Calimlim-Canullas v. Fortun
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Mercedes Calimlim-Canullas and Fernando Canullas were married and had five children. They resided in a house on an 891-square-meter residential land in Pangasinan, which Fernando inherited from his father in 1965. In 1978, Fernando abandoned his family and lived with private respondent Corazon Daguines, with whom he was later convicted of concubinage. On April 15, 1980, Fernando sold the land and the house thereon to Daguines for P2,000.00, describing the house as also inherited. Procedural History: Daguines filed a complaint for quieting of title and damages against Mercedes when she could not take possession of the property. Mercedes countered that the house and improvements were conjugal properties, built with conjugal funds and her industry, and that the sale was null and void due to her lack of consent. The Court of First Instance initially declared Daguines the owner of the land and one-half of the house. Upon reconsideration, the court amended its decision, declaring Daguines the owner of the land and 10 coconut trees, but declared the sale of the conjugal house, 3 coconut trees, and other crops null and void. The Petition: Petitioner sought review on certiorari of the decision and resolution of the Court of First Instance, assailing the upholding of the sale of the land to Daguines but not the conjugal house.
Issue(s)
Whether the construction of a conjugal house on the exclusive property of the husband ipso facto gave the land the character of conjugal property. Whether the sale of the lot together with the house and improvements thereon was valid under the circumstances.
Ruling
The Court set aside the decision of the respondent Judge, declaring the sale of the lot, house, and improvements in question as null and void.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether the construction of a conjugal house on the exclusive property of the husband ipso facto gave the land the character of conjugal property: The Court held that pursuant to Article 158, paragraph 2 of the Civil Code, buildings constructed at the expense of the partnership during the marriage on land belonging to one of the spouses also pertain to the partnership. The spouse owning the lot becomes a creditor of the conjugal partnership for the value of the land, which is to be reimbursed at the liquidation of the conjugal partnership. This interpretation aligns with the doctrine in Vda. de Padilla vs. Paterno, which was deemed a better rule than that in Maramba vs. Lozano. Therefore, the land and the building belonged to the conjugal partnership, with the husband's estate being a creditor for the land's value. On the issue of whether the sale of the lot together with the house and improvements thereon was valid under the circumstances: The Court found the contract of sale to be null and void for being contrary to morals and public policy. The sale was executed by a husband in favor of his concubine after he had abandoned his family and left the conjugal home. Such a sale is subversive of the stability of the family, a basic social institution protected by public policy. Article 1409 of the Civil Code declares contracts whose cause, object, or purpose is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy as void and inexistent. Furthermore, the law prohibits spouses from selling property to each other, and this prohibition extends to common-law relationships to prevent undue influence and protect the institution of marriage. The Court cited Buenaventura vs. Bautista and Matabuena vs. Cervantes in support of this principle, emphasizing that the disabilities attached to marriage should also attach to concubinage.
Main Doctrine
A building constructed at the expense of the conjugal partnership on the exclusive property of one spouse becomes conjugal property, with the spouse owning the land becoming a creditor of the partnership for the value of the land. A sale of conjugal property made by a husband to his concubine, after abandoning his family, is null and void as it is contrary to morals and public policy.