CORNELIA MATABUENA vs.

PETRONILA CERVANTES (March 31, 1971)

Donation to a common-law relationship

Digest Author: Arvin G

DOCTRINE
Donation; Donation between common law spouses is void
Statutory construction; Omission must be remedied by adherence to its avowed objective. If there is
ever any occasion where the principle of statutory construction that what is within the spirit of the law is
as much a part of it as what is written. This is it. Whatever omission may be apparent in an
interpretation purely literal of the language used must be remedial by an adherence to its avowed
objective.

PARTIES
Cornelia Matabuena plaintiff-appellant; sister of Felix
Petronila Cervantes defendant-appellee; wife of the deceased
Felix Matabuena donator( via inter vivos); husband of cervantes; deceased

FACTS
In 1956, Felix Matabuena donated a piece of lot to his common-lawspouse(Cohabitating
already), to the appellee Petronila Cervantes. Felix and Petronila got married only in 1962 or six
years after the deed of donation was executed. Five months later, or September 13, 1962, Felix
died.
Thereafter, appellant Cornelia Matabuena, by reason of being the only sister and nearest
collateral relative of the deceased, filed a claim over the property, by virtue of an affidavit
of self-adjudication executed by her in 1962, had the land declared in her name and paid the
estate and inheritance taxes thereon.
The lower court of Sorsogon declared that the donation was valid inasmuch as it was made at
the time when Felix and Petronila were not yet spouses, rendering Article 133 of the Civil
Code inapplicable.

ISSUES/HELD:
Whether or not the ban on donation between spouses during a marriage applies to a common-law
relationship YES (Therefore they are pro-indiviso heirs to the property. (1/2 for Cervantes
and for wife))
RATIO

Article 133 of the Civil Code considers as void a donation between the spouses during marriage,
policy consideration of the most exigent character as well as the dictates of morality requires
that the same prohibition should apply to a common-law relationship.
Stated in the case of Buenaventura vs. Bautista, if the policy of the law is to prohibit donations
in favor of the other consort and his descendants because of fear of undue and improper pressure
and influence upon the donor, then there is every reason to apply the same prohibitive policy to
persons living together as husband and wife without the benefit of nuptials.
The lack of validity of the donation by the deceased to appellee does not necessarily result in
appellant having exclusive right to the disputed property. As a widow, Cervantes is entitled to
one-half of the inheritance, and the surviving sister to the other half.
Article 1001, Civil Code: Should brothers and sisters or their children survive with the widow or
widower, the latter shall be entitled to one-half of the inheritance and the brothers and sisters or
their children to the other half.