TERMINATION OF THE CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP.Article 126 is exactly the same as Article 99. Hence, the explanationsunder the latter article are likewise applicable to Article 126.Art. 126 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEENHUSBAND AND WIFEConjugal Partnership of Gains546 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWThe community of partnership being as permanent as thestate that produces it, there can be no doubt that the same causesinfl uence it as marriage. The fi rst of them is death. Some havebelieved that the community might continue to exist betweenthe surviving spouse and the heirs of the deceased husband orwife; but, in the opinion of Matienzo, which appears to us tobe well-founded, there are reasons for believing otherwise, towit: (1) When the marriage is dissolved, the cause that broughtabout the community ceases, for the principles of an ordinarypartnership are not applicable to this community, which isgoverned by special rules. (2) In the absence of the reasonsthat induced the legislator to establish it, the provisions oflaw governing the subject should cease to have any effect forthe community of property is admissible and proper in so faras it conforms to unity of life, to the mutual affection betweenhusband and wife, and serves as a recompense for the care ofpreserving and increasing the property; all of which terminatesby the death of one of the partners. (3) The partnership havingbeen created by law, it has no object and it is unsafe to extend iton the pretext of tacit consent (Gutierrez, 3d Ed., vol. 1, p. 579;Nable Jose v. Nable Jose, 41 Phil. 713).Under the Family Code, the partnership rules apply in a suppletorymanner but, as in the opinion above-quoted, not upon thedissolution of the conjugal partnership of gains. Also,Manresa, discussing the status of the community(socieded) after dissolution of the conjugal relations, makes thefollowing comment:“x x x The community terminates when the marriageis dissolved or annulled, or when during the marriage anagreement is entered into to divide the conjugal property. Theconjugal partnership exists therefore so long as the spousesare legally united; the important thing is not exactly the bond,the tie formed by the marriage, but the existence in the eyesof the law of the life in common. It is this life in common thatcreates common necessities and represents common efforts, theresult of which should be that both partners should share in theprofi ts. x x xWhen, for any cause, the conjugal partnership establishesupon the basis of community property is dissolved, all theprovisions x x x based upon the existence of that partnershipcease to apply.Consequently, whatever is acquired by the survivingspouse on the dissolution of the partnership by death or presumptionof death, or by either of the spouse on termination ofArt. 126547the partnership for other reasons and when this latter no longerexists, whether the acquisition be made by his or her labor, orindustry, or whether by onerous or lucrative title, it forms partof his or her own capital, in which the other consort, or his orher heirs, can claim no share (Nable Jose v. Nable Jose, 41 Phil.713).Article 127. The separation in fact betweenhusband and wife shall not affect the regime of conjugal

partnership, except that:1) The spouse who leaves the conjugal homeor refuses to live therein, without just cause, shallnot have the right to be supported;2) When the consent of one spouse to anytransaction of the other is required by law, judicialauthorization shall be obtained in a summary proceeding;3) In the absence of suffi cient conjugal partnershipproperty, the separate property of bothspouses shall be solidarily liable for the support ofthe family. The spouse present shall, upon petitionin a summary proceeding, be given judicial authorityto administer or encumber any specifi c separateproperty of the other spouse and use the fruits orproceeds thereof to satisfy the latter’s share. (178a)EFFECT OF SEPARATION. Article 127 provides for the effectof separation in fact between husband and wife. Article 127 is exactlythe same as Article 100. Hence, the explanation made in the latterarticle is applicable to Article 127. The spouse who unjustifi ablyleaves the home is not entitled to support.Also, when the consent of one spouse to any transaction of theother is required by law, judicial authorization shall be obtained ina summary proceeding. It must be important to note that, in thiscase, the guilt of the party in leaving the house is not material. Theone who unjustifi ably separated from the other spouse may himselfor herself avail of this remedy provided by law.As to item number three (3) of Article 127, it must be importantto note that any debt incurred for the support of the family is aliability of the conjugal partnership of gains. Hence, even if one of thespouses left the conjugal home, with or without justifi able reasons,Art. 127 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEENHUSBAND AND WIFEConjugal Partnership of Gains548 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWany debt incurred by any spouse for the benefi t of the family shallbe chargeable to the community property. Their separation in factwill not justify the non-liability of the community property (Garciav. Cruz, 25 SCRA 225).Article 128. If a spouse without just causeabandons the other or fails to comply with his orher obligations to the family, the aggrieved spousemay petition the court for receivership, for judicialseparation of property, or for authority to bethe sole administrator of the conjugal partnershipproperty, subject to such precautionary conditionsas the court may impose.The obligations to the family mentioned in thepreceding paragraph refer to marital, parental orproperty relations.A spouse is deemed to have abandoned theother when he or she has left the conjugal dwellingwithout intention of returning. The spouse whohas left the conjugal dwelling for a period of threemonths or has failed within the same period to giveany information as to his or her whereabouts shallbe prima facie presumed to have no intention of returning

to the conjugal dwelling. (167a, 191a)ABANDONMENT. Article 128 is exactly the same as Article101. Hence, the explanations made in the latter article are applicableto Article 128. Articles 128 and 101 give an aggrieved spouse, who isthe co-owner of the properties, the right to bring an action to protecthis or her interest and her right thereto even before the liquidationor dissolution of the conjugal partnership of gains or the absolutecommunity of property (Enriquez v. Court of Appeals, 104 SCRA656).Section 7. LIQUIDATION OF THE CONJUGALPARTNERSHIP ASSETS AND LIABILITIESArticle 129. Upon the dissolution of the conjugalpartnership regime, the following procedureshall apply:1) An inventory shall be prepared, listingseparately all the properties of the conjugalArts. 128-129549partnership and the exclusive properties of eachspouse;2) Amounts advanced by the conjugal partnershipin payment of personal debts and obligationsof either spouse shall be credited to the conjugalpartnership as an asset thereof;3) Each spouse shall be reimbursed for theuse of his or her exclusive funds in the acquisitionof property or for the value of his or her exclusiveproperty, the ownership of which has been vestedby law in the conjugal partnership;4) The debts and obligations of the conjugalpartnership shall be paid out of the conjugal assets.In case of insuffi ciency of said assets, the spousesshall be solidarily liable for the unpaid balancewith their separate properties, in accordance withthe provisions of paragraph (2) of Article 121;5) Whatever remains of the exclusive propertiesof the spouses shall thereafter be deliveredto each of them;6) Unless the owner had been indemnifi edfrom whatever source, the loss or deterioration ofmovables used for the benefi t of the family, belongingto either spouse, even due to fortuitous event,shall be paid to said spouse from the conjugal funds,if any;7) The net remainder of the conjugal partnershipproperties shall constitute the profi ts,which shall be divided equally between husbandand wife, unless a different proportion or divisionwas agreed upon in the marriage settlements or unlessthere has been voluntary waiver or forfeitureof such share as provided in this Code;8) The presumptive legitimes of the commonchildren shall be delivered upon partition in accordancewith Article 51;9) In the partition of the properties, the conjugaldwelling and the lot on which it is situated

