1.

Rights and Obligations Between Husband and Wife

Obligations

 To Live Together
- Family Domicile
 To Observe Mutual Love
 To Observe Mutual Respect
- RA 8353: Anti-Rape Law
 To Observe Mutual Fidelity
- Art. 247, RPC: Death or Physical Injuries Inflicted under Exceptional
Circumstances.
 To Render Mutual Help
 To Render Mutual Support
- Joint responsibility of spouses for the support of family {i.e., Conjugal
obligations shall be paid by (a) community property, (b) income & fruits
of separate property, (c) separate property.
- Art. 199, FC: Order of persons liable to give support. {i.e., first is the
spouse}.

Rights

 To joint management of household

 To exercise any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity without the
consent of the other. {Objection – valid, serious and moral grounds}. RA 10572
[2013]: Benefit accrued to family prior to objection – CP; Benefit accrued to
family after the objection – SP.
 To apply to the court for relief, in case the other spouse neglects his/her duties or
commits acts prejudicial to the family.

Goitia v. Rueda: Elisa and Campos were married. They lived together for a month after
which Elisa returned to her parents because Campos demanded of her that she perform
unchaste and lascivious acts on his genitals. Is Elisa entitled to support when she is the
party who left the conjugal dwelling? SC: Cohabitation includes normal sexual
intercourse only. Husband has to support wife because she had just cause for leaving. A
husband cannot, by his own wrongful act, relieve himself from the duty to support his
wife imposed by law; and where a husband, by wrongful, illegal and unbearable conduct,
drives his wife from the domicile, he cannot take advantage of her departure to abrogate
the law applicable to the marital relation and repudiate his duties thereunder.

Dadivas v. Villanueva: Aurelia and Rafael were married. However, the incorrigible
nature of Rafael in his relations with other women coupled with his lack of consideration
caused Aurelia to leave the conjugal home and for her to establish her own abode. Is
Aurelia entitled for separate support from her husband? SC: Yes. In order to entitle a wife
to maintain a separate home and to require separate maintenance from husband, it is not
necessary that the husband should bring a concubine into the home. Perverse and illicit
relations with women outside the conjugal home are sufficient grounds.

Atilano v. Ching Beng: Pila married Ching Beng. They lived in the house of Cheng
Beng’s parents. Months after the marriage, the couple had a vacation in Zamboanga, the
hometown of Pilar. Pilar stayed behind in Zamboanga, telling Cheng Beng that she would
go back to him later. Pilar however did not follow Cheng Beng to Manila. Instead, she
filed a petition for support, alleging estrangement and incessant bickering with the
parents-in-law. Is Pila entitled to support? SC: No. Cheng Beng gave the option to
support the wife at conjugal dwelling outside of his parents’ home. Should plaintiff
 refuse, Cheng Beng is under no obligation to give any support. The wife cannot be
compelled to live with her husband but support can be denied to the spouse who left.

Del Rosario v. Del Rosario: Because of petty quarrels with the mother-in-law, the wife
left the conjugal dwelling. Is the wife entitled to support from the husband? SC: Yes.
Marriage vow does not include making sacrifices for the in-laws. There is legal
justification for wife’s refusal to live with husband, taking into account the “traditional
hatred between wife and her mother-in-law”.

Tenchavez v. Escano: Pastor and Vicenta were married. Vicenta went to US and
obtained a divorce and contracted another marriage with an American. May the court
compel Vicenta to cohabit with Pastor? SC: No. It is not within the province of courts to
attempt to compel one of the spouses to cohabit with, and render conjugal rights to the
other. However, a spouse who unjustifiably deserts the conjugal abode can be denied
support.

Pelayo v. Lauron: Dr. Arturo was called by the parents to attend to their daughter’s
delivery. Dr. Arturo tried his best, but the woman died due to childbirth. Dr. Arturo is
now asking for compensation for his services from the parents but the latter refused
payment by claiming that the husband should be the one to pay for the services. Who
should pay Dr. Arturo? SC: The husband, because rendering of medical assistance in case
of illness comprises one of the mutual obligations to which spouses are bound by way of
mutual support.

