408

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

ANNOTATION
THE FUNDAMENTALS OF CONJUGAL PROPERTY
By
Atty. SEVERIANO S. TABIOS
1. Introduction, p. 408.
2. Composition of Conjugal Property, p. 409.
A. Acquisition During Marriage Out of Conjugal Fund,
p.409
B. Product of Industry or Work,p. 410.
C. Fruits and Improvements During Marriage, p. 411.
3. Disputable Presumption of Law on Conjugal
Property, p. 412.
A. Coverage of Presumption, p. 412.
B. Conditions Negating the Presumption, p. 413.
4. Dealings in Conjugal Property, p. 414.
A. Acts of Administration, p. 414.
B. Acts of Disposition, p. 416.

1. Introduction
The New Civil Code which defines marriage1 as not a mere
contract but an inviolable social institution imposes upon
husband and wife the obligation not only to live together

and observe mutual respect

and fidelity but also to render
2
mutual help and support. In the rendition of support, it is
the husbands responsibility to support the wife and the
rest of the family from the conjugal property, then from the
husbands3 capital and lastly from the wifes paraphernal
property.
_______________
1

Article 52, New Civil Coide

Art. 109, New Civil Code

Art. 111, New Civil Code

409

VOL. 93, OCTOBER 11, 1979

409

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

While the husband and the wife are allowed to have

exclusive 4 properties which they own separately during
marriage, they are, however, requiried to place into a
common fund the fruits of their separate property
and the
5
income from their work and industry, unless before
marriage they have adopted
a different form
of property
6
7
relations between them. Correspondingly, the common
fund consisting of the properties called conjugal shall be
owned in common by the husband and the wife
8
commencing from the date of the celebration of marriage.
2. Composition of Conjugal Property
A. Acquisition During Marriage Out of Conjugal Fund
Under the New Civil Code that which is acquired by
onerous title during marriage at the expense of the
common fund, whether the acquisition be for 9the
partnership or for only one of the spouses, is conjugal. In
this regard, a property acquired out of a loan secured by
the husband upon the
credit of the property of his wife is
10
considered conjugal, because the loan obtained by the
husband constituted a charge against the conjugal
partnership under paragraph 1 of Article 1408
of the Civil
11
Code (now Art. 161 of the New Civil Code). However, if
the wife alone borrowed the money on the security of her

paraphernal property, the property bought out of the

proceeds
_______________
4

Art. 148, New Civil Code

Art. 142, New Civil Code

Art. 119, New Civil Code, allows future spouses to agree in the

marriage settlement upon absolute or relative community of property or

upon complete separation of property or upon any regime. In the absence
of marriage settlements or when the same is void, the regime of relative
community or conjugal partnership of gains shall govern.
7

Art. 143, New Civil Code

Art. 145, New Civil Code

Art. 153, New Civil Code

10

Palanca vs. Smith, Bell & Co., 9 Phil. 131

11

Crespo vs. Tinio, 62 Phil. 202

410

410

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

of the loan shall be her exclusive property, even if in the

loan agreement the husband signs giving his consent
thereto, because the wife does not have the management
or
12
representation of the conjugal partnership. Moreover, if
the property was purchased partly with paraphernal funds
and partly with money of the conjugal funds, justice
requires that the property be held to belong to both
patrimonies in common, in proportion
to the contributions
13
of each to the total purchase price. It should be noted,
however, that under the New Civil Code a property which
is acquired by each spouse during marriage by lucrative
title or is purchased with the exclusive money of each
shall
14
be the exclusive property of the acquiring spouse. Thus,
when a property belonging to the estate of the first
husband was sold at public auction to satisfy his
indebredness and was thereby acquired by the second
husband with the use of the wifes own money, the property
ceased to belong to the estate of the
first husband and
15
became the wifes exclusive property. However, if there is
no evidence that the money paid for the property belongs
exclusively
to the wife the property shall be deemed
16
conjugal.