shall, unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties,Art. 129 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEENHUSBAND AND WIFEConjugal Partnership of Gains550 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWbe adjudicated to the spouse with whom the majorityof the common children choose to remain.Children below the age of seven years are deemedto have chosen the mother, unless the court has decidedotherwise. In case there is no such majority,the court shall decide, taking into considerationthe best interest of said children. (181a, 182a, 183a,184a, 185a)LIQUIDATION OF PARTNERSHIP. The conjugal partnershipmay be liquidated by extrajudicial settlement, ordinary action ofpartition, or by way of testate or intestate proceedings (Villocino v.Doyon, 63 SCRA 460).INVENTORY. The process of making an inventory is the sameas that in the absolute community of property contained in Article102(1). All properties or assets at the time of the dissolution, whetherbelonging to the conjugal partnership or separate property of thespouses, must be inventoried. They must all be itemized and usuallyvalued. Under Article 132, the Rules of Court on the administrationof estates of deceased persons shall be observed in the appraisaland sale of property of the conjugal partnership, and other matterswhich are not expressly determined in this Chapter. Relevantly, it iserror to determine the amount to be divided by adding up the profi tswhich had been made on each year of the community’s continuanceand saying that the result thereof is that amount (De la Rama v. Dela Rama, 7 Phil. 745). In the appraisal of the properties, it is not thepurchase but the market or, in default thereof, the assessed value atthe time of the liquidation that must be taken into account (Pradov. Natividad, 47 Phil. 775). However, the process of liquidation maytake some time. If the proceedings take a long time and the valueshave suffered some alterations, there is nothing to prevent a newvaluation when the last stage is reached, i.e., the actual division orpartition comes, so long as all the properties are newly appraisedin reference to the same period of time. There is no law or doctrinethat a prior appraisal is conclusive upon the parties and the courts(Padilla v. Paterno, 93 Phil. 884).CREDITS IN FAVOR OF PARTNERSHIP. Any amountadvanced during the marriage by the conjugal partnership in favorof any of the spouses shall be credited to the conjugal partnershipas an asset. Thus, the advances made by the conjugal partnershipof gains in paying the support of the illegitimate child of eitherspouse, the personal debts contracted before the marriage which didArt. 129551not redound to the benefi t of the family and the payments of fi nesand pecuniary indemnities for which the spouse was made liableand which did not redound to the benefi t of the family, providedfor in Article 122, shall be considered as assets. Also, in cases ofproperty bought by installments under Article 118 where conjugalfunds and separate funds were used and where the property wasowned separately by either of the spouses, the amount of conjugalfunds used for completing the installment purchase shall likewise

be considered as an asset owing to the conjugal partnership of gains.This is also true with respect to advances made by the conjugalproperty involving charges relative to the onerous donations madein favor of a particular spouse (Article 114).REIMBURSEMENT IN FAVOR OF SPOUSE. If separatefunds of any of the spouses are used to buy conjugal property,such amount shall be reimbursed to the spouse. Also, the conjugalpartnership shall reimburse the wife for the value of exclusiveproperties, the ownership of which has been vested by law in theconjugal partnership, as in the case described in Article 120 of theFamily Code.In a case where a building separately owned by the wife wastorn down to make way for the construction of new buildings ownedby the conjugal partnership property, the value of the torn buildingshould be paid by the conjugal partnership to the separate spouseat the time of liquidation considering that the tearing down of thebuilding benefi ted the partnership. Thus, in the case of In re Padilla,74 Phil. 377, the Supreme Court said:The next question of law is whether the value of theparaphernal buildings which were demolished to make possiblethe construction of new ones, at the expense of the conjugalpartnership, should be reimbursed to the wife. Such tearingdown of buildings was done with regard to the Arquiza, JuanLuna and Martin Ocampo properties. Appellant maintains thatit is doubtful if these buildings had any value at the time theywere destroyed, and that there is no evidence that the conjugalpartnership realized any benefi t therefrom. However, we arecertain these old buildings had some value, though small, and itwill be the duty of the commissioners mentioned in the judgmentappealed from, to assess that value. We entertain no doubt thatthe conjugal partnership derived a positive advantage from thedemolition, which made it possible to erect new constructionsfor the partnership. It is but just, therefore, that the value ofthe old buildings at the time they were torn down should beArt. 129 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEENHUSBAND AND WIFEConjugal Partnership of Gains552 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWpaid to the wife. We dismiss, as without any merit whatever,the appellant’s contention that because Article 1404, par. 2 ofthe Civil Code does not provide for the reimbursement of thevalue of demolished improvements, the wife should not beindemnifi ed. Suffi ce it to mention the ancient maxim of theRoman law, “Jure naturae aequum est, meminem cum alteriusdetrimento et injuria fi eri locupletiorem” which was restated bythe Partidas in these terms: “Ninguno non deue enriquecersetortizeramente con dano de otro.” When the statutes are silentor ambiguous, this is one of those fundamental principles whichthe courts invoke in order to arrive at a solution that wouldrespond to the vehement urge of conscience.PAYMENT OF DEBTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF PARTNERSHIP.The partnership during its existence may have incurreddebts and obligations such as those enumerated in Article 121. Theyshould be paid. It is interesting to note that, under the procedurelaid down in Article 129, the reimbursement of the spouses for advancesthey made in favor of the conjugal partnership or for thevalue of their separate property which, by law, was vested to thepartnership, has to be paid fi rst before paying the other debts andobligations of the conjugal partnership.

