Cabang v.

Basay
G.R. No. 180587, March 20, 2008
Leano, J. / KMD
SUBJECT MATTER: Family Relations; Family Homes; When may be sold
CASE SUMMARY:
In this case, Cabang has been occupying the Lot 7777owned by Basay. Cabang believed that the said
property is Lot 7778 that they rightfully owned. SC ruled in favor Basay filed a complaint for recovery of
the said lot. RTC ruled in favor of Cabang. CA ruled in favor of Basay. Case was elevated to the SC.
Cabang argued that the said lot cannot be be subject of Motion for Execution as it is a family home.
However, the SC held that it is not a family home but a residential house because a family home cannot
be established on property held in co-ownership with third persons. It must be established on the
properties of ACP, CPG, or exclusive property of either spouse.
DOCTRINES:
A family home cannot be established on property held in coownership with third persons. The family
home must be established on the properties of (a) the absolute community, or (b) the conjugal partnership,
or (c) the exclusive property of either spouse with the consent of the other.
FACTS:
On June 16, 1987, Basay bought Lot No. 7777 for P8,000.00. However, they did not occupy the
said property.
Cabang, on the other hand, had been in continuous, open, peaceful and adverse possession of the
same parcel of land since 1956 up to the present believing that they are occupying Lot No. 7778
(They did not know that Lot No. 7778 was utilized by government for road construction).
On June 23, 1992, Basay filed a complaint with the RTC for Recovery of Property against
petitioner.
RTC in favor of the Cabang. RTC held that Basays rights to recover the land registered in their
names, have been effectively barred by laches.
Court of Appeals reversed RTC decision on December 23, 1998. Basay is entitled to the
possession of Lot No. 7777, subject to the rights of Cabang under Articles 448, 546, 547 and 548
of the New Civil Code.
Cabang filed a petition for review before the Supreme Court On October 18, 1999.
The Supreme Court issued a Resolution denying the petition for late filing and lack of appropriate
service which became final and executory on February 15, 2000. SC remanded the case to the
court a quo to determine the rights of Cabang.
The court a quo disclosed its difficulty in resolving whether or not the houses may be subject of
an order of execution it being a family home.

On June 18, 2002, Basay filed their Manifestation and Motion for Execution which was DENIED
on September 6, 2002.

On May 31, 2007, Basay elevated their cause to the CA which reversed the Order of the RTC that
denied the Motion for Execution.

Cabangs Motion for Reconsideration was denied by the Court of Appeals in its Resolution dated
September 21, 2007.

Hence this petition. Petitioners insist that the property subject of the controversy is a duly
constituted family home which is not subject to execution, thus, they argue that

ISSUE:
1) WON the appellate tribunal erred in reversing the judgment of the trial court. (NO)
HOLDING:
1.) No, the CA did not err in reversing RTCs dismissal of the Motion for Execution.
Under Article 153 of the Family Code, a family home is deemed constituted on a house and a lot
from the time it is occupied as a family residence. There is no need to constitute the same
judicially or extra-judicially. There can be no question that a family home is generally exempt
from execution, provided it was duly constituted as such.
However, a family home cannot be established on property held in coownership with third
persons. The family home must be established on the properties of (a) the absolute community, or
(b) the conjugal partnership, or (c) the exclusive property of either spouse with the consent of the
other. In this case, the said property on which their alleged family home stands is owned by
respondents. Therefore, it cannot be considered a family home but merely residential.

Petition denied, CA judgment AFFIRMED.

The family home is a sacred symbol of family love and is the repository of cherished memories that last during
ones lifetime. It is the dwelling house where the husband and wife, or an unmarried head of a family reside,
including the land on which it is situated. It is constituted jointly by the husband and the wife or by an unmarried
head of a family.