CO- OWNERSHIP

Buenaventura VS. CA
G.R. Nos. 127358 and G.R. Nos. 127449
March 31, 2005

Facts: Noel Buenaventura filed a position for the declaration of

nullity of marriage on the ground that both he and his wife were
psychologically incapacitated.
The RTC in its decision, declared the marriage entered into
between petitioner and respondent null and violation ordered the
liquidation of the assets of the conjugal partnership property;
ordered petitioner a regular support in favor of his son in the
amount of 15,000 monthly, subject to modification as the
necessity arises, and awarded the care and custody of the minor
to his mother.
Petitioner appealed before the CA. While the appeal was pending,
the CA, upon respondents motion issued a resolution increasing
the support pendants like to P20, 000.
The CA dismissal petitioner appeal for lack of merit and affirmed
in to the RTC decision. Petitioner motion for reconsideration was
denied, hence this petition.

Issue: Whether or not co-ownership is applicable to valid

marriage.

Held: Since the present case does not involve the annulment of a
bigamous marriage, the provisions of article 50 in relation to
articles 41, 42 and 43 of the Family Code, providing for the
dissolution of the absolute community or conjugal partnership of
gains, as the case maybe, do not apply. Rather the general rule

applies, which is in case a marriage is declared void ab initio, the

property regime applicable to be liquidated, partitioned and
distributed is that of equal co-ownership.
Since the properties ordered to be distributed by the court a quo
were found, both by the RTC and the CA, to have been acquired
during the union of the parties, the same would be covered by
the co-ownership. No fruits of a separate property of one of the
parties appear to have been included or involved in said
distribution.