Villanueva vs CA

427 SCRA 439

FACTS:

Oct 7, 1926 - Plaintiff Eusebia is the legal wife of defendant Nicolas 5 children

During their marriage, they acquired real properties and all improvements situated in Mandue City and
Consolacion (22 properties)

Nicolas is co-owner of a parcel of land in Mandaue which he inherited from his parents as well as the
purchasers of hereditary shares of approximately 8 parcels of land in Mandaue City  earns income
(Nicolas only one to receive)

1945: Nicolas no longer lived with legitimate family and cohabited with Pacita (1 illegitimate son)

Pacita has no occupation, no properties of her own

1985: Nicolas suffered a stroke

1985-present: Illegitimate child Procopio has been receiving the income of said properties

Defendants asked for settlement but no such thing was reached

RTC judgment in favor of respondents (legit family)

Art. 116 (presumption)  Eusebia presented solid evidence, petitioners failed to meet standard proof
required to maintain their claim that the subject properties are paraphernal properties of Nicolas

Appeal was made

Eusebia died on 1996  heirs substituted

1996: Pacita and Nicolas married

CA affirmed RTC decision C2013 | PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS | PROF. KATRINA LEGARDA | 101

ISSUES:

WON subject properties are conjugal

HELD:

YES

Family Code provisions on conjugal partnerships govern the property relations between Nicolas and
Eusebia even if they were married before the effectivity of FC (Art. 105)

Under FC, if the properties are acquired during the marriage, the presumption is that they are conjugal
Burden of proof  party claiming that they are not conjugal

Subject properties were acquired during the marriage of Nicolas and Eusebia

Tax declarations are not sufficient proof to overcome the presumption under Art. 116

Whether a property is conjugal or not is determined by law and not by the will of one of the spouses

No unilateral declaration by one spouse can change the character of conjugal property (intent of Nicolas
in misrepresenting himself as single in deeds of sale was to exclude Eusebia)

Cohabitation of a spouse with another person does not sever the tie of a subsisting previous marriage

Petition Denied