Benasa v. Mahor
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Bernard B. Benasa and respondent Presentacion R. Mahor, childhood sweethearts, engaged in an adulterous relationship from 1974 while Mahor was married to Pablo Mahor. Benasa, a seafarer, remitted salaries and benefits to Mahor, who used these funds to purchase several real properties. Benasa instructed Mahor to register the properties in his name, but they were registered solely in Mahor's name. Upon Benasa's retirement in 1999, he requested an accounting and reconveyance of the properties, which Mahor refused, leading to their separation. Procedural History: Benasa filed a Petition for Accounting, Inventory and Reconveyance of Real Properties with Damages against Mahor. Mahor was declared in default for failure to file an Answer. The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 78, Quezon City, denied Benasa's petition, finding insufficient evidence to establish co-ownership under Articles 147 or 148 of the Family Code, and presuming the properties acquired during Mahor's marriage to Pablo were conjugal. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC's decision. The Petition: Benasa filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, seeking to reverse the CA's decision, arguing that the CA erred in ruling against him and refusing to declare him a co-owner of the properties under Article 148 of the Family Code.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling against Benasa when it refused to declare him as a co-owner of the real and personal properties under Article 148 of the Family Code; and whether Article 148 of the Family Code applies to adulterous relationships and Benasa sufficiently evinced intent to cohabit. Whether the properties acquired during the adulterous relationship are subject to co-ownership under Article 148 of the Family Code based on the actual joint contributions of the parties; and whether Benasa's evidence sufficiently proved his contributions to the acquisition of the subject properties, entitling him to a share as a co-owner. Whether Benasa is entitled to an accounting, inventory, and reconveyance of the properties acquired during the cohabitation, specifically regarding real and personal properties; and whether damages and attorney's fees should be awarded.
Ruling
The petition is GRANTED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The case is REMANDED to the RTC for accounting and determination of ownership and shares. Mahor is ordered to submit a complete accounting report and pay Benasa PHP 100,000.00 for moral and exemplary damages, and PHP 10,000.00 for attorney's fees.
Ratio Decidendi
On the applicability of Article 148 of the Family Code and intent to cohabit: The Court held that Article 148 of the Family Code, which governs property relations in cases of cohabitation not falling under Article 147, applies to adulterous relationships and has retroactive application. The Court found that Benasa's remittances to Mahor, coupled with their continued communication, photographs showing affection, and Benasa's return to their shared Quezon City property after overseas assignments, sufficiently evinced his intent to cohabit as husband and wife, despite his work as a seafarer. On co-ownership, actual joint contribution, and reconveyance of real properties: The Court ruled that properties acquired during the cohabitation, through the actual joint contribution of money, property, or industry by the parties, shall be owned by them in common in proportion to their respective contributions. The Court found that Benasa's remittances constituted substantial contributions towards the acquisition of the subject properties, entitling him to a share as a co-owner. Despite the properties being registered solely in Mahor's name, the Court reiterated that TCTs are not conclusive proof of ownership and do not preclude co-ownership. Therefore, Benasa's prayer for accounting, inventory, and reconveyance of the real properties should prevail. On the claim for personal properties, damages, and attorney's fees: The Court denied Benasa's claim for personal properties located in the Quezon City property, finding that the evidence presented was inadequate to establish his ownership. The Court awarded moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney's fees, based on the wrongful acts of Mahor in refusing to account for the properties and money entrusted to her, and the emotional distress caused to Benasa.
Main Doctrine
Properties acquired during an adulterous relationship through the actual joint contribution of money, property, or industry by the parties shall be owned by them in common in proportion to their respective contributions, governed by Article 148 of the Family Code.