formal affixing of Norma's signature, she was surprised
CAMAISA, GR No. 147978, 2002-01-23 when respondent spouses informed her that they were backing out of the agreement because they needed Facts: "spot cash" for... the full amount of the consideration. petitioner Thelma A. Jader-Manalo allegedly came etitioner reminded respondent spouses that the across an advertisement placed by respondents, the contracts to sell had already been duly perfected and Spouses Norma Fernandez C. Camaisa and Edilberto Norma's refusal to sign the same would unduly Camaisa, in the Classified Ads Section of the newspaper prejudice petitioner. Still, Norma refused to sign the... BULLETIN TODAY in its April, 1992 issue, for the sale of contracts prompting petitioner to file a complaint for their ten-door apartment in Makati, as well as that in specific performance and damages against respondent Taytay, Rizal. spouses before the Regional Trial Court of Makati, she was interested in buying the two properties so she Branch 136 on April 29, 1992, to compel respondent negotiated for the purchase through a real estate Norma Camaisa to sign the contracts to sell. broker, Mr. Proceso Ereno, authorized by respondent... Issues: spouses. whether or not the husband may validly dispose of a Petitioner made a visual inspection of the said lots with conjugal property without the wife's written consent. the real estate broker and was shown the tax declarations, real property tax payment receipts, The issue thus posed for resolution in the trial court was location plans, and vicinity maps relating to the whether or not the contracts to sell between petitioner properties. and respondent spouses were already perfected such that the latter... could no longer back out of the Thereafter, petitioner met with the vendors who turned agreement. out to be respondent spouses. She made a definite offer to buy the properties to respondent Edilberto Ruling: Camaisa with the knowledge and conformity of his wife, The Court does not find error in the decisions of both respondent Norma Camaisa in the presence of the the trial court and the Court of Appeals. real... estate broker The law requires that the disposition of a conjugal This agreement was handwritten by petitioner and property by the husband as administrator in signed by Edilberto appropriate cases requires the written consent of the When petitioner pointed out the conjugal nature of the wife, otherwise, the disposition is void. Thus, Article properties, Edilberto assured her of his wife's 124 of the Family Code provides: conformity and consent to the sale. Art. 124. The administration and enjoyment of the The formal... typewritten Contracts to Sell were conjugal partnership property shall belong to both thereafter prepared by petitioner. The following day, spouses jointly. In case of disagreement, the husband's petitioner, the real estate broker and Edilberto met in decision shall prevail, subject to recourse to the court the latter's office for the formal signing of the by the wife for a proper remedy, which must be... typewritten Contracts to Sell. availed of within five years from the date of the contract implementing such decision. After Edilberto signed the... contracts, petitioner delivered to him two checks, namely, UCPB Check No. In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or 62807 dated April 15, 1992 for P200,000.00 and UCPB otherwise unable to participate in the administration of Check No. 62808 also dated April 15, 1992 for the conjugal properties, the other spouse may assume P100,000.00 in the presence of the real estate broker sole powers of administration. These powers do not and an employee in Edilberto's... office. include the powers of disposition or encumbrance which must have... the authority of the court or the The contracts were given to Edilberto for the formal written consent of the other spouse. In the absence affixing of his wife's signature. of such authority or consent the disposition or The following day, petitioner received a call from encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction respondent Norma, requesting a meeting to clarify shall be construed as a continuing offer on the part of some provisions of the contracts. the... consenting spouse and the third person, and may be perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance During the meeting, handwritten notations were made by the other spouse or authorization by the court on the contracts to sell, so they arranged to incorporate before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors. the notations and to meet again for the formal signing of the contracts The properties subject of the contracts in this case were conjugal; hence, for the contracts to sell to be effective, When petitioner met again with respondent spouses the consent of both husband and wife must concur. and the real estate broker at Edilberto's office for the Respondent Norma Camaisa admittedly did not give her agreement. Hence, she filed a complaint for specific written consent to the sale. Even granting that performance and damages. respondent Norma actively participated in negotiating for the sale of the subject properties, which she denied, ISSUE: her written consent to the sale is required by law for Whether or not the husband may validly dispose of a its... validity. Significantly, petitioner herself admits that conjugal property without the wife's written consent. Norma refused to sign the