Taking back of property from the husband

By | September 17, 2012

Q. Sometime in 2007 while in the Philippines, my husband abandoned me and our two children. The incurable promiscuity, vicious vices like gambling and his volcanic temper were the primary causes of our marriage breakdown. Freed from this bondage, I did not contest our separation.   Thereafter,  I and my children  left  the country  and are now  settled in  Toronto.

 

We were married in the Philippines   according to Chinese rites sometime on June 1999. Sometime in 1996, with my own money, I purchased a parcel of commercial property along Rizal Avenue, Sta. Cruz, Manila.   A land title for   this property was issued and registered in my name.

 

However, prior to our separation, I reluctantly agreed to my husband’s proposal to execute a Deed of Sale of my property in his favour, on his assurance that he would construct a commercial building for the benefit of our children. He convinced me that the Deed of Sale should be in his name alone, and as single, so that   I would not be involved in any obligation pertaining to the development of my lot.  

 

For the above  purpose ,  I  executed  a Deed  of Sale  transferring the my property  for and in consideration of  P 950,000.00. The price or consideration in the Deed of Sale was actually a formality for purposes of the purported sale, as I have not received a single centavo from this transaction.  It was also part of our arrangement that after the commercial building will be constructed; my husband is going to execute a Deed of Sale of this property in favour of our children.  On the basis of   the Deed of Sale that I made, a new title (TCT) was issued in my husband’s name.

 

To date despite of my incessant plea for my husband to fulfill his promise to execute a Deed of Sale in favour of our children, he refused to do so.   I really wanted my land returned to me for the sake of our children. Can I have my land back, considering that it is now titled in my husband’s name?  Thanks. Daisy.   

 

 

 

 

Ans . This corner is of the view  that  you  have  a  legal ground  to  get  back your land.   In the first place, the Deed of Absolute Sale that you executed  is one referred to in legal parlance as a “simulated sale.”  Being a simulated sale, the Deed or acts embodied in the document that you executed  was not sale  at all ,  as the actual purpose  thereof   was to suit only the interest of  the other.

 

Secondly, there was no consideration of the Deed  of Sale. As you said that no single centavo was actually paid to you . “ A contract of purchase and sale is null and void and produces no effect whatsoever where the same is without cause or the consideration  thereof  by way of purchase price which appears thereon as paid has in fact never been paid by the  purchaser to the vendor”. ( Rongavilla v. Court of  Appeals, 294 SCRA  289 ; Ocejo, Perez & Co. v. Flores, 40 Phil. 92).

 

Thirdly, the land in questioned,  is a paraphernal property of  yours. Under the law a paraphernal property is one belonging exclusively  to the wife which  does not form part  of or is not  an integral part of the conjugal or community of  properties.  Considering that the money you used to purchase the subject property  was your own money  and  plus the  fact that  the land  was registered  in your name,  such  facts are convincing evidence  that the property  is indeed  a paraphernal property under  Articles 135 and  148 of the Civil Code ,as amended by Executive Order Nos. 209 and 227 respectively, otherwise known as The Family Code of the Philippines  .  

 

Thus, the Deed of Sale being  simulated is without effect,  as the actual purpose of  its execution  was for your husband to construct a commercial building thereon  and to sell or convey the same to your children .

 

The Supreme Court in a related case, held that “ the Deed of Sale that  was executed  , was made  merely to facilitate the transfer of the property to petitioner pursuant to an agreement  is void and without effect . Being merely a subterfuge , that agreement cannot  be taken as a consideration for the sale.”( Yu Bun Guan v. Elvira Ong,G.R. 144735, Oct. 18,2001).
 
From the above rulings of the Supreme Court, it is clear that the law is your side.  Good luck and thank you for writing.

 

 

 

Disclaimer: Batas Pinoy Corner Not Legal opinion:

 

Material placed on this corner  is for the purpose of providing information only. It is not intended as  practice of law or legal services.  Although the writer believes this information to be accurate at the time it is first provided or as relayed by the person asking or soliciting the information from the writer.  Such circumstances or  understanding of the facts as conveyed to the writer  by the sender may not actually  reflect the ultimate facts or circumstances earlier represented and  as understood by the writer.

 

This writer makes no representation, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness or timeliness of the information provided in this writing. The content provided by Batas Pinoy Corner  is not meant to be a substitute for legal opinion. Always consult your lawyer or other legal professional for  legal advice as regards to the information obtained in this column.

 

 

                                                            * *  *  

Readers who may have legal concerns affecting their persons, property, rights,title and related interest concerning Philippine laws and jurisdiction, are welcome to e-mail their query  either in English or Pilipino  for comments  to: attyrw@mail.com