Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
*
G.R. No. 118305. February 12, 1998.
_______________
35 Francel Realty Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 252 SCRA 127, 134,
January 22, 1996, per Mendoza, J. citing Buan vs. Camaganacan, 16 SCRA 321,
February 28, 1966.
* SECOND DIVISION.
273
274
MARTINEZ, J.:
275
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015aa5c6b3ecafde6c05003600fb002c009e/p/APF364/?username=Guest 3/17
3/7/2017 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME286
_______________
276
_______________
277
_______________
278
_______________
279
The wordings of Article 161 of the Civil Code is very clear: for the
partnership to be held liable, the husband must have contracted
the debt for the benefit of the partnership, thus:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015aa5c6b3ecafde6c05003600fb002c009e/p/APF364/?username=Guest 7/17
3/7/2017 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME286
1) all debts and obligations contracted by the husband for the benefit
of the conjugal partnership x x x.
_______________
280
9
the case of CobbPerez vs. Lantin, that the husband as
head of the family and as administrator of the conjugal
partnership is presumed to have contracted obligations for
the benefit of the family or the conjugal partnership.
Contrary to the contention of the petitioners, the case of
CobbPerez is not applicable in the case at bar. This Court
has, on several instances, interpreted the term for the
benefit of the conjugal partnership. 10
In the cases of Javier vs.
11
Osmea, Abella de 12Diaz vs.
Erlanger & Galinger, Inc., CobbPerez vs. 13
Lantin and G
Tractors, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, cited by the
petitioners, we held that:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015aa5c6b3ecafde6c05003600fb002c009e/p/APF364/?username=Guest 8/17
3/7/2017 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME286
_______________
281
_______________
282
_______________
284
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015aa5c6b3ecafde6c05003600fb002c009e/p/APF364/?username=Guest 12/17
3/7/2017 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME286
285
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015aa5c6b3ecafde6c05003600fb002c009e/p/APF364/?username=Guest 13/17
3/7/2017 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME286
_______________
18 Ansaldo, et al. vs. Liberty Insurance Company, Inc. & Luzon Surety
Company, supra.
286
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015aa5c6b3ecafde6c05003600fb002c009e/p/APF364/?username=Guest 14/17
3/7/2017 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME286
directly from the use of the loan. In the case at bar, the loan is a
corporate loan extended to PBM and used by PBM itself, not by
petitionerappelleehusband or his family. The alleged benefit, if
any, continuously harped by respondentsappellants,
19
are not only
incidental but also speculative.
_______________
19 Court of Appeals Resolution of Nov. 28, 1994 denying the motion for
reconsideration, pp. 12 Annex B p. 41, rollo.
287
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015aa5c6b3ecafde6c05003600fb002c009e/p/APF364/?username=Guest 15/17
3/7/2017 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME286
_______________
288
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015aa5c6b3ecafde6c05003600fb002c009e/p/APF364/?username=Guest 16/17
3/7/2017 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME286
Petition denied.
o0o
289
Copyright2017CentralBookSupply,Inc.Allrightsreserved.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015aa5c6b3ecafde6c05003600fb002c009e/p/APF364/?username=Guest 17/17