2. Property Relations between Husband and Wife

What governs the property relations between husband and wife? Answer: (a) Marriage
Settlement; (b) Family Code; and (c) Local Customs.

 Marriage Settlement (MS)

- Form requirement: To be valid, it should be in writing, signed by the

parties before the celebration of the marriage. To affect third persons, it
should be registered in the local civil registry where the marriage contract
is recorded as well as in the proper registries of property. As a rule, the
marriage settlement becomes immutable after the marriage insofar as the
law provides that any modification thereof may be valid only if made
before the celebration of marriage.
- Additional requirements in exceptional cases: (a) Where one party is a
minor, the father, mother, surviving parent or guardian or persons having
legal charge should be made a party to the agreement; and (b) Where one
party suffers civil interdiction, the guardian appointed by the court should
be made a party to the agreement.
- What regime can be agreed upon in the MS? ACP, CPG, Complete
Separation of Property, or ANY other regime. In the absence of MS or
when the regime agreed upon is void, the system of ACP governs.
- What if the marriage does not take place? Everything stipulated in the MS,
including donations made therein shall be rendered void. But, stipulations
that do not depend on the celebration of the marriage shall be void.

Donation Propter Nuptias (DPN)

- Requisites: (a) It should be made before the celebration of marriage; (b) It

should be made in consideration of marriage; and (c) It should be made in
favor of one or both of the future spouses. THUS, the following donations
are not DPN: in favor of spouses after the marriage (ordinary wedding
 gifts), in favor of future spouses before the marriage but not in
consideration thereof, or in favor of persons other than the future spouses,
even though founded on the marriage.
- Governing laws: Primarily, the FC and, secondarily, the NCC. {For
instance, the form requirements in donation}.
- Solis v. Barroso: Parents made a donation of certain land in a private
document in favor of their son and his soon-to-be-wife in consideration of
the upcoming marriage. The marriage took place and the parents delivered
the land to the new spouses. The son however died a month after the
marriage. The parents now want to recover back the land from the
surviving spouse. SC: The parents can recover the land from the surviving
spouse. The DPN is void under the law. DPN is governed by the laws on
donation. Donation of real property must be in a public instrument to be
valid. Because the DPN was made in a private document, it is not valid
and does not confer any right.
- DPN of present or future property: Maximum 1/5 of the present property,
if donation is made in MS. Excess is void. Donation of future property
shall be governed by the law on succession.
- Revocation of DPN: (a) Marriage not celebrated or judicially declared
void, (b) Marriage taking place without consent of parents or guardian as
required by law, (c) Marriage is annulled, donee in bad faith, (d) Upon
legal separation, donee in bad faith, (e) Fulfillment of resolutory
condition, (f) commission of act of ingratitude.
- Donations after marriage between spouses: Every donation or grant of
gratuitous advantage, direct or indirect, between spouses during the
marriage is void, except moderate gifts on occasion of any family
rejoicing. The prohibition applies to unions without marriage. Reason:
Unity of personality of spouses; to prevent abuse by stronger spouse of the
weaker spouse.
- Harding v. Commercial Union: The husband gave a car to the wife. The
wife bought an insurance policy for the car. Later, the car was totally
destroyed by fire. The insurance company refused to pay saying that the
donation of husband to the wife was void. SC: The insurance company is
not the proper party to question the moderateness of the gift. It can only be
raised by persons who bear such a relation to the parties making the
transfer interfere with their rights or interest. Besides, the car may be
considered as a moderate gift under the circumstances (of the parties).

 Family Code

Absolute Community Property (ACP)