In the event that the conjugal partnership is terminated, Article310 of the Civil Code provides that the construction of a tombstoneor mausoleum shall be part of the funeral expenses, and shall bechargeable to the conjugal partnership property, if the deceased isone of the spouses.In case of insuffi ciency of said assets, the spouses shall besolidarily liable for the unpaid balance with their separate properties,in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (2) of Article 121.DELIVERY OF SEPARATE PROPERTIES. The exclusiveproperties are owned by either of the spouses. Hence, it is but properto immediately deliver from the inventory what they respectivelyown so that they can immediately use the same.DIVISION OF NET REMAINDER. The interest of the partiesis limited to the net remainder which constitutes the profi ts of theconjugal partnership property. As clearly seen, until a liquidationhas been made, it is impossible to say whether or not there will bea net remainder to be divided between the parties (Nable Jose v.Nable Jose, 41 Phil. 713). The sharing will be equal unless thereis a different proportion or division agreed upon in the marriagesettlement, or unless there has been a voluntary waiver of suchArt. 129553share as provided for in the Family Code. The waiver, however,must be valid. If the waiver of rights refers to those made duringthe subsistence of the conjugal partnership of gains, such waiveris invalid and ineffective as it is prohibited under Article 107 inrelation to Article 89. A valid waiver can only occur upon a judicialseparation of property or after the marriage has been dissolved orannulled and must be contained in a public instrument, as providedfor under the second paragraph of Article 107 in relation to Article89.In case of annulment of marriage, the conjugal partnershipproperty shall be dissolved and liquidated, but if either spousecontracted said marriage in bad faith, his or her share of the netprofi ts of the conjugal partnership property shall be forfeited infavor of the common children, or if there are none, the children ofthe guilty spouse by a previous marriage, or in default of children,the innocent spouse (Article 50, in relation to Article 43[2]).It must likewise be recalled that in cases of legal separationand annulment of marriage, the party in bad faith shall forfeit hisshare in the net profi ts which shall be the increase in value betweenthe market value of the community property at the time of thecelebration of the marriage and the market value at the time of itsdissolution.In case the marriage is judicially nullifi ed and when theinformal civil relationship is governed by Article 147 and when onlyone of the parties to a void marriage is in good faith, the share ofthe party in bad faith in the co-ownership shall be forfeited in favorof their common children. In case of default of or waiver by any orall of the common children or their descendants, each vacant shareshall belong to the respective surviving descendants. In the absenceof descendants, such share shall belong to the innocent party. Inall cases, the forfeiture shall take place upon the termination ofcohabitation. This rule shall likewise apply in cases of void marriageswhere the property relationship is governed by Article 148. However,this rule will not apply to a subsequent void marriage as a result of

the non-observance of Article 40 in relation to Articles 52 and 53. Inthis case, the rule that will apply is Article 50 in relation to Article43(2), which is the forfeiture rule in case of the liquidation of theconjugal partnership of gains.DELIVERY OF THE PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME. The presumptivelegitime is delivered only after the fi nality of a judicialdecree of annulment on grounds provided in Article 45 or of nullityArt. 129 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEENHUSBAND AND WIFEConjugal Partnership of Gains554 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWof a subsequent void marriage under Article 40. The law clearly providesthat such delivery should only be “in accordance with Article51” which only refers to the termination of marriage either by anannulment or a nullity judgment in the proper cases. Hence, deliveryof the presumptive legitime need not be made in cases of legalseparation or in case of a void marriage not as a result of the non-observanceof Article 40 in relation to Articles 52 and 53. Consideringthat the delivery of the presumptive legitime shall be provided forin the fi nal judgment, the children or their guardian, or the trusteeof their property may ask for the enforcement of the judgment inaccordance with the last paragraph of Article 51. The value of thepresumptive legitimes of all the children, computed as of the date ofthe fi nal judgment of the trial court, shall be delivered in cash, propertyor sound securities, unless the parties, by mutual agreementjudicially approved, had already provided for such matters (Article51).CONJUGAL DWELLING. Unless otherwise agreed upon bythe parties, in the partition of the properties, the conjugal dwellingand the lot on which it is situated shall be adjudicated to the spousewith whom the majority of the common children choose to remain.Children below the age of seven years are deemed to have chosenthe mother, unless the court has decided otherwise. In case there isno such majority, the court shall decide, taking into considerationthe best interests of said children.Article 130. Upon the termination of the marriageby death, the conjugal partnership propertyshall be liquidated in the same proceeding for thesettlement of the estate of the deceased.If no judicial settlement proceeding is instituted,the surviving spouse shall liquidate the conjugalpartnership property either judicially or extra-judicially within one year from the death of thedeceased spouse. If upon the lapse of the one-yearperiod no liquidation is made, any disposition orencumbrance involving the conjugal partnershipproperty of the terminated marriage shall be void.Should the surviving spouse contract a subsequentmarriage without compliance with theforegoing requirements, a mandatory regime ofcomplete separation of property shall govern theproperty relations of the subsequent marriage. (n)Art. 130555IDENTITY OF PROVISIONS. Article 130 relative to theconjugal partnership of gains and Article 103 in connection with

