Scribd
Upload
37 views2 pages

Defendant

This document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding the dissolution of a conjugal partnership regime. Spouses filed a case against Erlinda for a civil liability from a slander offense and the sheriff levied Erlinda's real property. Romulo, Erlinda's husband, filed to annul the certificate of sale. The Supreme Court ruled that Branch 21 had proper jurisdiction over the case as the property levied was conjugal property, and conjugal property cannot be held liable for the personal obligations of one spouse unless it benefited the partnership.

Uploaded by

Quiqui
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
37 views2 pages

Defendant

This document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding the dissolution of a conjugal partnership regime. Spouses filed a case against Erlinda for a civil liability from a slander offense and the sheriff levied Erlinda's real property. Romulo, Erlinda's husband, filed to annul the certificate of sale. The Supreme Court ruled that Branch 21 had proper jurisdiction over the case as the property levied was conjugal property, and conjugal property cannot be held liable for the personal obligations of one spouse unless it benefited the partnership.

Uploaded by

Quiqui
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

SPOUSES ROBERTO BUADO and VENUS BUADO, petitioner vs.

CA and ROMULO NICOL,


defendant.
G.R. No. 145222. April 24, 2009.

TOPIC: Dissolution of Conjugal Partnership Regime

FACTS:
Spouse filed in Branch 19 a case against Erlinda because of a civil liability she incurred from a criminal
offense of slander. And since she did not have sufficient funds to pay off the obligation, the sheriff
levied on real property TCT T-125322. The sale was issued in favor of spouses.
Romulo, Erlinda’s husband, filed annulment of certificate of sale against petitioners and deputy sheriff in
Branch 21.

a) Petitioner’s Arguments (Buado spouses – Lost)


Branch 19 is the one with jurisdiction and not 21 since the writ originated from there and they acted on
valid writ of execution

b) Respondent’s Argument’s (CA - Won)


No mention

ISSUE:
W/N the husband of the judgement debtor may file an independent action to protect the conjugal property
subject to execution?

FINDINGS OF THE Lower Court:


The petition is dismissed since Branch 19 has jurisdiction.

FINDINGS OF THE Court of Appeals:


Reversed saying Branch 21 has jurisdiction.

RULING OF THE Supreme Court:


The petition dismissed.
Rule:
Sec. 16 Rule 39 of the Rules of Court
Nothing herein contained shall prevent such claimant or any third person from vindicating his claim
to the property in a separate action, or prevent the judgment obligee from claiming damages in the
same or a separate action against a third-party claimant who filed a frivolous or plainly spurious
claim.

Application:
Only a stranger may file a third-party claim. If the character of the property is exclusive then the husband
is a stranger but if the property is conjugal then he is not. There is no dispute that the contested
property is conjugal but conjugal property cannot be held liable for the personal obligation contracted
by one spouse, unless some advantage or benefit is shown to have accrued to the conjugal
partnership.
It cannot be concluded that the civil liability was to the benefit of the conjugal property. Thus the filing of
a separate action is proper since the obligation is personal to the wife and not chargeable to the
conjugal property and Branch 21 has jurisdiction.

You might also like