Matabuena vs.

Cervantes (1971)

Summary Cases:

● Cornelia Matabuena vs. Petronila Cervantes 38 SCRA 284

Subject:

Article 133 of the Civil Code Prohibits Donation Between Spouses During Marriage (Prohibition Applies
to Common-Law Relationship); Policy of the Law to Prevent Fear of Undue and Improper Pressure;
Cervantes and Matabuena Own the Property Equally in Half

Facts:

Cornelia Matabuena, the appellant, had a brother, Felix Matabuena, who donated a piece of lot in 1956
to his common-law spouse, appellee Petronila Cervantes. Felix and Petronila got married only in 1962 or
six years after the deed of donation was executed. Five months later, or on September 1962, Felix died.

Cornelia, by reason of being the only sister and nearest collateral relative of the deceased, filed a claim
over the property, by virtue of an affidavit of self-adjudication executed by her. She thereafter had the
land declared in her name and paid the estate and inheritance taxes thereon.

The lower court of Sorsogon declared that the donation was valid inasmuch as it was made at the time
when Felix and Petronila were not yet spouses, rendering the prohibition in the Civil Code inapplicable.

Held:

Article 133 of the Civil Code Prohibits Donation Between Spouses During Marriage (Prohibition
Applies to Common-Law Relationship)

1. Art. 133 of the Civil Code considers as void a "donation between the spouses during the
marriage.”

2. Policy considerations of the most exigent character as well as the dictates of morality require
| Page 1 of 2
that the same prohibition should apply to a common-law relationship.

Policy of the Law to Prevent Fear of Undue and Improper Pressure

3. The policy of the law is to prohibit donations in favor of the other consort and his descendants
because of fear of undue and improper pressure and influence upon the donor, a prejudice
deeply rooted in our ancient law.

4. There was every reason to apply the same prohibitive policy to persons living together as
husband and wife without the benefit of nuptials.

Cervantes and Matabuena Own the Property Equally in Half

5. The lack of validity of the donation made by the deceased to defendant Petronila does not
necessarily result in plaintiff having exclusive right to the disputed property. Prior to the death of
Felix Matabuena, the relationship between him and the defendant was legitimated by their
marriage

6. She is therefore his widow. As provided for in the Civil Code, she is entitled to one-half of the
inheritance and the plaintiff, as the surviving sister, to the other half.

| Page 2 of 2