the absolute community of property are identical. Hence, theexplanations under Article 103 are applicable to Article 130.In Estonia v. Court of Appeals, 266 SCRA 627, the SupremeCourt ruled that the statement in a Transfer Certifi cate of Titledescribing the owner as married to somebody does not by itself giverise to the presumption of conjugality. Hence, in the absence of proofthat the property was acquired during the marriage, the propertyshall be considered as owned by the person stated in the certifi catedespite a description that he or she is married to someone. It shallnot be considered conjugal. Accordingly, in case of death of theowner, this exclusive property shall be co-owned by the survivingspouse and his or her heirs. Creditors of the surviving spouse canonly attach the share or interest of the surviving spouse in the coownershipand not the whole of the estate of the deceased, becausethis will greatly prejudice the other heirs.Article 131. Whenever the liquidation of theconjugal partnership properties of two or moremarriages contracted by the same person beforethe effectivity of this Code is carried out simultaneously,the respective capital, fruits and incomeof each partnership shall be determined upon suchproof as may be considered according to the rulesof evidence. In case of doubt as to which partnershipthe existing properties belong, the same shallbe divided between and among the different partnershipsin proportion to the capital and durationof each. (189a)SIMULTANEOUS LIQUIDATION OF CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIPCONSTITUTED PRIOR TO FAMILY CODE. Article 131has basically the same application as that of Article 104. Wheneverthe liquidation of the conjugal partnership properties of two or moremarriages contracted by the same person before the effectivity ofthis Code is carried out simultaneously, the respective capital, fruitsand income of each partnership shall be determined upon such proofas may be considered according to the rules of evidence.In case of doubt as to which partnership the existing propertiesbelong, the same shall be divided between the different partnershipsin proportion to the capital and duration of each. This has beenArt. 131 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEENHUSBAND AND WIFEConjugal Partnership of Gains556 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWsquarely applied by the Supreme Court in Dael v. IAC, 171 SCRA524, thus:Inevitably, the problem is how to apportion the propertiesinvolved between the two conjugal partnerships. On this score,guidance should be sought from the provisions of the Civil Codeto the effect that whenever the liquidation of the partnership oftwo or more marriages contracted by the same person should becarried out at the same time and there is no evidence to showthe capital or the conjugal property belonging to each of thepartnerships to be liquidated, the total mass of the partnershipproperty shall be divided between the different partnerships inproportion to the duration of each and to the property belongingto the respective spouses.The fi rst marriage existed for approximately fi fteen (15)years (1942 to 1957), while the second marriage lasted for

fourteen (14) years (1958 to 1972). Applying the aforestatedrule, the fi rst conjugal partnership will be prorated a shareof fi fteen twenty-ninths (15/29) of the properties included inthe inventory submitted on August 30, 1978, while the secondconjugal partnership will be fourteen twenty-ninths (14/29)thereof. Not to be included, however, are the real propertieslisted in the supplementary inventory fi led on January 16,1979, because they defi nitely belong to the estate of Cesario asthe latter’s inheritance from his parents, Bartolome Cabutihanand Natividad Dael.If there are two or more conjugal partnership properties oftwo marriages which have not yet been liquidated, the subsequentpartnership cannot be liquidated without the liquidation of the priorone. Thus, it has been held:The situation as regards the children by the fi rst marriageis, however materially different. Indeed, the contract, ExhibitQ, purports to dissolve and, hence, liquidate the conjugalpartnership of the petitioners. But, this liquidation should notand cannot be effected without a liquidation of the conjugalpartnership between Jose Bermas, Sr. and his fi rst wife, inwhich the children by fi rst marriage certainly have an interest(Onas v. Javillo, 59 Phil. 733). At any rate, said Exhibit Qcould adversely affect the rights of said children by the fi rstmarriage, for, “in case of doubt, the partnership property shallbe divided between the different (conjugal) partnerships inproportion to the duration of each and to the property belongingto the respective spouses,’’ as provided in Article 189 of theaforementioned (Article 1431 of the Spanish Civil Code) [ArticleArt. 131557131 of the Family Code]. Hence, it is essential that the saidchildren be personally notifi ed of the instant proceedings, andthat, for this purpose, their names and addresses, as well asthe addresses of the children of herein petitioners, be furnished(In re Voluntary Dissolution of the Conjugal Partnership of JoseBermas, Sr. and Pilar Manuel Bermas, 14 SCRA 327).Article 132. The Rules of Court on the administrationof estates of deceased persons shall be observedin the appraisal and sale of property of theconjugal partnership, and other matters which arenot expressly determined in this Chapter. (187a)Article 133. From the common mass of propertysupport shall be given to the surviving spouseand to the children during the liquidation of theinventoried property and until what belongs tothem is delivered; but from this shall be deductedthe amount received for support which exceeds thefruits or rents pertaining to them. (188a)ADVANCEMENT. As previously discussed, once a spouse dies,the surviving spouse and the children become co-heirs of the estateleft by the deceased. Hence, during liquidation they have a rightto get certain amounts from what they technically own to supportthemselves. The amount which they are allowed to get must at leastbe equivalent to the fruits or rents arising from the share which theywill eventually obtain after liquidation. If what they got exceededthe fruits of their share, the excess shall be taken from the part ofthe property which has been given to them as their separate propertyafter liquidation. Hence, the advance from the common mass of

property made during the liquidation shall be paid fi rst by the fruitsof their respective shares. If the fruits are insuffi cient because theiradvances exceeded the amount of the fruits, then the excess shall betaken from the particular share delivered to them after liquidation(See Santos v. Bartolome, 44 Phil. 76). Thus, the allowances forsupport to the children and the spouse of the deceased pendingliquidation of the estate are subject to collation and deductible fromtheir share of the inheritance in so far as they exceed what they areentitled to as fruits or income (Lesaca v. Lesaca, 91 Phil. 135).It must be observed, however, that only the surviving spouseand the children are entitled to get the allowances for supportcontemplated in Article 133. Other heirs, such as a grandchild, areArts. 132-133 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEENHUSBAND AND WIFEConjugal Partnership of Gains558 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWnot included (See Babao v. Villavicencio, 44 Phil. 921). Also, the factthat the children for example are already of age, gainfully employedor married is of no moment as these factors should not be takeninto account in relation to the determination of the rights of thementioned heirs (children and surviving spouse) under Article 133(Santero v. CFI, 153 SCRA 728).In one particular case, the Supreme Court held that the expenseof the maintenance and support of a widow at the time when theconjugal partnership has not yet been liquidated was property borneby the administrator of the deceased husband, but the expenditurewas in the nature of mere advancement and is to be deducted fromthe share pertaining to the heirs of the widow in so far as it exceedswhat they may have been entitled to as fruits or income. However,there must be a showing of the source, or sources, from which thefunds used for the maintenance and support of the widow werederived; and if it should appear that any part thereof was derivedfrom the net income of the property of the widow, such amountshould not be charged against her share (Santos v. Bartolome, 44Phil. 76).Arts. 132-133559

