Art. 125. Neither spouse may donate any conjugal partnership property without the consent of the other. However, either spouse may, without the consent of the other, make moderate donations from the conjugal partnership property for charity or on occasions of family rejoicing or family distress. (174a)
Donation, while an act of liberality transfers ownership over properties, it is akin to sale of the same, hence, there is a need for the consent of the other spouse if one of them make a donation of any conjugal property. Otherwise, it is void.
Section 6. Dissolution of Conjugal Partnership Regime
Art. 126. The conjugal partnership 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; or
(4) In case of judicial separation of property during the marriage under Articles 134 to 138. (175a)
Art. 103. Upon the termination of the marriage by death, the community property shall be liquidated in the same proceeding for the settlement of the estate of the deceased.
If no judicial settlement proceeding is instituted, the surviving spouse shall liquidate the community property either judicially or extra-judicially within six months from the death of the deceased spouse. If upon the lapse of the six months period, no liquidation is made, any disposition or encumbrance involving the community property of the terminated marriage shall be void.
Should the surviving spouse contract a subsequent marriage without compliance with the foregoing requirements, a mandatory regime of complete separation of property shall govern the property relations of the subsequent marriage. (n)
-Effect of death of a spouse on the conjugal properties
Art. 43. The absolute community of property or the conjugal partnership, as the case may be, shall be dissolved and liquidated, but if either spouse contracted said marriage in bad faith, his or her share of the net profits of the community property or conjugal partnership property shall be forfeited in favor of the common children or, if there are none, the children of the guilty spouse by a previous marriage or in default of children, the innocent spouse;
-Effects of Legal Separation
Effect of Annulment of Marriage
-In case of annulment of marriage or declaration of nulity, the conjugal partnership shall be dissolved and liquidated but if one spouse contracted the marriage in bad faith, he shall lose his share of the net profits of the partnership which shall be forfeited in favor of the common children, or if none, to the children of the guilty spouse by a previous marriage or if there be none, to the innocent spouse.
Note that the guilty spouse is not entitled to the net gains of the conjugal partnership.
Effect of Separation of Properties
-Under Article 137 of the Family Code, once the separation of property has been decreed, the absolute community or conjugal partnership of gains shall be liquidated.
Case Digest:
G.R. No. 156879
Calpatura, et al. v Patricio, Jr. et al.
January 20, 2004
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
Facts:
On December 19, 1959, Patricio Prado, Sr. died. Narcisa subsequently married Bonifacio Calpatura. In order to support her minor children with her first husband, Narcisa and her brother-in-law, Tomas Calpatura, Sr., executed on April 26, 1968 an Agreement of Purchase and Sale whereby the former agreed to sell to the latter the northern half portion of the property for the sum of P10,500.00.On July 28, 1973, Narcisa executed a Deed of Absolute Sale in favor of Tomas over the said property.
In 1976, Tomas’ daughter, Flordeliza Calpatura Flora, built a two-storey duplex with firewall on the northern half portion of the property. Respondents, who occupied the southern half portion of the land, did not object to the construction. Flordeliza Flora and her husband Wilfredo declared the property for taxation purposes and paid the corresponding taxes thereon. Likewise, Maximo Calpatura, the son of Tomas’ cousin, built a small house on the northern portion of the property.
On April 8, 1991, respondents filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of sale and delivery of possession of the northern half portion of the subject property against petitioners Flordeliza Calpatura Flora, Dominador Calpatura and Tomas Calpatura, Jr. before the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 100, docketed as Civil Case No. Q-91-8404.
Respondents alleged that the transaction embodied in the Agreement to Purchase and Sale between Narcisa and Tomas was one of mortgage and not of sale; that Narcisa’s children tried to redeem the mortgaged property but they learned that the blank document which their mother had signed was transformed into a Deed of Absolute Sale; that Narcisa could not have sold the northern half portion of the property considering that she was prohibited from selling the same within a period of 25 years from its acquisition, pursuant to the condition annotated at the back of the title;7 that Narcisa, as natural guardian of her children, had no authority to sell the northern half portion of the property which she and her children co-owned; and that only P5,000.00 out of the consideration of P10,500.00 was paid by Tomas.
Issue:
Whether or not sale of land is valid
Ruling:
Yes, the sale of the undivided one half portion thereof by Narcisa Prado in favor of Tomas Calpatura, Sr. is valid.
Narcisa Prado is entitled to 9/14 of the residential land consisting of 552.20 square meters, more or less, situated at 19th Avenue, Murphy, Quezon City and covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 71344.
Finally, no particular portion of the property could be identified as yet and delineated as the object of the sale considering that the property had not yet been partitioned in accordance with the Rules of Court.28 While Narcisa could validly sell one half of the subject property, her share being 9/14 of the same, she could not have particularly conveyed the northern portion thereof before the partition, the terms of which was still to be determined by the parties before the trial court.
Furthermore, the case is REMANDED to the court of origin, only for the purpose of determining the specific portion being conveyed in favor of Tomas Calpatura, Sr. pursuant to the partition that will be agreed upon by the respondents.
No comments:
Post a Comment