Facts:
Joseph Goyanko and Epifania dela Cruz were married. During the marriage, they acquire a certain property in Cebu. In 1993, Joseph executed a deed of sale over the property in favor of his common-law-wife Maria B. Ching. After Joseph's death, his children with Epifania discovered the sale. They thus filed with the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City a complaint for recovery of property and damages against Ching, praying for the nullification of the deed of sale and of the TCT and the issuance of a new one in favor of their father Goyanko.
Issue:
Was the sale made by Joseph Goyanko in favor of his common-law wife valid?
Held:
No. The proscription against sale of property between spouses applies even to common law relationships.
Article 1409 of the Civil Code states inter alia that: contracts whose cause, object, or purposes is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy are void and inexistent from the very beginning.
Article 1352 also provides that: “Contracts without cause, or with unlawful cause, produce no effect whatsoever. The cause is unlawful if it is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.”
Additionally, the law emphatically prohibits the spouses from selling property to each other subject to certain exceptions. Similarly, donations between spouses during marriage are prohibited. And this is so because if transfers or conveyances between spouses were allowed during marriage, that would destroy the system of conjugal partnership, a basic policy in civil law. It was also designed to prevent the exercise of undue influence by one spouse over the other, as well as to protect the institution of marriage, which is the cornerstone of family law. The prohibitions apply to a couple living as husband and wife without benefit of marriage, otherwise, “the condition of those who incurred guilt would turn out to be better than those in legal union.”
As the conveyance in question was made by Goyangko in favor of his common- law-wife, it was null and void. (Ching vs Goyanko, Jr., G.R. No. 165879, November 10, 2006 citing Calimlim-Canullas v. Fortun, G.R. No. L-57499, June 22, 1984)
Article 1409 of the Civil Code states inter alia that: contracts whose cause, object, or purposes is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy are void and inexistent from the very beginning.
Article 1352 also provides that: “Contracts without cause, or with unlawful cause, produce no effect whatsoever. The cause is unlawful if it is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.”
Additionally, the law emphatically prohibits the spouses from selling property to each other subject to certain exceptions. Similarly, donations between spouses during marriage are prohibited. And this is so because if transfers or conveyances between spouses were allowed during marriage, that would destroy the system of conjugal partnership, a basic policy in civil law. It was also designed to prevent the exercise of undue influence by one spouse over the other, as well as to protect the institution of marriage, which is the cornerstone of family law. The prohibitions apply to a couple living as husband and wife without benefit of marriage, otherwise, “the condition of those who incurred guilt would turn out to be better than those in legal union.”
As the conveyance in question was made by Goyangko in favor of his common- law-wife, it was null and void. (Ching vs Goyanko, Jr., G.R. No. 165879, November 10, 2006 citing Calimlim-Canullas v. Fortun, G.R. No. L-57499, June 22, 1984)
0 Comments
Post a Comment