Abalos v. Macatangay (2004)

Alabos v. Macatangay

GR No. 155043

September 30, 2004

Ponente: Justice Tinga

FACTS

Spouses Arturo and Esther Abalos (petitioner) are registered owners of a parcel of land with improvements in Makati. In 1988, Arturo executed a Receipt and Memorandum of Agreement, binding himself to sell the subject property exclusively to Macatangay (respondent). Such memorandum stated that full payment would be effected as soon as possession of the property shall have been turned over to the respondent. A marital squabble was brewing between the spouses Abalos which prompted Macatangay to cause the annotation of his adverse claim on the title of the spouses to the property in order to protect his interests. Esther executed a contract to sell the property to the extent of her conjugal interest to Macatangay after he had expressed his readiness to pay the full amount. Esther agreed to surrender the possession of the property within 20 days along with the Deed of Absolute sale upon the payment. When Macatangay informed the spouses that he was ready to pay the full amount for P1,290,000.00, the couple failed to deliver the property. Macatangay filed a complaint before the Regional Trial Court against the spouses Abalos, which ruled that the Special Power of Attorney issued by Esther in favor of Arturo was void as it was falsified, hence, unauthorizing Arturo to sell the property to Macatangay. The Court of appeals reversed the decision of the lower court and ruled that the transaction between Esther and Macatangay cannot be affected, assuming that the SPA was void. Furthrmore, the CA considered the memorandum executed by Arturo valid to effect the sale of his conjugal share in the property.

ISSUE:

- Whether or not the sale of the property in question is valid.

HOLDING/RATIONALE

- NO. The subject land which had been admittedly acquired during the marriage of the spouses forms part of their conjugal partnership.

- Under the Civil Code, the husband is the administrator of the conjugal partnership.  The wife is not entitled as of right to joint administration. However, even if the husband is designated as administrator of the conjugal partnership, he cannot validly alienate or encumber any real property of the conjugal partnership without the wife’s consent. Similarly, the wife cannot dispose of any property belonging to the conjugal partnership without the conformity of the husband. The law is explicit that the wife cannot bind the conjugal partnership without the husband’s consent, except in cases provided by law.

JUDGMENT:

- The appealed decision is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The decision of the RTC Makati is DISMISSED.