B. Product of Industry or Work

Under the New Civil Code, that which is obtained by the
industry or work or as salary17of the spouses, or of either of
them is a conjugal property. In this regard, Manresa in
commenting on a similar provision of the Spanish Civil
Code remarked that all income from the work, labor or
industry of the spouses, whether in the form of daily wages,
periodic salaries, honorarium or fees in the practice of
profession, or income from industrial, agricultural
or
18
commercial enterprise constitute conjugal property.
________________
12

Lim Queco vs. Cartagena, 71 Phil. 182

13

Castillo vs. Pasco, L16857, May 25, 1964, 11 SCRA 102, 108.

14

Art. 148, New Civil Code

15

Gefes vs. Salvio, 36 Phil. 221

16

Lorenzo, et al. vs. Nicolas, et. al., L4085, July 30, 1952.

17

Art. 153 (2), New ivil Code

18

9 Manresa 580
411

VOL. 93, OCTOBER 11, 1979

411

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

It would also appear from the provisions of the New Civil

Code that things acquired by occupation such as fishing
and hunting are within the meaning of things obtained by
the industry or work
of the spouse as these things are
19
conjugal properties. In this regard, a share of the hidden
treasure 20discovered by a spouse is also a conjugal
property.
C. Fruits and Improvements During Marriage
The New Civil Code specifies that fruits, rents or interests
received or due during marriage, coming from the common
property or from the exclusive
property of each spouse are
21
conjugal
properties.
It
likewise
provides
that
improvements whether for utility of adornment, made on
the separate property of the spouses through
advancements from the partnership or through the

industry of either the22 husband or the wife belong to the

conjugal partnership. However, if the improvement is a
building constructed at the expense of the partnership
during marriage on the land belonging to one spouse, both
building and land shall be considered conjugal property
after the value of the23 land shall have been reimbursed to
the spouse owning it.
Under several decisions of the Supreme Court regarding
fruits received
during marriage, it has been held
that rents
24
25
of land, the
fruits of paraphernal property the offspring
26
of animals and even damages
awarded for the detention of
27
paraphernal property are conjugal properties. However,
the fruits of the exclusive property of one of the spouses,
occurring after the death of the owner,
does not anymore
28
form part of the conjugal property.
________________
19

Art .155, New Civil Code

20

Art. 154, New Civil Code

21

Art. 153, New Civil Code

22

Art. 158, New Civil Code

23

Ibid.

24

Quison vs. Salud, 12 Phil. 109

25

Javier vs. Osmea, 34 Phil. 336

26

Marigsa vs. Macabuntoc, 17 Phil. 107.

27

Bisante vs. Aldecoa & Co., 17 Phil. 480

28

Crespo vs. Tinio, 62 Phil. 202

412

412

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

With respect to the effect of an improvement on the

separate property of one of the spouses provided for under
the the second paragraph of Article 158 of the New Civil
Code, the Supreme Court declared that the construction of
the house at conjugal expense on the exclusive property of
one of the spouses does not automatically make it conjugal.
While it is true, according to the Supreme Court, that in
the meantime the conjugal partnership may use both the
land and the building, it does so, however, not as owner but
in the exercise of the right of usufruct as the ownership of
the land remains the same until the value thereof is paid

and this payment

can only be demanded in the liquidation
29
of the property.
3. Disputable Presumption of Law on Conjugal
Property
A. Coverage of Presumption
Under the New Civil Code, all property of the marriage is
presumed to belong to the conjugal partnership unless it be
proved
that it pertains exclusively to the husband or to the
30
wife. Thus, until the contrary is shown, 31all properties of
the spouses are presumed to be conjugal. In this regard,
the mere fact that one of the spouses appears as purchaser
in the deeds of sale and in the certificates of title does not
change the
conjugal nature of the property acquired during
32
marriage. Moreover, if lands acquired during marriage
were paid out of the sale of a fishpond which has been
developed as such fishpond out of the exclusive property of
one of the spouses during marriage, the acquired land is
presumed conjugal, because according to the Supreme
Court in the absence of evidence as to the source of the
money used in the conversion of the parapher
_______________
29

Maramba vs. Lozano, L21533, June 29, 1967, 20 SCRA 474, 478

479 Coingco vs. Flores, 82 Phil. 284 Paterno vs. Padilla, 74 Phil. 377
Testate Estate of Narciso Padilla, L8748, Dec. 26, 1961, 3 SCRA 678
30
31

