VALDEZvsRTC

Petitioner:ANTONIOA.S.VALDEZ,
Repondents:REGIONALTRIALCOURT,BRANCH102,QUEZONCITY,andCONSUELOM.
GOMEZVALDEZ,
FACTS:
AntonioValdezandConsueloGomezweremarriedin1971.Theybegot5children.In1992,Valdezfileda
petitionfordeclarationofnullityoftheirmarriageonthegroundofpsychologicalincapacity.Thetrial
courtgrantedthepetition,therebydeclaringtheirmarriagenullandvoid.Italsodirectedthepartiestostart
proceedingsontheliquidationoftheircommonpropertiesasdefinedbyArticle147oftheFamilyCode,
andtocomplywiththeprovisionsofArticles50,51and52ofthesamecode.
Gomezsoughtaclarificationofthatportioninthedecision.SheassertedthattheFamilyCodecontained
noprovisionsontheprocedurefortheliquidationofcommonpropertyin"unionswithoutmarriage.
InanOrder,thetrialcourtmadethefollowingclarification:"Consequently,consideringthatArticle147of
theFamilyCodeexplicitlyprovidesthatthepropertyacquiredbybothpartiesduringtheirunion,inthe
absenceofprooftothecontrary,arepresumedtohavebeenobtainedthroughthejointeffortsoftheparties
andwillbeownedbytheminequalshares,plaintiffanddefendantwillowntheir'familyhome'andall
theirotherpropertiesforthatmatterinequalshares.Intheliquidationandpartitionofthepropertiesowned
incommonbytheplaintiffanddefendant,theprovisionsoncoownershipfoundintheCivilCodeshall
apply."
ValdesmovedforreconsiderationoftheOrderwhichwasdenied.Valdesappealed,arguingthat:
(1)Article147oftheFamilyCodedoesnotapplytocaseswherethepartiesarepsychological
incapacitated;(2)Articles50,51and52inrelationtoArticles102and129oftheFamilyCodegovernthe
dispositionofthefamilydwellingincaseswhereamarriageisdeclaredvoidabinitio,includingamarriage
declaredvoidbyreasonofthepsychologicalincapacityofthespouses;(3)AssumingarguendothatArticle
147appliestomarriagesdeclaredvoidabinitioonthegroundofthepsychologicalincapacityofaspouse,
thesamemaybereadconsistentlywithArticle129.
ISSUE:
WhetherArt147FCisthecorrectlawgoverningthedispositionofpropertyinthecaseatbar.
HELD:
YES.Inavoidmarriage,regardlessofthecausethereof,thepropertyrelationsofthepartiesduringthe
periodofcohabitationisgovernedbytheprovisionsofArticle147orArticle148,suchasthecasemaybe,
oftheFamilyCode.
Article147applieswhenamanandawoman,sufferingnoillegalimpedimenttomarryeachother,so
exclusivelylivetogetherashusbandandwifeunderavoidmarriageorwithoutthebenefitof
marriage.Underthispropertyregime,propertyacquiredbybothspousesthroughtheirworkandindustry
shallbegovernedbytherulesonequalcoownership.Anypropertyacquiredduringtheunionisprima
faciepresumedtohavebeenobtainedthroughtheirjointefforts.Apartywhodidnotparticipateinthe
acquisitionofthepropertyshallbeconsideredashavingcontributedtheretojointlyifsaidparty's"efforts
consistedinthecareandmaintenanceofthefamilyhousehold."Unliketheconjugalpartnershipofgains,
thefruitsofthecouple'sseparatepropertyarenotincludedinthecoownership.
Whenthecommonlawspousessufferfromalegalimpedimenttomarryorwhentheydonotlive

exclusivelywitheachother(ashusbandandwife),onlythepropertyacquiredbybothofthemthroughtheir
actualjointcontributionofmoney,propertyorindustryshallbeownedincommonandinproportionto
theirrespectivecontributions.Suchcontributionsandcorrespondingshares,however,areprimafacie
presumedtobeequal.Theshareofanypartywhoismarriedtoanothershallaccruetotheabsolute
communityorconjugalpartnership,asthecasemaybe,ifsoexistingunderavalidmarriage.Iftheparty
whohasactedinbadfaithisnotvalidlymarriedtoanother,hisorhershareshallbeforfeitedinthemanner
alreadyheretoforeexpressed.
Indecidingtotakefurthercognizanceoftheissueonthesettlementoftheparties'commonproperty,the
trialcourtactedneitherimprudentlynorprecipitately;acourtwhichhasjurisdictiontodeclarethemarriage
anullitymustbedeemedlikewiseclothedinauthoritytoresolveincidentalandconsequentialmatters.Nor
diditcommitareversibleerrorinrulingthatpetitionerandprivaterespondentownthe"familyhome"and
alltheircommonpropertyinequalshares,aswellasinconcludingthat,intheliquidationandpartitionof
thepropertyownedincommonbythem,theprovisionsoncoownershipundertheCivilCode,notArticles
50,51and52,inrelationtoArticles102and129,12oftheFamilyCode,shouldaptlyprevail.Therules
setuptogoverntheliquidationofeithertheabsolutecommunityortheconjugalpartnershipofgains,the
propertyregimesrecognizedforvalidandvoidablemarriages(inthelattercaseuntilthecontractis
annulled),areirrelevanttotheliquidationofthecoownershipthatexistsbetweencommonlawspouses.
ThefirstparagraphofArticles50oftheFamilyCode,applyingparagraphs(2),(3),(4)and95)ofArticle
43,13relatesonly,byitsexplicitterms,tovoidablemarriagesand,exceptionally,tovoidmarriagesunder
Article4014oftheCode,i.e.,thedeclarationofnullityofasubsequentmarriagecontractedbyaspouseof
apriorvoidmarriagebeforethelatterisjudiciallydeclaredvoid.