Substantial compliance

If the property subject of a case is conjugal, can any of the spouses alone file or defend the suit? This is the question raised in this case of the spouses Tito and Tita.

The ownership of the foreshore land involved here was claimed by the couple because they have occupied it since time immemorial. But they were sued by Benny who said that they were only his lessees of the property. Eventually the court ruled in favor of Benny which ordered Tito and Tita to vacate the property except that portion which the couple reclaimed from the sea and formed part of the shore. When the decision became final and a writ of demolition was issued against Tito and Tita, they filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition before the Court of Appeals against the lower court and the sheriff alleging grave abuse of discretion in ordering demolition. In the petition, only Tito signed the certificate of non-forum shopping (that there is no other action or proceeding involving the same issues before any other court) which is necessary before their petition can be given due course.

Benny thus questioned the petition and asked the Court of Appeals not to give due course to it. He contended that since the property they are claiming is allegedly conjugal, the certificate of non-forum shopping should be signed by both Tito and Tita. And since it was signed only by Tito, the petition is defective. Was Benny correct?

No. The petition signed only by Tito constitute substantial compliance with the rules on non-forum shopping. There are only two petitioners in this case and they are husband and wife. Their residence is the subject property alleged to be conjugal. Whether it is conjugal under the New Civil Code or the Family Code, the certificate signed by the husband Tito constitute sufficient compliance.

Under the New Civil Code, the husband is the administrator of the conjugal partnership. In fact he is the sole administrator and the wife is not entitled as a matter of right to join him in this endeavor. The husband may defend the conjugal partnership in a suit or action without being joined by the wife. The husband as the statutory administrator of the conjugal property could have filed the petition for certiorari and prohibition alone without the concurrence of the wife. If suits to defend an interest in the conjugal properties may be filed by the husband alone, with more reason, he may sign the certificate of non-forum shopping to be attached to the petition.

Under the Family Code, the administration of the conjugal property belongs to the husband and wife jointly. However unlike an act of alienation or encumbrance where consent of both spouses is required, joint management or administration does not require that the husband and wife always act together. Each Spouse may validly exercise full power of management alone subject to the intervention of the Court in case of disagreement by the wife over the prevailing decision of the husband. Under the Family Code therefore, the husband alone could have also filed the petition for Certiorari and Prohibition without being joined by the wife.

Besides, the husband is reasonably presumed to know personally whether his wife has filed any action or claim similar to the petition he filed concerning the conjugal property. So his certification alone is substantial (Docena vs. Lapesura, 355 SCRA 658).

*      *      *

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call tel. 7249445.

*      *      *

E-mail at: [email protected]