RAMOS vs PANGILINAN

Respondents filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against E.M. Ramos

Electric, Inc. owned by Ernesto Ramos (father of the petitioners)
The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of respondents, and ordered Ramos to pay
Php 1,661,490.30 for backwages, separation pay, 13 th month pay, etc of the
employees.
o A writ of execution was issued, levying the property of Ramos in
Pandacan
Ramos and his company moved to quash the writ of execution, claiming that
the Pandacan property was a family home.
o Respondents aver, however, and claim that the Pandacan property is
NOT the family home. It is the one used for the business, and is In fact
the address used in their company letterhead.
o They had another house in Antipolo, which is where they reside.
NLRC and Labor Arbiter: petitioners failed to exercise right to redeem
property within 1 year period
o Petitioners claim that property was covered by regime of CPG, as such
only Ramos share can be levied upon.
But they failed to substantiate such claim. The phrase in the
certificate title Ernesto Ramos, married to Juanita Trinidad, did
not mean both of them owned the property. It only described
Ramos civil status
Petitioners also alleged that the NLRC erred in identifying the market value of
the lot as Php 2, 172, 000. At the time the Pandacan property was constituted
as a family home in 1944, it was valued at Php 300,000. Art 153 is applicable
no longer had to resort to judicial constitution
o Court of Appeals: Pandacan Property NOT exempt. Art 153 does not
retroact, such that every family home is deemed constituted upon
occupation after the effectivity of the Family Code.
o Articles 244-251 of the Civil Code should be applied. Hence, it needs to
have been judicially/extrajudicially constituted before Pandacan
property is exempted.

Was levy upon Pandacan property valid?

SC: There must be proof that alleged family home was constituted jointly by
husband and wife for it to be exempt from execution. It must be part of
properties of absolute community or conjugal property or exclusive property
of one of the spouses.
When should a property be constituted as a family home?
o If before the Family Code: must be constituted judicially/extrajudicially
using Art 225, 229-231, and 233 of CC. (Verified petition and
requirement of court order with Register of Deeds)

If after the Family Code: no need to constitute judicially/extrajudiically.

Considered constituted upon occupation.
o In both cases, it is not sufficient that person claiming exemption
merely alleges it was a family home.
Petitioners failed to show that the family home was constituted prior to
August 3 1988.
The Pandacan property can be levied.
o