Ari-ariang pagmamay-ari ng kasal na mag-asawa, hindi maaaring ibenta o i-donate ng isa sa kanila

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta - @Magtanong Kay Attorney | July 23, 2021

Dear Chief Acosta,

Iniisip ng aking kaibigan, bago pa man sila lubusang maghiwalay ng kanyang asawa na balak nang mangibang bansa, na ipa-donate na lamang sa kanya ang kanilang bahay sa Pasig at ibenta sa kanya ang isa pang ari-arian sa Kamaynilaan upang masigurado niyang hindi siya maiisahan kung sakaling makagawa ng paraan ang kanyang asawang maipawalambisa ang kanilang kasal. Maaari ba ito? – Xena

Dear Xena,

Ayon sa bagong kasong Nicxon I. Perez, Jr. vs. Avegail Perez, et al. (G.R. No. 233365, March 24, 2021, Ponente: Honorable Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa), na dinesisyunan ng Korte Suprema, hindi maaaring mag-donate o magbenta ang mag-asawa ng anumang ari-ariang hati nilang pinagmamay-arian. Sinabi sa kaso na:

“The [Waiver of Rights] is void pursuant to Article 87 of the Family Code, which provides:

ART. 87. Every donation or grant of gratuitous advantage, direct or indirect, between the spouses during the marriage shall be void, except moderate gifts which the spouses may give each other on the occasion of any family rejoicing. The prohibition shall also apply to persons living together as husband and wife without a valid marriage.” (133a) (Emphasis supplied) xxx

“Parenthetically, the Court takes this opportunity to dispel the notion that assuming the marriage between Eliodoro and Adelita was valid at the time the [Waiver of Rights] was executed and it had valuable or material consideration the [Waiver of Rights] would have been valid. The [Waiver of Rights] would still be void because the sale between the spouses during their marriage is proscribed under Article 1490 of the Civil Code, which provides:

ART. 1490. The husband and the wife cannot sell property to each other, except:

(1) When a separation of property was agreed upon in the marriage settlements; or

(2) When there has been a judicial separation of property under Article 191. (1458a)

The reason behind the prohibition is to protect third persons who may have contracted with a spouse, believing in the existence of certain properties, and who could easily be defrauded by removing such property by transfer to the other spouse.” (Binigyang-diin)

Samakatwid, ang binabalak ng inyong kaibigan ay hindi pinapahintulutan ng ating batas.

Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.

Maraming salamat sa inyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.