- This is a special kind of co-ownership. The primarily governing law is the

FC, and the NCC applies suppletorily only. Examples: (a) in ordinary co-
ownership, a co-owner may validly waive or dispose of his ideal share
without the consent of the other co-owners. But in ACP, no waiver of
rights, interests, or shares in the ACP can be made during the marriage.
And, (b) in ordinary co-ownership, the parties may agree as to the time of
commencement and duration of the state of co-ownership. But in ACP, the
law is explicit that it shall commence at the precise moment that the
marriage is celebrated. Any stipulation to the contrary is void.
- What constitutes ACP? Arts 91, 92, and 93 FC: Unless otherwise
provided in Chapter 3, Title IV of the FC or in the marriage settlement, the
ACP consists of ALL the property owned by the spouses at the time of the
celebration of the marriage or acquired thereafter. EXPTNS under
Chapter 3, Title IV, FC (Art. 92): Those (1) acquired during the marriage
by gratuitous title and the fruits and income thereof; (2) acquired for
 personal and exclusive use of either spouse; and (3) acquired before the
marriage be either spouse who has legitimate descendants by a former
marriage and the fruits as well as the income of the property. Article 93:
Property acquired during the marriage is presumed to belong to the
community, unless there is proof to the contrary.

- Charges upon the ACP:

Debts & Obligations Taxes & Expenses Support

Par. 2: Incurred by Par. 4: Including minor Par. 1: Of spouse, common
administrator-spouse or both or major repairs upon children, legitimate children of
spouses, or by one with the community property. either spouse.
consent of the other.
Par. 3: Incurred by one without Par. 5: For mere Par. 6: To enable either spouse to
the consent of the other to the preservation of separate commence or complete a
extent that family may have been property used by the profession or vocational course, or
benefited (e.g., failed business). family. other activity for self-
improvement.
Par. 7: Antenuptial debts of Par. 10: For litigation Par. 8: The value of what is
either spouse insofar as they between spouses, unless donated or promised in favor of
have redounded to the benefit of groundless. common legitimate children for
the family. commencement or completion of
education. No age limit.
Par. 9: Antenuptial debts that do
not benefit family, for support of
illegitimate children or liability
for crime or quasi-delict, in case
of insufficiency of separate
property – deductible from the
share of the debtor-spouse upon
liquidation of the ACP.

- Solidary liability of spouses, except par. 9, with their separate properties

in case the ACP is not sufficient to cover the foregoing charges.
- Losses and winnings in gambling? Losses, not chargeable against ACP.
But, winnings are chargeable against ACP. Situation: If the winning lotto
ticket for 6/58 draw is given to a spouse by a friend, it is considered a
donation under Article 92(1) and winnings will not form part of ACP,
unless expressly provided by donor.
- Ownership and Disposition of ACP. Both spouses are joint owners of
the ACP, subject to certain limitations: non-disposition of share during the
marriage, but may be done thru wills; prohibition on donation of ACP
without the consent of the other spouse.
- The administration and enjoyment of ACP belong to both spouses. In case
of disagreement, husband’s decision prevails but the wife may go to court
for appropriate remedy, which must availed of within 5 years from date of
contract implementing the decision. In case one spouse is incapacitated or
unable to participate in the administration of ACP, the other may assume
sole powers of administration, but excluding the power to dispose or
encumber the ACP without court authority or written consent of the other
spouse. In case of disposition or encumbrance in violation of Art. 96, the
same is void but the transaction shall be construed as continuing offer on
the part of the consenting spouse and the third person, and may be
perfected as binding contract upon the acceptance by the other spouse or
authorization by the court before the offer is withdrawn by either or both
offerors.
- Dissolution of ACP. This is not synonymous with dissolution of marriage.
The instances mentioned in Art. 99 is not exclusive, example: Art. 42 and
43 on reappearance of the first spouse. Separation in fact does not affect
ACP; abandonment by the other spouse does not also affect ACP but
would afford the innocent spouse to obtain proper reliefs from court. Art.
99: ACP terminates – (a) death of either spouse; (b) legal separation; (c)
 annulment or nullity; (d) judicial separation of property during the
marriage.
- Liquidation of ACP. Article 102 enumerates the steps in liquidation:

 Inventory. There are 3 lists: (a) Inventory of community property; (b)

Inventory of separate property of the wife; and (c) Inventory of
separate property of the husband.
 Payment of Community Debts
 First, pay out of community assets
 If not enough, husband and wife are solidarily liable with their
separate property.
 Delivery to each spouse his or her separate property, if any.
 Division of the net community assets {what’s net profits?}
NOTE: There are special rules regarding the family home.
 Delivery of presumptive legitimes, if any to the children. The
presumptive legitimes are given in the following instances: (a) Death
of either spouse (Article 103); (b) Legal Separation (Articles 63 and
64); (c) Annulment (Articles 50 – 52); (d) Judicial Separation of
Property (Articles 134 – 137); (e) Reappearance of the absent spouse
which terminates the 2nd marriage (Article 43)

Conjugal Partnership of Gains (CPG)

- When is there regime of CPG in marriage?

