Subtopic:

People Bank and Trust Co. v. Register of Deeds

GR No. L-26270

Date of Promulgation: May 5, 1934
Ponente: Imperial, J.
Petition: Appeal from CA Decision
Petitioners: People Bank and Trust Co.
Respondents: The Register of Deeds for the City of Manila

Facts:
Domina Angeles, married to Manuel Sandoval from whom she lives separate and apart,
executed an instrument in favor of Peoples Bank and Trust Company where she conveyed in
trust her paraphernal property consisting of three parcels of land with two buildings thereof.
Trust was constituted in order that lots would be subdivided and sold and that trustee would
collect the rents to be derived from the property. Registration for the instrument was denied
upon presentation at the Register of Deeds for the City of Manila. Petitioner brought the matter
in consultation before the Court of First Instance but the registration was still denied. CFI held
that instrument was null and void because it lacked the consent of the husband given that
such fruits were considered conjugal partnership property, management of which corresponds
to the husband.
Issues/Held:
WON the wife may authorize in trust the collection of fruits of her paraphernal property. YES

Ratio:
Article 1387 of the Civil Code says that the fruits of the paraphernal property, which are
conveyed in trust, belong to the conjugal partnership, management of which belongs to the
husband of the grantor. However, according to the deed of trust, the grantor neither parts with
nor conveys the rent of her paraphernal property. Trust instrument merely authorized Peoples
Bank and Trust Company to collect rent of paraphernal property. Such act was merely an act
of administration of the paraphernal property, which the wife has yet to deliver to her husband
for purpose of conferring management upon him.
Applying the doctrine aforementioned, the grantors husband cannot claim the fruits in
question for their conjugal partnership until a liquidation thereof has been made by her.
Husband only acquires the right to claim the fruits for the conjugal partnership upon the
liquidation by the wife.
Failure to comply with the requisite prescribed in article 1387 (consent of husband) merely
renders the contract voidable, right of action exclusively belonging to husband or his heirs.
Decision:
Petition GRANTED. CA Decision REVERSED.

Notes:
Doctrine:
To the wife belongs the management of the fruits of her paraphernal property, which has not
been delivered to her husband under the formalities prescribed by the law, while such fruits
remain unliquidated, on the ground that they answer for the necessary and indispensable
expenses incurred in the administration and preservation of the property
Manresas commentaries were cited, which according to Court, supported their ruling
- The management of paraphernal property conferred upon the wife by Article 1384 of the CC
carries with it the power to enter into contracts regarding the same, subject only to the
limitation contained in Article 1387, the wife personally defraying the expenses incurred therein
as a consequence, without prejudice to the liabilities to which such property is subject, in
accordance with the provisions of article 1385 (November, 1898)
- Management of the paraphernal property by the wife should be conducted in accordance
with the provisions of Article 1384 of the CC, which only differs from the former law in that for
such acts and contracts executed in connection with said management the wife does not need
marital consent (October 1918)
- Prohibition in Article 1387 must be construed in a restrictive manner; the wife may legally
perform every act not intended to alienate, mortgage or otherwise encumber her paraphernal
property, she being authorized to execute contracts arising from the administration of an
estate, and consequently to obtain loans, without marital consent, for the benefit of said
property (January, 1928)