Art. 160, New Civil Code

Benedicto vs. Yap Tico & Co., 46 Phil. 783 Diaz vs. Erlanger &

Galinger, 59 Phil. 326 Leonardo vs. Santiago, 7 Phil. 401 Cui vs. Cui, 53
O. G. 3429
32

Camia vs. Reyes, 63 Phil. 629

413

VOL. 93, OCTOBER 11, 1979

413

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

nal properties into the fishponds, the presumption is that it

came from the conjugal funds or from the income derived
from the33labor or industry of each spouse which is also
conjugal. As interpreted by the Supreme Court, the

provision of law on presumption of the conjugal nature of

the property requires the party who invokes it to prove first
that the property in controversy was acquired during
marriage. In other words, proof of acquisition during
coverture is a condition sine qua non for the operation
of
34
the presumption in favor of conjugal ownership.
Thus, in
35
Camia de Reyes vs. Reyes de llano, it was held that
according to law and jurisprudence it is sufficient to prove
that the property was acquired during marriage in order
that the same may be deemed conjugal property.
Correspondingly, the registration alone in the name of one
of the spouses does not destroy the conjugal nature of the
property once the property in 36question is proved to have
been acquired during marriage.
B. Conditions Negating the Presumption
The Supreme Court has invariably held that the party who
invokes the presumption under Article 160 of the New Civil
Code must first prove that37the property in controversy was
acquired during marriage. Thus, where the party invoking
the presumption failed to prove that the property was
acquired during marriage, there being no showing as to
when the property in question was acquired, the fact that
the title is in the
_______________
33

Vitug vs. Montemayor, L4156, May 16, 1952

34

CobbPerez vs. Lantin, L22320, May 22, 1968, 23 SCRA 637, 644.

35

63 Phil. 629.

36

Bucay vs. Paulino, et. al., L25775, April 26, 1968, 23 SCRA 248, 257

citing Alvarez vs. Espiritu, L18833, Aug. 14, 1965 Silos vs. Ramos, 97
Phil. 263 Guinoo vs. Court of Appeals, 97 Phil. 235 Sideco vs. Aznar, 92
Phil. 952 Vitug vs. Montemayor, 91 Phil. 286 Padilla vs. Padilla, 94 Phil.
377 Marigsa vs. Macabuntoc, 17 Phil. 307
37

Camia de Reyes vs. Reyes de llano, 63 Phil. 629 CobbPerez vs.

Lantin, supra,
414

414

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property
38

wifes name alone is determinative. In this regard, the

Supreme Court observed, had the property been acquired

by them (the spouses) during coverture, it would have been

registered in the name not of Francisca Soriano, married
to Tomasa Rodriguez but 39
of the spouses Francisco Soriano
and Tomasa Rodriguez . Similarly, the circumstance in
the title showing that the property is registered in the
name of Marcosa Rivera, married to Rafael Litam indicates
that the property in question belongs to the registered
owner, Marcosa Rivera, as her paraphernal property, for if
the property were conjugal, the property covering the same
should have been issued in the names of Rafael Litam and
Marcosa Rivera as the words married to Rafael Litam
written after the name of Marcosa Rivera in each of the
titles are merely descriptive of the civil status of Marcosa
Rivera,
the registered owner of the property covered by the
40
41
title. Moreover, in the case of CobbPerez vs. Lantin,
since there is no evidence as to when the shares of stock
were acquired, the fact that they were registered in tne
name of the husband alone is an 42indication that the shares
belong exclusively to said spouse.
4. Dealings in Conjugal Property
A. Acts of Administration
Under the New Civil Code the husband
is the
43
administrator of the conjugal partnership. As it is a right
clearly granted
to him by law, the husband is the sole
44
administrator and the
________________
38

