Facts:

The case involves John Abing (petitioner) and Juliet Waeyan (respondent), who cohabited as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage from 1986 until their separation in 1995. During their relationship, they acquired a two-storey residential house and an annex structure that housed a sari-sari store, which was built on a lot owned by Alejandro DiAo. The tax declaration for the house was transferred to Juliet's name. In December 1991, Juliet left for overseas employment in Korea, sending money back to John, which he deposited into their joint bank account. In 1992, the original house underwent renovations, and the annex structure was constructed. Upon Juliet's return in 1994, she managed the sari-sari store while John worked as a mine employee. Their relationship soured in 1995, leading them to execute a Memorandum of Agreement on October 7, 1995, to partition their properties. Although the agreement was signed by witnesses, it remained unsigned by both parties. ...

Facts:

Background of the Parties

• Petitioner John Abing (John) and respondent Juliet Waeyan (Juliet) cohabited as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage from 1986 to 1995.
• During their cohabitation, they acquired properties, including a 2-storey residential house purchased from Benjamin Macua, erected on a lot owned by Alejandro DiAo in Mankayan, Benguet. The tax declaration for the house was transferred to Juliet's name.

Renovation and Annex Structure

• In 1992, the original house underwent renovation, and an annex structure was added, housing a sari-sari store. This annex structure is the subject of the dispute.
• Juliet left for overseas employment in Korea in December 1991, sending money to John, which was deposited in their joint bank account.
• Juliet returned in 1994 and managed the sari-sari store while John worked as a mine employee.

Partition of Properties

• In 1995, their relationship deteriorated, leading to a decision to partition their properties. They executed a Memorandum of Agreement on October 7, 1995, which was unsigned by both parties but signed by witnesses.
• Under the agreement, Juliet was to pay John P428,870.00 for his share of their properties. Juliet paid P232,397.66 as partial payment, with the balance to be paid in monthly installments starting November 1995.

Failure to Pay and Ejectment Suit

• Juliet failed to pay the balance, prompting John to demand that she vacate the annex structure. When she refused, John filed an ejectment suit before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Mankayan, Benguet.
• John claimed exclusive ownership of the annex structure, asserting that he funded its construction using his own money and loans from relatives. He also cited the tax declaration under his name.

Court Decisions

• The MTC ruled in favor of John, ordering Juliet to vacate the premises and pay monthly compensation until she vacated.
• The Regional Trial Court (RTC) affirmed the MTC's decision.
• The Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the RTC's decision, ruling that the annex structure was co-owned by John and Juliet, and Juliet could not be ejected.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• (Unlock)

Ratio:

1. Co-Ownership Under Article 147 of the Family Code: Properties acquired during cohabitation without marriage are presumed to be jointly owned in equal shares unless proven otherwise. John failed to provide sufficient evidence to rebut this presumption.
2. Tax Declarations Do Not Prove Ownership: Tax declarations are merely indicia of ownership claims and do not establish exclusive ownership.
3. Binding Effect of the Memorandum of Agreement: Although unsigned, the agreement is binding as Juliet partially performed its terms by making an initial payment.
4. Ejectment Not Proper Against a Co-Owner: Juliet's possession of the annex structure is lawful as a co-owner. Ejectment is not the appropriate remedy; John should have filed an action for a sum of money or rescission.