A tale of two unmarried sisters

Annette and Luisa are twin sisters who are passionately in love. They share the same fate—they are not destined to walk down the aisle.

Annette is the live-in partner of Andresito, a swinging bachelor who does not believe in sanctity of marriage. He is the chief executive officer of a well-established multinational company. His salaries were more than enough to address the needs of Annette and their children.

For 15 years, Annette managed their household and took care of the domestic concerns of their children. In the course of their cohabitation, real properties in Quezon City were acquired by the couple.

Luisa, on the other hand, fell in love with Luisito, a married man who left Amanda, his wife of 20 years. Since then, Luisa became his faithful and domesticated paramour.

Luisa, like her sister, never worked and made their love nest a domestic haven. In return, Luisito provided well for the material needs of Luisa and their children. He even bought a real property in Makati and had it registered under the name of Luisa.

Q: Does Annette have any dominical rights over the Quezon City properties considering that it was only through Andresito’s earnings that they were able to acquire them?

A: Yes, Annette is a co-owner of the Quezon City property pursuant to Art. 147 of the Family Code.

Q: What is Art. 147 of the Family Code?

A: Art. 147 of the Family Code provides for a peculiar kind of co-ownership. It applies when a man and a woman, suffering no legal impediment to marry each other, so exclusively live together as husband and wife under a void marriage or without the benefit of marriage.

The term “capacitated” in the provision (in the first paragraph of the law) refers to the legal capacity of a party to contract marriage, i.e., any “male or female of the age of eighteen years or upwards not under any of the impediments mentioned in Articles 37 and 38” of the Code.

Under this property regime, property acquired by both spouses through their work and industry shall be governed by the rules on equal co-ownership.

Any property acquired during the union is prima facie presumed to have been obtained through their joint efforts.

A party who did not participate in the acquisition of the property shall still be considered as having contributed thereto jointly if said party’s “efforts consisted in the care and maintenance of the family household.”

Unlike the conjugal partnership of gains, the fruits of the couple’s separate property are not included in the co-ownership.

(Art. 147, Family Code, Valdes v. RTC- Q.C., G.R. No. 122749, Jul. 31, 1996; Diño v. Diño, G.R. No. 178044, Jan. 19, 2011; See also Legarda, Mawis, and Falor. The Family Code.)

Q: Can Andresito sell the property without Annette’s consent?

A: No, he cannot sell the property without obtaining the consent of his co-owner, Annette.

Q: Can Annette inherit from Andresito if the latter dies without a will? If not, who will be the compulsory heirs of Andresito?

A: No, she cannot since she is not a spouse in contemplation of the law. Only his children will be able to inherit from him.

Q: How about Luisa? Does she have any dominical rights over the Makati property?

A: No, she does not have any dominical rights over the Makati property.

Q: How come Luisa does not have any dominical rights over the Makati property?

A: This is because the property relationship governing the Luisa-Luisito union is limited co-ownership as defined by Art. 148.

Q: What is Article 148 of the Family Code? How come Article 148 of the Family Code will govern the Luisa-Luisito union?

A: Article 148 shall apply because Luisito is not legally capacitated to marry. Article 148 provides, among others, that Article 148. “(i)n 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.

In other words, a man and a woman who are not legally capacitated to marry each other, but who nonetheless live together conjugally, may be deemed co-owners of a property acquired during the cohabitation only upon proof that each made an actual contribution to its acquisition.

Hence, mere cohabitation without proof of contribution will not result in a co-ownership.

(Tumlos v. Sps. Fernandez, G.R. No. 137650, Apr. 12, 2000. Malilin, Jr. v. Castillo, G.R. No. 136803, Jun. 16, 2000.; Villanueva v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 136803, Jun. 16, 2000; and Atienza v. de Castro, G.R. No. 169698, Nov. 29, 2006; See also See also Legarda, Mawis, and Falor. The Family Code)

Q: What can Amanda do in order to recover the property registered under the name of Luisa?

A: Amanda can sue Luisa in order to recover the Makati property. As held in one case the Supreme Court ruled that the property acquired by a man while living with a common-law wife during the subsistence of his marriage is conjugal property, even when the property was titled in the name of the common-law wife.

In such cases, a constructive trust is deemed to have been created by operation of Article 1456 of the Civil Code over the property, which lawfully pertains to the conjugal partnership of the subsisting marriage.

(Adriano v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124118, Mar. 27, 2000; see also Legarda, Mawis, and Falor. The Family Code)

Q: Can Luisa inherit from Luisito if the latter dies without a will?

A: No, she cannot since she is not a spouse in contemplation of the law.