Siochi v. Gozon (2010)

Inter-Dimensional Realty, Inc. v. Siochi and Gozon (SIOCHI v. GOZON)

GR No. 169977

March 18, 2010

Justice Carpio

FACTS

A 30,000 sqm. parcel of land situated in Malabon is registered in the name of “Alfredo Gozon, married to Elvira Gozon.” In 1991, Elvira filed a petition for legal separation against Alfredo and in 1992, filed a notice of lis pedens which was annotated on the Transfer Certificate Title of the aforementioned land. During the pendency of the case for legal separation, Alfredo entered into an Agreement to Buy and Sell the said land for P18M with Mario Siochi. Sichi took possession of the property after delivering a partial payment. On June 29, 1994, the RTC Cavite rendered a decree of legal separation between the spouses Gozon and dissolved and liquidated the conjugal partnership. The same court held that the land in question is deemed conjugal property. Alfredo executed a deed of donation in favor of Winifred (daughter). Executed in his favor by Winifred, Alfredo sold the property to Inter-dimensional Realty, Inc. (IDRI) for 18 million. Siochi filed a complaint for the annulment of donation and sale before the RTC which was granted and ordered Alfredo to exclude the property and rights of Elvira to the undivided one-half share and to deliver a Deed of Absolute sale to Siochi over his one-half undivided share of the said property. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court and was appealed only by Mario and IDRI.

ISSUE:

- Whether or not the offending spouse, Alfredo Gozon has right to sell their conjugal partnership without the consent of the other spouse and share of the net profits earned by the conjugal partnership.

HOLD

- This issue involves the conjugal property of Alfredo and Elvira. Despite being separated in fact, Alfredo still cannot sell the property without the written consent of Elvira or the authority of the court.

- The absence of the consent of one of the spouses renders the entire sale void, including the portion of the conjugal property pertaining to the spouse who contracted the sale. Even if the other spouse

actively participated in negotiating for the sale of the property, that other spouse’s written consent to the sale is still required by law.

- The Agreement entered into by Alfredo and Mario was without the written consent of Elvira. Thus, the Agreement is entirely void.

- Article 63 (2) of the Family Code provides that the absolute community or the conjugal partnership shall be dissolved and liquidated but the offending spouse shall have no right to any share of the net profits earned by the absolute community or the conjugal partnership, which shall be forfeited.

JUDGMENT: Petition DENIED, and the judgment of the Court of Appeals affirmed with modifications.

Note. — A wife, by affixing her signature to a Deed of Sale on the space provided for witnesses, is deemed to have given her implied consent to the contract of sale—a wife’s consent to the husband’s disposition of conjugal property does not always have to be explicit or set forth in any particular document so long as it is shown by acts of the wife that such consent or approval was indeed given. (Pelayo vs. Perez, 459 SCRA 475 [2005])