- Describe regime of CPG in brief: Under the regime of CPG, the spouses
place in common fund the proceeds, products, fruits and income from
their separate properties and those acquired by either or both spouses
through their efforts or by chance, and, upon dissolution of the marriage or
of the partnership, the net gains or benefits obtained by either or both
spouses shall be divided equally between them, unless otherwise agreed in
the MS. (Art. 106). CPG is governed primarily by the MS, then by FC,
then suppletorily by the NCC on partnership.
- De Ansaldo v. Sheriff of Manila: The spouses are not co-owners of the
conjugal properties during the marriage and cannot alienate the supposed
½ interest of each in the said properties. The interest of the spouses in the
conjugal properties is only inchoate or a mere expectancy and does not
ripen into title until it appears after the dissolution and liquidation of the
partnership that there are net assets.
- What constitutes the exclusive property of each spouse in the regime
of CPG? Art. 109: (a) capital/paraphernal properties; (b) those acquired
during marriage thru gratuitous title, i.e., succession or donation; (c) those
acquired by right of redemption, by barter or by exchange with property
belonging to only one of the spouses; and (d) those purchased with
exclusive money of the wife or of the husband. Over these exclusive
property, the owner-spouse exercises absolute control.
- What comprises the CPG? In general – Art. 116: ALL properties
acquired during marriage, whether the acquisition appears to have been
made, contracted or registered in the name of one or both spouses, is
presumed to be conjugal, unless the contrary is proved. {Recitals in the
DOS or Registration of property in the name of one spouse is not enough
to rebut the presumption in favor of conjugality}.
- In particular – Art. 117: ***** (3) The fruits, natural, industrial, or civil,
due or received during the marriage from the common property, as well as
the net fruits from the exclusive property of each spouse.

 According to Professor Balane, Article 117 (3) is inaccurate.

There is no problem if the fruits come from the conjugal property.
 The problem arises when the fruits arise from the spouses’ separate
properties. For fruits arising from the separate properties of the
spouses to be considered conjugal, one must look at when the fruits
are due and not when the fruits are received.

 For example, A lends P 1,000,000 to B at 20% interest payable

every quarter. B is supposed to pay interest in March, June, Sept,
and Dec. B did not pay the interest due on March. A gets married
to C in April. B finally pays the interests for the months of March
and June in June. The interest for March is exclusive property
while the interest for June is conjugal property. The interest for
March is exclusive property because the test is not when A and C
receives the fruits. It is when the fruits are due. In this case, the
fruits were due on March before the marriage between A and C.

- ART. 118, FC: On property bought on installments paid partly from

exclusive funds of either or both spouses and partly from conjugal funds.
Test: When did the ownership vest in the buyer? The source of the funds
is irrelevant. Example: A, who is single, buys on installment a lot in
Talisay City. A has to pay 60 monthly installments. The contract provides
that ownership would vest upon the full payment of the installments. A
had already paid 20 monthly installments. A gets married to B. After that
A pays the remaining 40 monthly installments with his salaries as a
professor in the College of Law. The property is conjugal following Art.
118. The first 20 monthly installments is a credit of A against the property
regime. The relevance of the funds is only for accounting purposes.

- ART. 119, FC: Whenever an amount or credit payable within a period of

time belongs to one of the spouses, the sums which may be collected
during the marriage in partial payments or by installments on the principal
shall be the exclusive property of the spouse. However, interests falling
due during the marriage on the principal shall belong to the conjugal
partnership. Example: The wife lent money to another before her
marriage at interest, payable in installment for 10 years. The interest
falling due during the marriage are conjugal, but the installment payments
on the principal loan belong to the wife exclusively even if made during
the marriage.

