YU BUN GUAN VS.

ELVIRA ONG

FACTS:
 Elvira Ong is married to Yu Bun Guan under Chinese rights, executed a deed of
sale of one of their properties in favor of her husband but on the promise that the
property would be constructed for a commercial purpose for the benefit of their
children. The said property will be registered under the name of Yu Bun Guan
only.
 The consideration for the 'simulated sale' was that, after its execution in which he
would represent himself as single, a Deed of Absolute Sale would be executed in
favor of the three children and that he would pay the Allied Bank, Inc. the loan he
obtained.
 The spouses who have three children separated because Ong found out that his
husband is promiscuous, short-tempered and had vices.
 Yu Bun Guan broke his promise and his wife is insisting him to deliver the copy
of the title of the land.
 She decided to execute an Affidavit of Adverse Claim she also wrote Allied Bank
a letter of withdrawal of her authority for his husband to apply for additional
loans.
 Yu Bun Guan filed with the Makati RTC a 'Petition for Replacement' of an owner's
duplicate title due to misplacement or loss of the owner’s copy of title but it was
fictitious.
 The court granted the petition and a new title was issued.
 Ong discovered the fraud committed by his husband and immediately filed an
Affidavit of Adverse Claim.
 Asked the court to declare the sale as null and void.
 Yu Bun Guan said that he just used Ong as dummy to purchase the said property
 He also added Yu Bun Guan also stated that his wife can’t buy the property
because of financial incapacities but he has at that time.
Issue: Whether or not the sale made by the wife to her husband is valid.
Held: No, The court used as basis Art. 1490 of the Civil Code which provides 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 or property under Article 191.

Wherefore, the petition is hereby denied and the assailed. Decision affirmed.
Costs will be against petitioner.