Article 157

By Marte Oquias

Art. 157. The actual value of the family home shall not exceed, at the time of its constitution, the amount of the three hundred thousand pesos in urban areas, and two hundred thousand pesos in rural areas, or such amounts as may hereafter be fixed by law.

In any event, if the value of the currency changes after the adoption of this Code, the value most favorable for the constitution of a family home shall be the basis of evaluation.

For purposes of this Article, urban areas are deemed to include chartered cities and municipalities whose annual income at least equals that legally required for chartered cities. All others are deemed to be rural areas. (231a)

Article 155

Articles 152 & 153

By: Christelle B. Amil

Case Digest Mondequillo vs Breva

Article 152. The family home, constituted jointly by the husband and the wife or by an unmarried head of a family, is the dwelling house where they and their family reside, and the land on which it is situated. (223a)

Article 153. The family home is deemed constituted on a house and lot from the time it is occupied as a family residence. From the time of its constitution and so long as any of its beneficiaries actually resides therein, the family home continues to be such and is exempt from execution, forced sale or attachment except as hereinafter provided and to the extent of the value allowed by law. (223a)

Constitution

• A family home is deemed constituted on a house and land from the time it is actually occupied as a family residence.
• The requirement of the house and land as a constitutive of a family home stresses the element of permanence.
• All residential houses used as a family home, with or without having been judicially or extrajudicially constituted as such prior to the effectivity of the Family Code, are deemed constituted by operation of law as a family home on August 3, 1988.
• The family home is not affected by the type of property regime of the spouses or by the fact that the marriage has been nullified.

Exempt from Execution

The exemption form execution, forced sale or attachment provided by law is effective from the time of the constitution of the family home as such, and lasts so long as any of its beneficiaries actually resides therein.

Waiver, Laches, and Estoppel

The Court has held in several cases that a claim for exemption from execution of the family home should be set up and proved before the sale of the property at a public auction, and failure to do so would estop the part from later claiming the exemption.

Exceptions from Exemptions

Article 155. The family home shall be exempt from execution, forced sale or attachment except:

1.For non-payment of taxes;

2.For debts incurred prior to the constitution of the family home;

3.For debts secured by mortgages on the premises before or after such constitution; and

4.For debts due to laborers, mechanics, architects, builders, materialmen and others who have rendered service or furnished material for the construction of the building. (243a)

Article 154

By: Evelyn Balaoro

The beneficiaries of a family home are:

1. The husband and wife, or an unmarried person who is the head of a family; and
2. Their parents, ascendants, descendants, brothers and sisters, whether the relationship be legitimate or illegitimate, who are living in the family home and who depend upon the head of the family for legal support. 

Who are the beneficiaries of a family home?

Explanation:

As stated in Article 154 the Beneficiaries is important because their actual occupancy of a home may constitute the same as a family home provided their actual occupancy of the house and lot is with the consent of the husband and wife who own the house and lot or the unmarried person who is the head of the family and likewise own the house and lot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Article 156

Article 156. The family home must be part of the properties of the absolute community or the conjugal partnership, or of the exclusive properties of either spouse with the latter’s consent’ lt may also be constituted by an unmarried head of a family on his or her own Property. Nevertheless, property that is the subject of a conditional sale on installment where ownership is reserved by the vendor only to guarantee payment of the purchase price may be constituted  as family home

FAMILY HOME. The family home must be constituted ar a place where there is a fixed and permanent connection with the persons constituting it. The law provides that it must be a part of the properties of the absolute community or the conjugal partnership, or of the exclusive properties of either spouse with the latters consent It may also be constituted by an unmarried head of a family his or her own property. Thus, an apartment unit or a house being merely rented cannot be constituted a family home. Also, a house” erected by a person on the property of another is .not a family home (Taneo v Court of Appeals, 904 SCRA 308). Nevertheless, property that is the subject of a conditional sale on installment where ownership is reserved by the vendor only to guarantee payment of the purchase once may be constituted as a family home.

