1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Jose, Jesus, Mercedes, Alejandro, and Gregorio all surnamed Reyes, Plaintiff, vs.

Don and Benigna Gomez, Defendant ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) The defendant was in error in claiming that the deceased spouse of Natividad Reyes, Enrique, father to Jose et.al was a Spaniard and not a Filipino Citizen therefore voiding his ownership rights to the conjugal property in dispute. Background: Natividad and Enrique Reyes conjugally own two real estate properties covered by TCT Nos. 136909 and 136910. They were married prior to the effectivity of the Family Code of the Philippines and hence their property is governed by Article 105 of the Code which provides: “In case the future spouses agree in marriage settlements that the regime of conjugal partnership of gains shall govern their property relations during marriage, the provisions in this Chapter shall be supplementary application. The provisions of this chapter shall also apply to the conjugal partnership of gains already established between spouses before the effectivity of this Code, without prejudice to vested rights already acquired in accordance with the Civil Code of other laws as provided in Article 255. “

This is in clear violation of Article 130 of the Family Code which states: “Upon the termination of the marriage by death. If no judicial settlement proceeding is instituted.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Enrique died intestate and left no will and no partition of estate was effected among his Spouse and children. 1998 without the knowledge and coinmsent of the children. However on July 21. If upon the lapse of the sixmonth period no liquidation is made. (2) That the pledgor or mortgagor be the absolute owner of the thing pledged or mortgaged. any disposition or encumbrance involving the conjugal partnership property of the terminated marriage shall be void. Should the surviving spouse contract a subsequent marriage without compliance with the foregoing requirements. 2002 to Spouses Don and Benigna Gomez.” Argument: The Gomez’s contends that Enrique was a citizen of Spain at the time of his death and therefore has no right to own the properties in question which leaves Natividad as the legal owner of the property. This argument is anchored on article 2085 of the Civil Code which states: The following requisites are essential to the contracts of pledge and mortgage: (1) That they be constituted to secure the fulfillment of a principal obligation. a mandatory regime of complete separation of property shall govern the property relations of the subsequent marriage. the surviving spouse shall liquidate the conjugal partnership property either judicially or extra-judicially within six months from the death of the deceased spouse. the conjugal partnership property shall be liquidated in the same proceeding for the settlement of the estate of the deceased. Natividad mortgaged the two real estate properties before her death on May 24. .

and in the absence thereof. it is right to assume that the properties in question is conjugally owned by Natividad and Enrique and the sale of the properties by Natividad without the consent of the children of Enrique should be void by virtue of article 130 of the Family code. .1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (3) That the persons constituting the pledge or mortgage have the free disposal of their property. Therefore. except such as shall have elected to preserve their allegiance to the Crown of Spain in accordance with the provisions of the treaty of peace between the United States and Spain signed at Paris December tenth. Numbers two and three are wrongfully interpreted since Enrique is a Filipino citizen at the time of his death as provided by section 4 of the Philippine Bill of 1902 which states that: “That all inhabitants of the Philippine Islands continuing to reside therein who were Spanish subjects on the eleventh day of April. The supreme court ruled in favor of the plaintiff and upheld his Filipino Citezenship in reference to the abovementioned provision of the Philippine Bill.” This makes Enrique a Filipino Citizen by virtue of his descendants as such and therefore has the right to own the property.al vs Fernando Poe Jr. eighteen hundred and ninety-nine. shall be deemed and held to be citizens of the Philippine Islands and as such entitled to the protection of the United States. and their children born subsequent thereto. eighteen hundred and ninety-eight. and then resided in the Philippine Islands. Velez and fornier et. that they be legally authorized for the purpose. This is further supported by the jurisprudence on the case of Tecson.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer: Get 4 months of Scribd and The New York Times for just $1.87 per week!

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times