Maramba vs. Lozano, et. al., L21533, June 29, 1967, 20 SCRA 474

39

Ponce de Leon vs. R. F. C., L24571, Dec. 18, 1970, 36 SCRA 289, 312

40

Litam vs. Eperitu, 100 Phil. 364, 376

41

L22320, May 22, 1968, 23 SCRA 637

42

CobbPerez vs. Lantin, L22320, May 22, 1968, 23 SCRA 637, 645

43

Art. 165, New Civil Code

44

Ysasi vs. Fernandez, et. al., L28593, June 25, 1968, 23 SCRA 1079,

1083.
415

VOL. 93, OCTOBER 11, 1979

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

415

wife is not entitled as45of right to a joint administration of

the conjugal property. Correspondingly, the husband may
even enforce the right of possession against the wife who
46
has taken over the administration without his consent,
including a requirement to 47 render full and complete
accounting of such property. Should the wife refuse to
deliver to him the conjugal
assets, she may be cited and
48
punished for contempt.
As the sole administrator of the conjugal assets, the
husband is required by law to act for the benefit of the
conjugal partnership. He is therefore expected to conserve
and, if possible, augment the funds of the conjugal
partnership, not dissipate them. If out of friendship or
misplaced generosity on his part the conjugal would be
saddled with financial burden, then the family stands to
suffer. No objection need arise if the obligation contracted
by him could be shown to be for the benefit of the wife and
the progeny if any there be. However, to make a conjugal
partnership respond for a liability that should appertain to
the husband alone is to defeat and frustrate the avowed
objective of the New Civil Code to show the utmost concern
for the solidarity and wellbeing of the family as a unit. The
husband, therefore, as is wisely thus made certain, is
denied the power to assume unnecessary and unwarranted
49
risks to the financial stability of the conjugal partnership.
However, should the husband assume unnecessary and
unwarranted risks to the financial stability of the conjugal
partnership, the wife is allowed by law to seek protection
from the courts. Thus, under the New Civil Code, in case of
abuse of the powers of administration of the conjugal
partnership property by the husband, the wife can petition
the court to provide for a receivership50 or administration by
the wife or separation of property. In this regard, the
Supreme Court declared that while
_______________
45

Dela Rosa vs. Barruga, L3268, June 30, 1950.

46

Ysasi vs. Fernandez, et. al., supra.

47

Perkins vs. Director of Prisons, 58 Phil. 271, 281

Perkins vs. Perkins, 57 Phil. 205, 211 Ysasi vs. Fernandez, et. al.,
supra.
48

49

Luzon Surety Co., Inc. vs. De Garcia, et. al., L25659, Oct. 31, 1969,

30 SCRA 111,117
50

AVRT: 167, New Civil Code

416

416

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

it is the wifes prerogative to ask the court to remove the

administration of the conjugal properties from the husband
for protection, her right, moreover, rests upon 51
proof of the
abuse of the husbands power of administration.
Moreover, the administration of the conjugal property
may be transferred to the wife voluntarily by the husband
52
by express authority embodied in a public instrument or
by the order of the court when the wife becomes the
guardian of the husband, or when the wife asks for the
husbands declaration of absence
or in case of the
53
husbands civil interdiction. The administration of the
conjugal property may also be conferred on the wife upon
order of the court when the husband abandons
the wife
54
without just cause for at least one55 year, or when the
husband has become an involvent, or a fugitive from
justice or be in hiding as a defendant in a criminal case, or
if being absolutely unable to administer,
he should have
56
failed to provide for such administration.
B. Acts of Disposition
Under the New Civil Code the disposition of conjugal
property in payment for the obligation of the partnership is
vested in the57 husband as administrator of the conjugal
partnership. Thus, even without the consent of the wife,
the husband can dispose of conjugal partnership property
for the payment of all debts and obligations contracted by
the husband for the benefit of the partnership or the
payment of arrears due during marriage from obligations
which constitute a charge upon property of either spouse or
for minor repairs of such separate properties or repairs of
conjugal properties, or the
_______________
51