Chapter 5SEPARATION OF PROPERTYOF THE SPOUSE AND ADMINISTRATIONOF COMMON PROPERTY BY ONE SPOUSEDURING THE MARRIAGEArticle 134. In the absence of an express declarationin the marriage settlements, the separationof property between spouses during the marriageshall not take place except by judicial order. Suchjudicial separation of property may either be voluntaryor for suffi cient cause. (190a)JUDICIAL SEPARATION OF PROPERTY. If the husbandand wife, prior to the marriage, did not execute any written maritalagreement providing that the separation of property regime willgovern their property relationship, they cannot, after the marriageceremony, alter their property relationship to a separate propertyregime without mandatory judicial approval. This is the case whetherthe separation is by agreement of parties under Article 136 or for

suffi cient cause under Article 135 of the Family Code. Commentingon the regime of separation of property under the Civil Code, theSupreme Court, in Garcia v. Manzano, 103 Phil. 798, stated that:consistently with its policy of discouraging a regime ofseparation as not in harmony with the unity of the familyand the mutual help and protection expected of the spouses,the Civil Code requires that separation of property shall notprevail unless expressly stipulated in the marriage settlementsbefore the union is solemnized or by judicial decree during theexistence of the marriage.In most cases, judicial approval of separation of property issought because the spouses have already separated. In this regard,the Supreme Court said that:559560 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWin so approving the regime of separation of property of thespouses and the dissolution of their conjugal partnership, thisCourt does not thereby accord recognition to nor legalize defacto separation of the spouses, which xxx is a “state which isabnormal and fraught with grave dangers to all concerned.”We would like to douse the momentary seething emotions ofcouples who, at the slightest ruffl ing of domestic tranquility— brought about “by mere austerity of temper, petulance ofmanners, rudeness of language, a want of civil attention andaccommodation, even occasional sallies of passion” withoutmore — would be minded to separate from each other (Lacson v.San Jose-Lacson, 24 SCRA 837).Article 135. Any of the following shall be consideredsuffi cient cause for judicial separation ofproperty:1) That the spouse of the petitioner has beensentenced to a penalty which carries with it civilinterdiction;2) That the spouse of the petitioner has beenjudicially declared an absentee;3) That loss of parental authority of thespouse of petitioner has been decreed by the court;4) That the spouse of the petitioner hasabandoned the latter or failed to comply with hisor her obligations to the family as provided for inArticle 101;5) That the spouse granted the power ofadministration in the marriage settlements hasabused that power; and6) That at the time of the petition, the spouseshave been separated in fact for at least one yearand reconciliation is highly improbable.In the cases provided for in numbers (1), (2)and (3), the presentation of the fi nal judgmentagainst the guilty or absent spouse shall be enoughbasis for the grant of the decree of judicial separationof property. (191a)CIVIL INTERDICTION. The accessory penalty of civil interdictiondeprives the offender during the time of his or her sentenceArt. 135561of the rights of parental authority, or guardianship, either as to theperson or property of any ward, of marital authority, of the right

to manage his property and of the right to dispose of such propertyby any act or any conveyance inter vivos (Revised Penal Code, Article34). The fi nal decision of the court rendered against the erringspouse embodying the penalty of civil interdiction is enough for thecourt to approve a judicial separation of property in this case.DECLARATION OF ABSENCE. Two years having elapsedwithout any news about the absentee or since the receipt of the lastnews, and fi ve years in case the absentee has left a person in chargeof the administration of his property, his absence may be declared(Article 384, Civil Code). The spouse present, the heirs instituted ina will who may present an authentic copy of the same, the relativeswho may succeed by the law of intestacy, and those who may haveover the property of the absentee some right subordinated to thecondition of his or her death, may ask for the judicial declaration ofabsence (Article 385 of the Civil Code). The judicial declaration ofabsence shall not take effect until six months after its publicationin a newspaper of general circulation (Article 386, Civil Code). Thefi nal decision of the court declaring the spouse absent is enough forthe court to approve a judicial separation of property in this case.LOSS OF PARENTAL AUTHORITY. Loss of parental authorityunder Article 135(3) refers to the loss of such authority over thecommon child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, of the spouse ofthe petitioner and the petitioner, or over the child, whether legitimateor illegitimate, of the spouse of the petitioner with anotherperson. The law does not distinguish.It must be observed that one of the liabilities of the absolutecommunity of property or the conjugal partnership of gains is thesupport of the common children and the legitimate children ofeither spouse (Articles 94[1] and 121[1]). Subject to reimbursementfrom the separate property of the liable spouse at the time of theliquidation of the absolute community property or of the conjugalpartnership of gains, the liabilities even include the support ofthe illegitimate children of one of the spouses provided certainconditions are observed (Articles 94[9] and 122). Thus, it can beseen that the exposure of the absolute community of property or theconjugal partnership of gains extends to the support of children whomay not even be related to one of the spouses. Indeed, the exposureis predicated on mere fi liation. Accordingly, in the event that loss ofparental authority has been judicially decreed against a spouse overArt. 135 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFESeparation of Property of the Spouse and Administrationof Common Property by One Spouse During the Marriage562 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWa common legitimate or illegitimate child with the other spouse, thelatter can seek for the judicial separation of property so that his orher interest in the community property or the partnership assetscan be immediately allocated to him or her. Since the relationshipof the spouses is already damaged, there is a need to protect his orher interest in the assets by way of partition lest the guilty spouseundertakes an act very prejudicial to the innocent spouse’s propertyrights in the community property or the conjugal partnership.Also, in the event that loss of parental authority has beenjudicially decreed against a spouse in connection with his or herlegitimate child by a previous marriage, or an illegitimate childwith another person, it is but proper to allow the other spouse toimmediately ask for a judicial separation of property so that his or

