Spouses Buado vs Court of Appeals and Nicol

GR No. 143286, April 14, 24

!AC"S#
$n 3 April 1%84, Spouses Ro&erto and 'enus Buado (petitioners) filed a
co*plaint for da*a+es a+ainst ,rlinda Nicol (,rlinda) -it. Branc. 1% of t.e
Re+ional "rial Court (R"C) of Bacoor, Cavite &ased on civil lia&ilit/ arisin+
fro* t.e cri*inal offense of slander filed a+ainst .er &/ petitioners.
".e trial court rendered a decision orderin+ ,rlinda to pa/ da*a+es
particularl/ t.irt/ t.ousand (03,.) pesos as *oral da*a+es, five
t.ousand (01,.) pesos as attorne/2s fees and liti+ation e3penses, anot.er
five t.ousand (01,.) pesos as e3e*plar/ da*a+es and t.e cost of suit.
Said decision -as affir*ed on appeal &/ t.e CA and it &eca*e final and
e3ecutor/.
$n 14 $cto&er 1%%2, t.e trial court issued a -rit of e3ecution co**andin+
t.at of t.e +oods and c.attels of t.e defendant ,rlinda Nicol, or fro* .er
estates or le+al .eirs to satisf/ 4ud+*ent.
But t.e properties of Nicol -as not enou+. to satisf/ 4ud+*ent and as suc. t.e
5eput/ S.eriff issued a notice of lev/ on real propert/ on e3ecution addressed
to t.e Re+ister of 5eeds of Cavite.
But t-o da/s &efore t.e pu&lic auction sale -.ic. -as to &e .eld on 6anuar/
2%, 1%%3, an affidavit of t.ird7part/ clai* of Arnulfo !. !ulo -as received &/
t.e deput/ s.eriff. ".e petitioners put up a s.eriff2s inde*nit/ &ond and t.e
sale proceeded -it. t.e petitioners as t.e .i+.est &idder.
$n !e&ruar/ 4, 1%%3, a certificate of sale -as issued in favor of t.e
petitioners. Al*ost one /ear later, on !e&ruar/ 2 1%%4 Respondent Ro*ulo
Nicol, t.e .us&and of ,rlinda Nicol filed a co*plaint for annul*ent of t.e
certificate of sale and da*a+es -it. preli*inar/ in4unction a+ains t.e
petitioners and t.e deput/ s.eriff
Respondent, -.o is plaintiff .erein, alle+ed t.at t.e defendants, no-
petitioners, connived and directl/ levied upon and e3ecute .is real propert/
-it.out e3.austin+ t.e personal properties of ,rlinda Nicol. Respondent
averred t.at t.ere -as no proper pu&lication and postin+ of t.e notice of sale.
!urt.er*ore, respondent clai*ed t.at .is propert/ -.ic. -as valued at
01,. -as onl/ sold at a 8ver/ lo- price8 of 011,681., -.ereas t.e
4ud+*ent o&li+ation of ,rlinda Nicol -as onl/ 04,.
9SS:,S#
;$N t.e -ife<s cri*inal lia&ilit/ is c.ar+ea&le to t.e con4u+al partners.ip
;$N t.e .us&and of t.e 4ud+*ent de&tor *a/ file an independent action
to protect t.e con4u+al propert/ su&4ect to e3ecution.
=,>5#
$n t.e first issue# N$, t.e -ife<s cri*inal lia&ilit/ is c.ar+ea&le to t.e
con4u+al partners.ip. :nli?e in t.e s/ste* of a&solute co**unit/ -.ere
lia&ilities incurred &/ eit.er spouse &/ reason of a cri*e or @uasi7delict is
c.ar+ea&le to t.e a&solute co**unit/ of propert/, in t.e a&sence or
insufficienc/ of t.e e3clusive propert/ of t.e de&tor7spouse, t.e sa*e
advanta+e is not accorded in t.e s/ste* of con4u+al partners.ip of +ains.
9t cannot &e concluded t.at t.e civil o&li+ation arisin+ fro* t.e cri*e of
slander co**itted &/ ,rlinda redounded to t.e &enefit of t.e con4u+al
partners.ip.
Con4u+al propert/ cannot &e .eld lia&le for t.e personal o&li+ation contracted
&/ one spouse, unless so*e advanta+e or &enefit is s.o-n to .ave accrued to
t.e con4u+al partners.ip
$n t.e second issue# A,S, t.e .us&and *a/ properl/ file a t.ird part/ clai* in
t.e case at &ar since t.e -ife2s cri*inal lia&ilit/ is not c.ar+ea&le to t.e
con4u+al propert/ &ut on .er separate propert/.
9n deter*inin+ -.et.er t.e .us&and is a stran+er to t.e suit, t.e c.aracter of
t.e propert/ *ust &e ta?en into account.
9n Bariano v. Court of Appeals,11 -.ic. -as later adopted in Spouses C.in+
v. Court of Appeals,12 t.is Court .eld t.at t.e .us&and of t.e 4ud+*ent de&tor
cannot &e dee*ed a 8stran+er8 to t.e case prosecuted and ad4ud+ed a+ainst .is
-ife for an o&li+ation t.at .as redounded to t.e &enefit of t.e con4u+al
partners.ip.
;=,R,!$R,, t.e petition is 59SB9SS,5. ".e 5ecision of t.e Court of Appeals is
A!!9RB,5. Costs a+ainst petitioners.