contracts to sell. Respondent HELD: Norma may have been aware of the negotiations for the Under Art. 124 of the Family Code: “In the event that sale of their conjugal properties. However, being one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to merely aware of a transaction is not consent. participate in the administration of the conjugal properties, the other spouse may assume sole powers it should be stressed that court authorization under Art. of administration. These powers do not include the 124 is only resorted to in cases where the spouse who powers of disposition or encumbrance which must does not give consent is incapacitated. have the authority of the court or the written consent of the other spouse. In the absence of such authority or In this case, petitioner failed to allege and prove that consent the disposition or encumbrance shall be void.” respondent The properties subject to the contract in this case were Norma was incapacitated to give her consent to the conjugal; hence, for the contracts to sell to be effective, contracts. In the absence of such showing of the wife's the consent of both husband and wife must be obtained. Respondent Norma Camaisa did not give her incapacity, court authorization cannot be sought. written consent to the sale. Even granting that Principles: respondent Norma actively participated in negotiating for the sale of the subject properties, which she denied, Art. 124. The administration and enjoyment of the her written consent to the sale is required by law for its conjugal partnership property shall belong to both validity. She may have been aware of the negotiations for the sale of their conjugal properties, however that is spouses jointly. In case of disagreement, the husband's not sufficient to demonstrate consent decision shall prevail, subject to recourse to the court by the wife for a proper remedy, which must be... availed of within five years from the date of the LINCOLN L. YAO vs. HONORABLE NORMA C. PERELLO contract implementing such decision. FACTS: The Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or (HLURB) issued a writ of execution for the satisfaction of otherwise unable to participate in the administration of its judgment in favor of petitioner and against PR the conjugal properties, the other spouse may assume Builders, Inc. and its managers, which included Pablito sole powers of administration. These powers do not Villarin, private respondent’s husband. Pursuant to the include the powers of disposition or encumbrance writ, the deputy sheriff levied on a parcel of land which must have... the authority of the court or the registered in the names of spouses Villarin and the written consent of the other spouse. In the absence property was scheduled for public auction. Private of such authority or consent the disposition or respondent filed a petition for prohibition alleging that encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction the subject property could not be levied on to answer shall be construed as a continuing offer on the part of for the separate liability of her husband. The trial court the... consenting spouse and the third person, and may granted the petition and exempted the subject property be perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance from execution. Hence, the scheduled auction sale did by the other spouse or authorization by the court not materialize. Consequently, petitioner filed a motion before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors. for intervention, but the same was denied. Hence, this petition for certiorari. it should be stressed that court authorization under Art. 124 is only resorted to in cases where the spouse who ISSUE: Whether or not lower Court grave abuse of does not give consent is incapacitated. discretion in denying petitioner’s motion for intervention on the ground that the same was filed late.
HELD: NO. Petitioner’s claim that he had the right to
FACTS: intervene is without basis. Nothing in the said provision Petitioner, Thelma A. Jader-Manalo made an offer to buy the properties of the respondents from the requires the inclusion of a private party as respondent husband of Norma Fernandez C. Camaisa, respondent in petitions for prohibition. On the other hand, to allow Edilberto Camaisa. After some bargaining, petitioner intervention, it must be shown that (a) the movant has and Edilberto agreed upon the purchase price and a legal interest in the matter in litigation or otherwise terms of payment. The agreement handwritten by the qualified, and (b) consideration must be given as to petitioner was signed by Edilberto, with assurance from him that he would secure his wife’s consent. Petitioner whether the adjudication of the rights of the original was later on surprised when she was informed that parties may be delayed or prejudiced, or whether the respondent spouses were backing out of the intervenor’s rights may be protected in a separate proceeding or not. Both requirements must concur as the first is not more important than the second. Moreover, even granting for the sake of argument that petitioner indeed had the right to intervene, he must exercise said right in accordance with the rules and within the period prescribed therefor. As provided in the Rules of Court, the motion for intervention may be filed at any time before rendition of judgment by the trial court, in this case Petitioner filed his motion way beyond the period set forth in the rules.