her share and interest in the absolute community property or theconjugal partnership property can be immediately allocated to her,thereby removing it from being further exposed to liability in favorof children who are not even related to him or her. But to be able todo so, the petitioning spouse must show a prior judicial declarationof loss of parental authority of the other spouse.Article 229, the third paragraph of Article 231, and Article232 of the Family Code enumerate the grounds for the terminationof parental authority. To constitute a suffi cient cause, a courtdecision terminating parental authority must be on specifi c groundsprovided by law. Generally, the loss of parental authority shouldindicate malice, abuse, bad faith or culpable negligence on the partof the spouse of the petitioner. Thus, if a spouse sexually abusedhis or her child with the petitioner, the latter can ask the court forthe termination of parental authority of the abusing parent. He orshe can likewise seek the separation of the community property orthe partnership property after the court decrees the loss of parentalauthority. The fi nal decision of the court terminating parentalauthority is enough for the court to approve a judicial separation ofproperty in this case.ABANDONMENT AND FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH OBLIGATIONSTO THE FAMILY. The concept of abandonment here andthe failure to comply with obligations to the family are the same asthat in Article 101. Hence, the explanations under Article 101 areapplicable to Article 135(4). A spouse is deemed to have abandonedthe other when he or she has left the conjugal dwelling without anyintention of returning and with an intent to absolutely forego his orher family duties. The spouse who has left the conjugal dwelling forArt. 135563a period of three months or has failed within the same period to giveany information as to his or her whereabouts shall be prima faciepresumed to have no intention of returning to the conjugal dwelling(Article 101). Failure to comply with the obligations of the familyrefers to marital, parental or property relations (Ibid.).ABUSE OF ADMINISTRATION. The administration of theabsolute community properties or the conjugal properties or thecommunity properties may be granted in favor of anyone of the spousesin the marriage settlement entered into prior to the marriage. Incase such spouse abuses his or her powers of administration, judicialseparation of property may be availed of by the aggrieved spouseto avoid further depletion of his or her interest in the properties.For “abuse” to exist, it is not enough that the spouse granted thepower of administration performs an act or acts prejudicial tothe other spouse. Nor is it suffi cient that he or she commits actsinjurious to the community of property or the conjugal partnershipproperty, for these may be the result of mere ineffi cient or negligentadministration. Abuse connotes willful and utter disregard of theinterests of the partnership, evidenced by a repetition of deliberateacts and/or omissions prejudicial to the latter (De la Cruz v. De laCruz, 130 Phil. 324). Hence, it has been held that mere refusal orfailure of the husband as administrator of the conjugal partnershipto inform the wife of the progress of the family business does notconstitute abuse of administration (De la Cruz v. De la Cruz, 130Phil. 324).SEPARATION IN FACT. At the time of the petition, the

spouses must have been separated in fact for at least one year andreconciliation is highly improbable.Article 136. The spouses may jointly fi le a verified petition with the court for the voluntary dissolutionof the absolute community or the conjugalpartnership of gains, and for the separation oftheir common properties.All creditors of the absolute community or ofthe conjugal partnership of gains, as well as thepersonal creditors of the spouse, shall be listed inthe petition and notifi ed of the fi ling thereof. Thecourt shall take measures to protect the creditorsand other persons with pecuniary interest. (191a)Art. 136 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFESeparation of Property of the Spouse and Administrationof Common Property by One Spouse During the Marriage564 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWVOLUNTARY SEPARATION. The spouses may agree on theseparation of their absolute community of property regime or theirconjugal partnership of gains. Before being effective, such separationmust have court approval. Otherwise, it shall be void. The petitionto be fi led in court need not state any reason for the conversion.The agreement of the parties is enough. But if the reason is statedand the same is against public policy, the court must reject theagreement. The petition for the approval to separate the propertymay even embody the plan or scheme as to how the properties areto be separated which, if not contrary to law and public policy,shall be granted by the court. The agreement for the division of thecommunity property or the conjugal partnership property must beequal unless a different proportion or division has been agreed uponin the marriage settlement or unless there has been a valid waiverof such share as provided in the Family Code (Article 102[4] andArticle 129[7]). A valid waiver may be made upon judicial separationof property.The agreement for voluntary separation of property takeseffect from the time of the judicial order decreeing the separationof the properties and not from the signing of the agreement. Thus,in Toda, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, 183 SCRA 713, the Supreme Courtruled and stated thus:We are in agreement with the holding of the Court ofAppeals that the compromise agreement became effective onlyon June 9, 1981, the date when it was approved by the trialcourt, and not on March 30, 1981 when it was signed by theparties. Under Article 190 of the Civil Code [now Article 134 ofthe Family Code], “in the absence of an express declaration inthe marriage settlements, the separation of property betweenspouses during the marriage shall not take place save in virtueof judicial order.” Hence, the separation of property is noteffected by the mere execution of the contract or agreement ofthe parties, but by the decree of the court approving the same.It, therefore, becomes effective only upon judicial approval,without which it is void. Furthermore, Article 192 of the saidCode (now Article 137 of the Family Code) explicitly providesthat the conjugal partnership is dissolved only upon theissuance of a decree of separation of property.Consequently, the conjugal partnership of Benigno andRose Marie should be considered dissolved only on June 9, 1981when the trial court approved their joint petition for voluntary

dissolution of their conjugal partnership. x x xArt. 136565All creditors of the absolute community or of the conjugalpartnership of gains, as well as the personal creditors of the spouses,shall be listed in the petition and notifi ed of the fi ling thereof. Thecourt shall take measures to protect the creditors and other personswith pecuniary interest. In case of a waiver of one of the spouses,any creditor of the spouse who made such waiver may petition thecourt to rescind the waiver to the extent of the amount suffi cient tocover the amount of the credit (Article 89 and Article 107).In De Ugalde v. De Yasi, G.R. No. 130623, February 29,2008, 547 SCRA 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that the when thejudgment by way of compromise agreement dissolving the conjugalpartnership of spouses has become fi nal and executory, the fact thatthe creditors were not notifi ed will not invalidate such a judgment.According to the Supreme Court, a judgment upon a compromiseagreement has all the force and effect of any other judgment, andconclusive only upon parties thereto and their privies, and notbinding on third persons who are not parties to it. In the De Ugaldecase, the Supreme Court was interpreting the provision on noticeto creditors in Article 191 of the Civil Code which was essentiallyadopted by the second paragraph of Article 136.Article 137. Once the separation of propertyhas been decreed, the absolute community or theconjugal partnership of gains shall be liquidated inconformity with this Code.During the pendency of the proceedings forseparation of property, the absolute community orthe conjugal partnership shall pay for the supportof the spouses and their children. (192a)LIQUIDATION. According to Article 137, the liquidation mustbe made in conformity with the Family Code. Hence, the processeslaid down in Articles 102 and 129 must be observed. However,the delivery of the presumptive legitime provided for in the saidprovisions need not be complied with, as such delivery specifi callyapplies only in case the marriage is either judicially annulledunder Article 45 or declared void for non-observance of Article 40(i.e., the subsequent void marriage). The division of the communityproperty or the conjugal partnership property must be equal unlessa different proportion or division has been agreed upon in themarriage settlement or unless there has been a valid waiver of suchArt. 137 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFESeparation of Property of the Spouse and Administrationof Common Property by One Spouse During the Marriage566 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWshare as provided in the Family Code (Article 102[4] and Article129[7]). During the pendency of the proceedings for separation ofproperty, the absolute community or the conjugal partnership shallpay for the support of the spouses and their children.In Maquilan v. Maquilan, G.R. No. 155409, June 8, 2007,524 SCRA 167, the Supreme Court ruled that a partial voluntaryseparation of property agreed upon by the parties via a compromiseagreement duly approved by the court prior to the judicial declarationof nullity of marriage is valid.Article 138. After dissolution of the absolute

