subject to the approval or consent of the court
- court order only in cases where spouse is because spouse is incapacitated
administration of ACP & CPG
Charges on ACP& CPG card
same with ACP (refer back)
CPG: Charges upon & obligations of CPG (ARt. 121) & ACP (Art 94) is the same EXCEPT
- support for ILLEGITIMATE children is provided in a separate article (122,) but Art. 94 (9) under ACP
- liability for
- support for illegitimate children,
- fines & indemnities,
- ante-nuptial debts not redounding to the benefit
are chargeable to the CPG only when:
a. other conjugal charges are already covered
b. .debtor-spouse has insufficient SEPARATE property
Wife w/o consent obtained a loan additional capital for her printing business & mortgaged conjugal property, the loan is chargeable to?
to the CPG to extent it benefitted the family but the MORTGAGE is void as it is an encumerance and requires consent of the husabnd
can personal debts contracted DURING marriage (not redounding to the benefit of the family) in both ACP and CPG be covered by the ARM?
⚠️
No, the only PERSONAL DEBTS that may be advanced by the ACP/CPG is personal debts contracted BEFORE the marriage (ante-nuptial debts)
is atty’s fees chargeable agaainst the CPG?
If it is not shown to the benefit of the family, then it is NOT chargeable to the CGPG
Remedy of spouse if the Conjugal Property is levied on execution for the personal obligation of the other spouse?
- FIle a third-party complaint
- File a motion to quash levy on attachment/execution
Distinguish the Procedure in DISSOLUTION between ACP & CPG
[ACP]
- inventory both separate & common
- payment of debts
- delivery of exclusive porpoerties
- Partition of net assets
- delivery of presumptive legitimes (Art. 40 & Art .45)
- conjugal dwelling
[CPG]
- inventory
- credits in favor of partnership of advances made by either spouse to form part of assets
- reimbursement in favor of spouse
- payment of debts & obligations of partnership
- delivery of separate properties
- division of net remains, delivery of presumptive legitimes, conjugal dwelling
What are the similar provisions of ACP & CPG
- administration & enjoyment
- dissolution of property relations
- effect of separation-in-fact between spouses
- remedies in case spouse abandons or fails to comply with her obligation
- procedure of liquidation in case of termination by daeth
- simultaneous liquidation of peropties of 2 or more marriages before effectivity of the FC
7 precise time of commencement of the property regime - prohibition against waiver of rights during marriage
