Chapter 3

System of Absolute Community

Section 1: General Provisions

Article 90. The provisions on co-ownership shall apply to the absolute community of property between the spouses in all matters not provided for in this Chapter. (n)

Explanation:

·         All matters not covered by the Family Code are governed by the rules on co-ownership.

Note: 

Ø  The law provides for the property regime in case of common-law relationships and even if the marriage is void, the distribution of the properties shall be based on co-ownership where the parties shall share and share alike.

In Valdez vs. RTC of Quezon City, et al., G.R. No. 122749, July 31, 1996, 72 SCAD 967, said that the property relationship in void marriages ab initio is co-ownership and if ever there is a declaration of nullity of a void marriage, even if based on psychological incapacity, the dissolution of the properties or distribution shall be based on the law on co ownership where the parties shall share and share alike.

Antonio Valdes vs. Regional Trial Court

G.R No. 122749, July 31, 1996

Facts:

Antonio Valdes and Consuelo Gomez were married in 1971 and begotten during the marriage were five children. Valdes sought the declaration on nullity of marriage pursuant to Article 36 of the Family Code which was granted and hereby declared null and void on the ground of their mutual psychological incapacity to comply with their essential marital obligations.

Both Valdes and Gomez are directed to start proceedings on the liquidation of their common properties as defined in Article 147, of the Family Code which explicitly provides that the property acquired by both parties during their union, in the absence of proof to the contrary, are presumed to have been obtained through the joint efforts of the parties and will be owned by them in equal shares, plaintiff and defendant will own their 'family home' and all their other properties for that matter in equal shares. Also, the property regime of petitioner and respondent shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership.

Antonio Valdes moved for reconsideration of the order but was denied.

Issue:

          Whether or not Article 147 does not apply to cases where the parties are psychological incapacitated.

Held:

The trial court correctly applied the law. In a void marriage, regardless of the cause thereof, the property relations of the parties during the period of cohabitation is governed by the provisions of Article 147 or Article 148, such as the case may be, of the Family Code. Article 147 is a remake of Article 144 of the Civil Code as interpreted and so applied in previous cases;[6] it provides:

"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.

This peculiar kind of co-ownership 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"^[7] 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."^[8] Unlike the conjugal partnership of gains, the fruits of the couple's separate property are not included in the co-ownership.

Sources: 
Family Code of the Philippines by Albano