Ysasi vs. Fernandez, et al., L25893, June 25, 1968, 23 SCRA 1079,

1085
52

Art. 168, New Civil Code

53

Art. 196, New Civil Code

54

Art. 178, New Civil Code

54

Art. 178, New Civil Code

55

Art. 2238, New Civil Code

56

Art. 196, New Civil Code

57

Art. 171, New Civil Code

417

VOL. 93, OCTOBER 11, 1979

417

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

payment of expenses for the maintenance of the family, the

education of the children or spouse
completing a
58
professional, vocational or other course, or for donations to
the common59children to secure their future or for finishing
their career. However, in the alienation or encumbrance of
real property of the conjugal partnership, the husband
needs the wifes consent, unless the wife has been declared
a non compos mentis or a spend thrift or
is under civil
60
interdiction or is confined in a leprosarium or the61purpose
of the alienation is a moderate donation to charity.
Should the husband alienate or encumber real property
without
his wifes consent except in instances authorized by
62
law or donate any property
of the conjugal partnership
63
without such consent, the wife is entitled during marriage
and within ten (10) years from the questioned transaction
to ask the court
to annul the alienation or encumbrance of
64
such property. Likewise, the wife may also question any
act or contract entered into by the husband which tends to
defraud her or impair her interest in the conjugal property
so disposed without her consent and seek from the court
the annulment of such transaction
within ten (10) years
65
from the time it was executed. Even if the transaction
made by the husband is fictitious or simulated, the wife is
entitled to annul the transfer
and cancel the title issued in
66
favor of the grantee. However, if the alienation or
encumbrance is a fictitious or simulated contract, the
67
transaction is considered void from the very beginning
and as such the wife is not limited to the ten year period
_______________
58

Art. 161, New Civil Code

59

Art. 163, New Civil Code

60

Art. 166, New Civil Code

61

Art. 174, New Civil Code

62

Art. 166, New Civil Code

63

Art, 174, New Civil Code

64

Art. 173, New Civil Code

65

Ibid.

66

Gallon vs. Gayares, 53 Phil. 43 Rivera vs. Batallones, 40 O.G. 2000

67

Art. 1409, New Civil Code

418

418

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

within which to question the transaction inasmuch as the

action for the 68declaration of the inexistence of contract does
not prescribe.
Two preventive remedies that a wife may seek with
respect to fraudulent or unlawful alienations of property by
the husband were indicated in cases decided by the court.
Thus, in a situation wherein the wife seeks to obtain legal
separation and the partition of conjugal properties, it being
just and proper for her to protect her interest from the
husbands acts of disposition during the pendency of the
action, a preliminary injunction may be obtained by the
wife prohibiting the husband from alienating or
encumbering any part of the conjugal property69 during the
pendency of the action for legal separation. Similarly,
pending the annulment of a contract executed by the
husband which is prejudicial to the wife for tending to
defraud or impair her interest in the conjugal property, the
wife may record in the registry of property and in the title
of the transferee the fraudulent condition of the transfer so
that whoever acquires the property from the transferee will
not be able to allege ignorance that they acquired a right
subject to the contingent right of the wife
of the transferor
70
to ask for the nullity of the transaction.
Under the New Civil Code the right of the wife to seek
redress against the husbands fraudulent transactions or
alienations and encumbrances entered into without her
consent is
limited to a ten (10) year period during
71
marriage. Thus, should the wife fail to exercise the right,
the wife or her heirs would have to wait for the dissolution
of marriage in order that she or they may demand the
value of72 property so fraudulently alienated hy the
husband. In such case, however, the nullity extends only
to that interest in the proper ty which would have

pertained to the wife or her heirs as the

________________
68

Art. 1410, New Civil Code

69

De la Via vs. Villareal, 41 Phil. 13

70

Baello vs. Villanueva, 54 Phil. 213

71

Art. 173, New Civil Code

72

Ibid.
419

VOL. 93, OCTOBER 11, 1979

419

The Fundamentals Of Conjugal Property

transferee73 acquires the interest of the husband in the

property.
Morever, as the wife is given ten (10) years within which
to question her husbands transaction executed without her
consent, it may also be possible that within the period she
may have initiated actions that would indicate a
ratification
of
what
her
husband
had
done.
Correspondingly, in a pacto de retro sale executed by the
husband without the wifes consent, the wifes conformity
to the extension of the period of redemption manifested by
signing the annotation on the margin of the deed was
viewed by
the court as a ratification of the act of the
74
husband.
o0o
_______________
73

Uy Coque vs. Navas, 45 Phil. 430

74

Lanuza vs. De Leon, L22331, June 6, 1967, 20 SCRA 369, 375.

420

Copyright2016CentralBookSupply,Inc.Allrightsreserved.