community or the conjugal partnership, the provisionson complete separation of property shall apply.(191a)In case of judicial separation of property, whether voluntary orinvoluntary, the mere fi ling of the petition to initiate the proceedingshall not automatically result in the dissolution of the absolutecommunity of property or the conjugal partnership of gains. It isthe fi nality of the decision of the court decreeing the separationwhich dissolves the same. Therefore, it is only from that time thatthe complete separation of property applies. Hence, in the samevein, as to properties each of the spouses may have acquired orexpenses each of them may have incurred after the fi nality of thejudicial separation decree, the same belong exclusively to either ofthem independently of the community properties or the conjugalpartnership properties.Article 139. The petition for separation ofproperty and the fi nal judgment granting the sameshall be recorded in the proper local civil registriesand registries of property. (193a)Article 140. The separation of property shallnot prejudice the rights previously acquired bycreditors. (194a)RIGHTS OF CREDITORS. The recording in the civil registryof the petition of the separation of property and the fi nal judgment isto aid present and future creditors in determining whether an assetof a spouse is conjugal or really separate. Likewise, the separationof property shall not prejudice the rights previously acquired by thecreditors. In fact, if there has been a waiver on the part of one of theArts. 138-140567spouses relative to a property in the regime sought to be liquidated,any creditor of the spouse who made such waiver may petition thecourt to rescind the waiver to the extent of the amount suffi cient tocover the amount of the credit (Article 89 and Article 107).Article 141. The spouses may, in the same proceedingswhere separation of property was decreed,fi le a motion in court for a decree revivingthe property regime that existed between them beforethe separation of property in any of the followinginstances:1) When the civil interdiction terminates;2) When the absentee spouse reappears;3) When the court, being satisfi ed that thespouse granted the power of administration in themarriage settlements will not again abuse thatpower, authorizes the resumption of said administration;4) When the spouse who has left the conjugalhome without a decree of legal separation resumescommon life with the other;5) When the parental authority is judiciallyrestored to the spouse previously deprived thereof;6) When the spouses who have separatedin fact for at least one year, reconcile and resumecommon life; or7) When after voluntary dissolution of theabsolute community of property or conjugal partnership

has been judicially decreed upon the jointpetition of the spouses, they agree to the revival ofthe former property regime. No voluntary separationof property may thereafter be granted.The revival of the former property regimeshall be governed by Article 67. (195a)REVIVAL OF PREVIOUS PROPERTY REGIME. The terminationof the causes under Article 135 for which an involuntaryseparation of property has been decreed by the court constitutes thegrounds to be able to revive the previous property regime. This isArt. 141 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFESeparation of Property of the Spouse and Administrationof Common Property by One Spouse During the Marriage568 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAWclearly set out in Article 141(1) to (6). The parties, however, can fi leanother petition for judicial separation of the properties once thereare grounds again to initiate the same even if the ground invokedwere the same ground previously used.Also, in case where the previous property regime was judiciallyseparated on the basis of the voluntary agreement of the parties, theparties can revive the same upon petition in court (Article 142[7]).However, no voluntary separation of property may thereafterbe granted. If any one of the spouses gives cause for involuntaryseparation under Article 135, the proper proceedings for judicialseparation invoking any of the grounds in Article 135 can be initiatedand a proper decree of separation granted.JUDICIAL PROCEEDING FOR REVIVAL. To be able to revivethe previous property regime, the spouses should fi le a motion in thesame court proceeding where separation was decreed for a decreereviving the property regime that existed between them before theseparation of property. The agreement to revive the former propertyregime shall be executed under oath and shall specify: 1) theproperties to be contributed anew to the restored regime; 2) those tobe retained as separate properties of each spouse; and 3) the namesof all their known creditors, their addresses and the amounts owingto each. Copies of the agreement of revival and the motion for itsapproval shall be furnished to the creditors named therein. Afterdue hearing, the court shall, in its order, take measures to protectthe interest of creditors. Such order shall be recorded in the properregistries of property (See Article 67).Article 142. The administration of all classes ofexclusive property of either spouse may be transferredby the court to the other spouse:1) When one spouse becomes the guardian ofthe other;2) When one spouse is judicially declared anabsentee;3) When one spouse is sentenced to a penaltywhich carries with it civil interdiction; or4) When one spouse becomes a fugitive fromjustice or is hiding as an accused in a criminal case.If the other spouse is not qualifi ed by reason ofincompetence, confl ict of interest, or any other justArt. 142569cause, the court shall appoint a suitable person to

be the administrator. (n)GUARDIAN. When a spouse is judicially appointed guardianof his or her spouse, he or she may likewise be constituted as theadministrator of the estate of the other spouse. This is so because aspouse is already obliged by law to live with and take care of his orher spouse.ABSENTEE AND CIVIL INTERDICTION. These two groundsare exactly the same as in Article 135(1) and (2). Hence, theexplanations in the said article are applicable to Article 142(2) and(3).FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE. A fugitive from justice refersto “one who having committed or being accused of a crime in onejurisdiction is absent for any reason from that jurisdiction; specifi -cally, one who fl ees to avoid punishment’’ (Ochida v. Cabarroguis,71 SCRA 40).OTHER PERSONS AS GUARDIAN. If the other spouse isnot qualifi ed by reason of incompetence, confl ict of interest, or anyother just cause, the court shall appoint a suitable person to be theadministrator.SEPARATION IN FACT. It must be recalled also that underArticle 100(3) and Article 127(3), it is provided that the separationin fact between the spouses shall not affect the absolute communityproperty or the conjugal partnership of gains, as the case maybe, except that, in the absence of suffi cient absolute communityproperty or conjugal partnership of gains, the separate property ofboth spouses shall be solidarily liable for the support of the family.The spouse present shall, upon petition in a summary proceeding,be given judicial authority to administer or encumber any specifi cseparate property of the other spouse and use the fruits or proceedsthereof to satisfy the latter’s share.Art. 142 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFESeparation of Property of the Spouse and Administrationof Common Property by One Spouse During the Marriage570 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAW

Chapter 6REGIME OF SEPARATION OF PROPERTYArticle 143. Should the future spouses agreein the marriage settlements that their property relationsduring marriage shall be governed by theregime of separation of property, the provisions ofthis Chapter shall be suppletory. (212a)SUPPLETORY CHARACTER. In the event the contractingparties want that their property relationship shall be governed bythe regime of separation of property, they have to enter into a validmarriage settlement prior to the marriage stipulating such regime.The marriage settlement shall principally govern the regime ofseparation of property. The Family Code shall only be suppletory incharacter.Article 144. Separation of property may referto present or future property or both. It may be totalor partial. In the latter case, the property notagreed upon as separate shall pertain to the absolutecommunity. (213a)PROPERTIES INCLUDED. The parties may agree on theextent of their separation of property regime. It may involve presentor future property or both. It may be total or partial. If it is partial,

the property not agreed upon as separate shall pertain to theabsolute community.However, it is not valid for the contracting parties to agree inthe marriage settlement that the conjugal partnership of propertyor the absolute community of property shall govern their maritalproperty relationship only up to a certain time, such as up to thetenth wedding anniversary, and thereafter, the separation ofproperty regime shall commence and govern the marital property570571relationship. This is so because the provision on the separation ofproperty regime to commence on the 10th wedding anniversaryis tantamount to dissolving the absolute community property orconjugal partnership of gains by virtue of a cause or contingency notspecifi cally provided by law, particularly Articles 99 and 126 of theFamily Code.Article 145. Each spouse shall own, dispose of,possess, administer and enjoy his or her own separateestate, without need of the consent of the other.To each spouse shall belong all earnings fromhis or her profession, business or industry and allfruits, natural, industrial or civil, due or receivedduring the marriage from his or her separate property.(214a)Article 146. Both spouses shall bear the familyexpenses in proportion to their income, or, in caseof insuffi ciency or default thereof, to the currentmarket value of their separate properties.The liability of the spouses to creditors forfamily expenses shall, however, be solidary. (215a)Arts. 145-146 PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEENHUSBAND AND WIFERegime of Separation of Property572 PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS LAW

Chapter 7PROPERTY REGIME OF UNIONSWITHOUT MARRIAGEArticle 147. When a man and a woman who arecapacitated to marry each other, live exclusivelywith each other as husband and wife without thebenefi t of marriage or under a void marriage, theirwages and salaries shall be owned by them in equalshares and the property acquired by both of themthrough their work or industry shall be governedby the rules on co-ownership.In the absence of proof to the contrary, propertiesacquired while they lived together shall bepresumed to have been obtained by their joint efforts,work or industry, and shall be owned bythem in equal shares. For purposes of this Article,a party who did not participate in the acquisitionby the other party of any property shall be deemedto have contributed jointly in the acquisition thereofif the former’s efforts consisted in the care andmaintenance of the family and of the household.Neither party can encumber or dispose by acts

inter vivos of his or her share in the property acquiredduring cohabitation and owned in common,without the consent of the other, until after the terminationof their cohabitation.When only one of the parties to a void marriageis in good faith, the share of the party in badfaith in the co-ownership shall be forfeited in favorof their common children. In case of default ofor waiver by any or all of the common children ortheir descendants, each vacant share shall belong572573to the respective surviving descendants. In the absenceof descendants, such share shall belong tothe innocent party. In all cases, the forfeiture shalltake place upon termination of the cohabitation.(144a)INFORMAL CIVIL RELATIONSHIP. Though there is no technicalmarital partnership between persons living as husband andwife without being lawfully married or under a void marriage, neverthelessthere is between them an informal civil relationship whichwould entitle the parties to some rights (Lesaca v. Lesaca, 91 Phil.135). The property relationship that is created under Article 147 aswell as Article 148 is a special kind of co-ownership. Co-ownership isa form of trust and every co-owner is a trustee for the other (Mallilinv. Castillo, G.R. No. 136803, June 16, 2000).To qualify under Article 147, the man and the woman must: 1)must be capacitated to marry each other; 2) live exclusively with eachother as husband and wife; and 3) be without the benefi t of marriageor under a void marriage. All these requisites must concur. Absenceof any of these requisites will remove the contracting parties fromthe ambit of Article 147. Thus, a live-in relationship between a manand a woman without the benefi t of marriage may fall under Article147 if all the mentioned requisites are present.Pertinently, a person with legal capacity to marry is defi nedin Article 5 as “any male or female of the age of eighteen years orupwards not under any of the impediments mentioned in Articles37 and 38.” Thus, informal civil partnerships where the parties arebelow 18 years of age or those whose circumstances fall under theincestuous void marriages under Article 37 and under Article 38enumerating void marriages for reasons of public policy, cannot fallunder Article 147. Legal capacity of a person to marry must likewisehave reference to Article 39 of the Civil Code stating that familyrelation limits a person’s capacity to act. Thus, an already marriedperson has no legal capacity to remarry without the fi rst marriagehaving been previously terminated. A second marriage celebratedwhile the fi rst one is validly subsisting is bigamous.Consequently, provided there are no other circumstances tomake the marriage void under Articles 37, 38, 35(1) and (4) whichrefer to marriages between persons below eighteen years of ageand bigamous or polygamous marriage not falling under Article41, respectively, the void marriages referred to under Article