 

Article 158

By Steve Corpuz

The family home may be sold, alienated, donated, assigned or encumbered by the owner or owners thereof with the written consent of the person constituting the same, the latter’s spouse, and a majority of the beneficiaries of legal age. In case of conflict, the court shall decide. (235a)

This is a limitation on the right of disposition of the owners of a property where a family home is situated. The law specifically provides that it cannot be sold, alienated, donated, assigned or encumbered without the written consent of:

1. Person constituting the same
2. The latter’s spouse
3. Majority of beneficiaries of legal age

The law is lenient in the protection of all person and their interest, kung ibebenta nga naman ito ng landlord ng walang consent sa benificiaries nito ay saan nalamang sila pupulutin diba? Kaya kahit na legal ages sila, hanggat umaasa ito sa legal support ng ilaw ng tahanan, ay hindi basta basta papanigan ang kagustuhan ng iisa laban sa kapakanan nang nakararami.

Question:

Let’s say na meron kang family home at gusto mo itong i-benta, kung ikaw ay may asawa at tatlong anak, na lahat ay nasa wastong gulang na ngunit umaasa padin sayo ng legal support, at dalawa dito sa anak mo ay suffering from down syndrome, kailangan mo pa din ba nang majority consent ng beneficiaries mo para maibenta ang bahay mo?

Answer:

Yes. Kailangan pa din. As provided for in art. 158: “… majority of the benificiaties of legal age”. Basta nasa wastong edad na sila, kailangan pa din ng consent.

Sa pagsagot ng katanungan sa taas pinagbasehan ko ang Doctrine of Inclusio unios “when the law does not distinguish, then we should not distinguish” at isa pa, the law is clear so I have applied the literal meaning of it.

By: Steve Louie C. Corpuz

Article 159

By Maielle De Lumban

Article 159. The family home shall continue despite the death of one or both spouses or of the unmarried head of the family for a period of ten years or for as long as there is a minor beneficiary, and the heirs cannot partition the same unless the court finds compelling reasons therefor. This rule shall apply regardless of whoever owns the property or constituted the family home.

LIMITATION AFTER DEATH. The security of the family is a concern of the law. Thus, even upon the death of the person who constituted the family home, such family home shall continue as a family home for a period of 10 years or for as long as there is a minor beneficiary. The heirs cannot partition the same unless the court finds compelling reasons therefor.

G.R. No. 177703, January 28, 2016 

Arriola v. Arriola

VILMA G. ARRIOLA and ANTHONY RONALD G. ARRIOLA,Petitioners, vs. JOHN NABOR C. ARRIOLA, Respondent.[G.R. No. 177703, January 28, 2008] 

Facts:

 John Nabor C. Arriola (respondent) filed Special Civil Action No. 03-0010 with the Regional Trial Court, Branch 254, Las Piñas City (RTC) against Vilma G. Arriola and Anthony Ronald G. Arriola (petitioners) for judicial partition of the properties of decedent Fidel Arriola (the decedent Fidel). Respondent is the son of decedent Fidel with his first wife Victoria C. Calabia, while petitioner Anthony is the son of decedent Fidel with his second wife, petitioner Vilma.

However, the parties failed to agree on how to divide the abovementioned property and so the respondent proposed to sell itthough public auction. The petitioners initially agreed but refused to include in the auction the house standing on the subject land. The respondent then filed an

Urgent Manifestation and Motion for Contempt of Court  but was denied by the RTC for lack of merit .When a motion of reconsideration was still denied by the RTC, the respondent elevated the case to the CA with a petition for certiorari and prayed that he be allowed to push through with the auction of the subject land including the house built on it. The CA granted the petition and ordered the public auction sale of the subject lot including the house built on it. Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration but the CA denied the said motion. Hence this petition for review on Certiorari.

 The Supreme Court said that though a house and lot passed to the heirs because of the death of the father, it cannot be immediately partitioned because of Article 159.

