Friday, February 5, 2016

Proof of acquisition during the marriage is an essential condition for the operation of the presumption in favor of the conjugal partnership




MILAGROS MANONGSONG, etc., et. al. vs. FELOMENA JUMAQUIO ESTIMO, et. al., G. R. No. 136773, June 25, 2003
“x x x.
Nevertheless, the trial court held that the Kasulatan was void because the Property was conjugal at the time Navarro sold it to Enriqueta Lopez Jumaquio. We do not agree. The trial courts conclusion that the Property was conjugal was not based on evidence, but rather on a misapprehension of Article 160 of the Civil Code, which provides:

All property of the marriage is presumed to belong to the conjugal partnership, unless it be proved that it pertains exclusively to the husband or to the wife.

As the Court of Appeals correctly pointed out, the presumption under Article 160 of the Civil Code applies only when there is proof that the property was acquired during the marriage. Proof of acquisition during the marriage is an essential condition for the operation of the presumption in favor of the conjugal partnership.[28]

There was no evidence presented to establish that Navarro acquired the Property during her marriage. There is no basis for applying the presumption under Article 160 of the Civil Code to the present case. On the contrary, Tax Declaration No. 911 showed that, as far back as in 1949, the Property was declared solely in Navarros name.[29] This tends to support the argument that the Property was not conjugal.

X x x.”



No comments:

Post a Comment