Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

9/23/2015

TUMLOSvsSPOUSESFERNANDEZ|OurLegalNotesBlog

OurLegalNotesBlog
JustanotherWordPress.comweblog
Postedby:lylegalnotes|September14,2009

TUMLOSvsSPOUSESFERNANDEZ
FACTS:
MarioandLourdesFernandezweretheplaintiffsinanactionforejectmentfiledbeforeBranch82
oftheMTCofValenzuela,MetroManilaagainstGuillermaTumlos,TotoTumlosandGina
Tumlos.
Intheircomplaintthesaidspousesallegedthattheyaretheabsoluteownersofanapaprtment
building;thatthroughtolerancetheyhadallowedtheTumlosestooccupytheapartmentbuilding
forthelastsevenyears,since1989,withoutthepaymentofanyrent;thatitwasagreeduponthat
afterafewmonths,defendantGuillermaTumloswillpayP1,600.00amonthwhiletheother
defendantspromisedtopayP1,000.00amonthbothasrental,whichagreementwasnotcomplied
withbythesaiddefendants;thattheyhavedemandedseveraltimesthedefendantstovacatethe
premises,astheyareinneedofthepropertyfortheconstructionofanewbuilding.Spouseshave
alsodemandedpaymentincurredforthelastsevenyears.Suchdemandswereunheededthusthis
presentactionofthespouses.
TheMTCpromulgateditsdecisiononJanuary22,1997.
ThedefendantsappealstotheRTC,allegedintheirmemorandumonappealthatMario
FernandezandGuillermahadanamorousrelationship,andthattheyacquiredthepropertyin
questionastheirlovenest.Itwasfurtherallegedthattheylivedtogetherinthesaidapaprtment
buildingwiththeirtwo(2)childrenforaroundthen(10)years,andthatGuillermaadministered
thepropertybycollectingrentalsfromthelesseesoftheotherapartments,untilshediscovered
thatMariodeceivedherastotheannulmentofismarriage.Itwasalsoduringtheearlypartof
1996whenMarioaccusedherofbeingunfaithfulanddemonstratedhisbaselessjealousy.
ISSUE:WONGuillermaTumlosisaCoownerofthesaidapartmentunderArticle148.
HELD:TheSupremeCourtrejectedtheclaimthatGuillermaTumlosandMarioFernandezwere
coownersofthedisputedproperty.Theclaimofcoowenrshipwasnotsatisfactorilyprovenby
Guillerma.Nootherevidencewaspresentedtovalidatesuchclaim,exceptforthesaid
affidavit/positionpaper.Aspreviouslystated,itwasonlyonappealthatGuillermaallegedthat
shecohabitedwiththepetitionerhusbandwithoutthebenefitofmarriage,andthatsheborehim1/3

https://lylegalnotes.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/tumlosvsspousesfernandez/

9/23/2015

TUMLOSvsSPOUSESFERNANDEZ|OurLegalNotesBlog

shecohabitedwiththepetitionerhusbandwithoutthebenefitofmarriage,andthatsheborehim
twochildren.SuchcontentionsanddocumentsshouldnothavebeenconsideredbytheRTC,as
theywerenotpresentedinheraffidavit/positionpaperbeforethetrialcourtMTC.
Evenifthesaidallegationsweretrue,theclaimofcoownershipstillfails.MarioFernandezis
validlymarriedtoLourdesFernandez,GuillermaandMarioarenotcapacitatedtomarryeach
other.Thus,thepropertyrelationgoverningtheirsupposedcohabitationisthatfoundinArticle
148oftheFamilyCode.itisclearthatactualcontributionisrequiredbyitsprovision,incontrast
toArticle147oftheFamilyCodewhichstatesthateffortsinthecareandmaintenanceofthe
familyandhouseholdareregardedascontributionstotheacquisitionofcommonpropertybyone
whohasnosalaryorincomeorworkorindustry.Suchprovisionisnotincludedinarticle148of
theFamilyCode.
Ifactualcontributionofthepartyisnotproventhenthereisnocoownershipandnopresumption
ofequalsharesasstatedinAgapay,Supra.
About these ads (https://wordpress.com/about-these-ads/)

YouMayLike

1.
10Child
StarsWhoGrewUpWayTooFasta
monthagoanswers.comAnswers
Answers.com(sponsored)
PostedinUncategorized

Categories
PhilippinePoliticalLaw
Uncategorized

BlogatWordPress.com.|TheOceanMistTheme.
Follow
https://lylegalnotes.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/tumlosvsspousesfernandez/

2/3