- ART. 120, FC: This is known as reverse accession. In this situation, an

improvement which is paid for by conjugal funds is built on land which is
exclusively owned by one of the spouses. Caltex vs. Felias: The SC said
that before Article 120 could be applied, it is essential that the land must
be owned by one of the spouses before the improvement is introduced.
The general rule is that the accessory follows the principal. Thus, normally
the improvement would follow the land. In Article 120, this is may not be
the case, and it may be that the land would follow the improvement. That
is why it’s called reverse accession.

Rules:

1. Reverse Accession - if the cost of the improvement and the plus value
are more than the value of the principal property at the time of the
improvement. Thus, the entire property becomes conjugal. Example:
A lot is worth P1,000,000. A structure worth P800,000 was built.
Thus, the total cost of the separate property and the improvement is
P1,800,000. However due to the building of the improvement, the
value of the entire property increases by P300,000 – the plus value.
 Thus, the entire property is worth P2,100,000. In this case, the entire
property becomes conjugal. The cost of the improvement (P800,000)
and the plus value (P300,000) is more than the cost of the land
(P1,000,000).

2. Accession Proper – if the cost of the improvement and the plus value
are less than the value of the principal property at the time of the
improvement. Thus, the entire property becomes exclusive property of
the spouse.

3. What if the cost of the improvement and the plus value are equal to the
value of the principal property at the time of the improvement? The
entire property becomes exclusive property of the spouse, as Art. 120
uses the phrase “more than”.

4. Ownership of the entire property shall vest on the owner-spouse or the

partnership as the case upon the reimbursement of the improvement.

5. Reimbursement time is the time of the liquidation of the CPG.

6. The value to be paid at the liquidation is the value at the time of the
improvement (This overrules Padilla vs. Padilla).

 “Plus value” refers to what the improvement contributes to the

increase in the value of the whole thing.

Problem Areas:

1. Suppose the improvement is destroyed before reimbursement. Will

Article 120 apply? Article 120 applies only on the assumption that the
improvement exists at the time of liquidation. If the property is
destroyed before the liquidation, the Article 120 won’t apply. In the
case of Padilla vs. Paterno, the SC said that land never became
conjugal because the conjugal improvements were destroyed before
payment could be effected.

2. Does the vesting of ownership in reverse accession retroact to the time

of the building of the improvement? The law is not clear.

- Charges upon the CPG. The charges on the CPG are parallel to the
charges on ACP, except for 2 differences: First, Art. 94(5) and Art.
121(5), in obligations to taxes and expenses pertaining to preservation of
separate property, ACP provides that it should be “used by the family”
while CPG does not have such qualification. Reason: CPG has interest in
the preservation of separate properties since its fruits belong to the
conjugal funds. On the other hand, a separate property of the spouses is
usually beyond the reach of ACP hence, the expenses requirement.
Second, Art. 94(9) does not have a counterpart in Art. 121: Ante-nuptial
debts, liabilities and support of illegitimate children. Spouse can only
resort to a financially capable ACP in case of absence or insufficiency of
exclusive property. CPG instead has Art. 122 with additional requirement:
that is, recourse to CPG can be made only AFTER the responsibilities
enumerated in Art. 121 have been covered.

- Administration of the CPG. Similar to ACP. Arts. 122 to 125 have

counterpart provisions in the ACP.
 - Dissolution of CPG. Similar to ACP. Like Article 99 (3), Article 126 (3)
is incorrect. The marriage regime in a void marriage never existed. There
is nothing to dissolve. The special rules of co-ownership shall govern.
EXPTN: Void marriage under Article 40 in relation to Articles 50 and 43,
FC.

- Liquidation of CPG.

Steps in Liquidation
1. Inventory of the CPG assets and exclusive properties of each spouse.
2. Restitution of advances made to each spouse (i.e., Article 122, ¶3)
3. Payment of debts to each spouse (i.e., Article 120)
4. Payment of obligations to 3rd parties
5. Delivery of exclusive properties
6. Payment of losses and deterioration of movables (used for the benefit of
family) belonging to each spouse, even the loss is due to FE.
7. Delivery of presumptive legitimes
8. Division

Separation of Property of the Spouses & Administration of Common Property by

One Spouse during the Marriage

- Separation of property during marriage shall not take place, except: (a) as
provided in the MS, or (b) in case judicially decreed by the court.
- Judicial separation of property may be for cause or without cause
(voluntary on the part of the parties).
- The separation of properties shall not prejudice rights previously acquired
by creditors.
- After separation – Regime of Complete Separation of Properties governs.
- Parties may move the court for the resumption of the former property
regime.
- Administration of exclusive property of one spouse by the other: (a) in
case of appointment as guardian, (b) in case of judicially declared absence,
(c) in case of civil interdiction, (d) in case of fugitive spouse.