Article 160

When a creditor whose claims is not among those mentioned in Article 155 obtains a judgment in his favor, and he has reasonable grounds to believe that the family home is actually worth more than the maximum amount fixed in Article 157, he may apply to the court which rendered the judgment for an order directing the sale of the property under execution. The court shall so order if it finds that the actual value of the family home exceeds the maximum amount allowed by law as of the time of its constitution. If the increased actual value exceeds the maximum allowed in Article 157 and results from subsequent voluntary improvements introduced by the person or persons constituting the family home, by the owner or owners of the property, or by any of the beneficiaries, the same rule and procedure shall apply.

At the execution sale, no bid below the value allowed for a family home shall be considered. The proceeds shall be applied first to the amount mentioned in Article 157, and then to the liabilities under the judgment and the costs. The excess, if any, shall be delivered to the judgment debtor. (247a, 248a)

Requisites for creditor to avail of the right under Article 160

1. He must be a judgment creditor;

2. His claim is not among those excepted under Article155, and

3. He has reasonable grounds to believe that the family home is worth more than the maximum amount fixed in Article 157

Procedure to avail of right under Article 160

1. The creditor must file a motion in the court proceeding where he obtained a favorable for a writ of execution against the family home.

2. There will be a hearing on the motion where the creditor must prove that the actual value of the family home exceeds the maximum amount fixed by the FC either at the time of its constitution or as a result of improvements introduced thereafter its constitution.

3. If the creditor proves that the actual value exceeds the maximum amount the court will order its sale in execution.

4. If the family home is sold for more than the value allowed, the proceeds shall be applied as follows: a. First, the obligation enumerated in Article 155 must be paid b. Then the judgment in favor of the creditor will be paid, plus all the costs of execution c. The excess, if any, shall be delivered.

 

Judgement Creditor

A party to which a debt is owned that has proved the debt in a legal proceeding and entitled to use judicial process to collect the debt.

 

 

Article 161 & 162

by Nitzshell Dela Torre

Article 149

By Robinson N Manaig

Article . 149

The family, being the foundation of the nation, is a basic social institution which public policy cherishes and protects. Consequently, family relations are governed by law and no custom, practice or agreement destructive of the family shall be recognized or given effect.

• Paramount importance is given to the family as provided in the 1987 constitution.

Family relations are governed t law and no custom or practice destructive of the family will be recognized.

De Leon vs Court of Appeals, 287 SCRA 94; GR No. 104796, March 6, 1998

• Facts:

Private respondents filed in the RTC of Quezon City a complaint for annulment or rescission of a contract of sale of two parcels of land against petitioners. Private respondents paid the docket fee of a flat rate of P400.00 as Petitioners moved for the dismissal of the complaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction by the trial court by reason of private respondents’ non-payment of the correct amount of docket fees.

Petitioners argue that an action for annulment or rescission of a contract of sale of real property is a real action and, therefore, the amount of the docket fees to be paid by private respondent should be based either on the assessed value of the property, subject matter of the action, or its estimated value as alleged in the complaint.

On the other hand, private respondents counter that an action for annulment or rescission of a contract of sale of real property is incapable of pecuniary estimation and, so, the docket fees should be the fixed amount of P400.00 The trial court denied petitioners’ motion to dismiss but required private respondents to pay the amount of docket fees based on the estimated value of the parcels of land in litigation as stated in the complaint.

The Court of Appeals  held that an action for rescission or annulment of contract is not susceptible of pecuniary estimation and, therefore, the docket fees should not be based on the value of the real property, subject matter of the contract sought to be annulled or rescinded

• Issue:

WON in assessing the docket fees to be paid for the filing of an action for annulment or rescission of a contract of sale, the value of the real property, should be used as basis.

• Held:

No. The action for annulment or rescission is considered as one which is not capable of pecuniary estimation.

A review of the jurisprudence of this Court indicates that in determining whether an action is one the subject matter of which is not capable of pecuniary estimation, this Court has adopted the criterion of first ascertaining the nature of the principal action or remedy sought.  If it is primarily for the recovery of a sum of money, the claim is considered capable of pecuniary estimation, and whether jurisdiction is in the municipal courts or in the courts of first instance would depend on the amount of the claim.