Regime of Separation of Property

- When will this take place? 2 instances: MS and Subsequent marriage after
death of the first spouse without liquidating the ACP or CPG.


Art. 122, ¶3. However, the payment of personal debts contracted by either spouse before the marriage, that of
fines and indemnities imposed upon them, as well as the support of illegitimate children of either spouse, may be
enforced against the partnership assets after the responsibilities enumerated in the preceding Article have been
covered, if the spouse who is bound should have no exclusive property or if it should be insufficient; but at the
time of the liquidation of the partnership, such spouse shall be charged for what has been paid for the purpose
above-mentioned.

Art. 120. The ownership of improvements, whether for utility or adornment, made on the separate property of
the spouses at the expense of the partnership or through the acts or efforts of either or both spouses shall pertain
to the conjugal partnership, or to the original owner-spouse, subject to the following rules:
When the cost of the improvement made by the conjugal partnership and any resulting increase in value
are more than the value of the property at the time of the improvement, the entire property of one of the spouses
shall belong to the conjugal partnership, subject to reimbursement of the value of the property of the owner-
spouse at the time of the improvement; otherwise, said property shall be retained in ownership by the owner-
spouse, likewise subject to reimbursement of the cost of the improvement.
In either case, the ownership of the entire property shall be vested upon the reimbursement, which shall
be made at the time of the liquidation of the conjugal partnership.
 - Separation of property may refer to present or future or both. It may be
total or partial. In case of partial, those not agreed as separate = ACP.
- Each spouse is the absolute owner of his/her separate property.
- Both spouses however shall bear family expenses in proportion to their
income or current market value of their separate properties.
- Liability of spouses to creditors, however, is solidary.

Property Regime of Unions without Marriage

- Art. 147. When a man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each
other, live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the
benefit of marriage or under a void marriage, their wages and salaries
shall be owned by them in equal shares and the property acquired by both
of them through their work or industry shall be governed by the rules on
co-ownership. In the absence of proof to the contrary, properties acquired
while they lived together shall be presumed to have been obtained by
their joint efforts, work or industry, and shall be owned by them in equal
shares. For purposes of this Article, a party who did not participate in the
acquisition by the other party of any property shall be deemed to have
contributed jointly in the acquisition thereof if the former's efforts
consisted in the care and maintenance of the family and of the household.
Neither party can encumber or dispose by acts inter vivos of his or her
share in the property acquired during cohabitation and owned in common,
without the consent of the other, until after the termination of their
cohabitation. When only one of the parties to a void marriage is in good
faith, the share of the party in bad faith in the co-ownership shall be
forfeited in favor of their common children. In case of default of or
waiver by any or all of the common children or their descendants, each
vacant share shall belong to the respective surviving descendants. In the
absence of descendants, such share shall belong to the innocent party. In
all cases, the forfeiture shall take place upon termination of the
cohabitation.

- Art. 148. In cases of cohabitation not falling under the preceding Article,
only the properties acquired by both of the parties through their actual
joint contribution of money, property, or industry shall be owned by them
in common in proportion to their respective contributions. In the absence
of proof to the contrary, their contributions and corresponding shares are
presumed to be equal. The same rule and presumption shall apply to joint
deposits of money and evidences of credit. If one of the parties is validly
married to another, his or her share in the co-ownership shall accrue to the
absolute community or conjugal partnership existing in such valid
marriage. If the party who acted in bad faith is not validly married to
another, his or her shall be forfeited in the manner provided in the last
paragraph of the preceding Article. The foregoing rules on forfeiture shall
likewise apply even if both parties are in both faith.