Case Digest (G.R. No. 72870)
Facts:
In Marietta N. Barrido v. Leonardo V. Nonato, petitioner Marietta N. Barrido and respondent Leonardo V. Nonato, whose marriage was declared void for psychological incapacity on March 15, 1996 under Article 36 of the Family Code, acquired during their union a house and lot in Eroreco, Bacolod City (TCT No. T-140361). After the declaration of nullity, Nonato sought partition of the property on January 29, 2003 before the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) of Bacolod City, which dismissed Barrido’s jurisdictional objection and affirmative defense of sale to their children Joseph Raymund and Joseph Leo, applied Article 129 of the Family Code, adjudicated the property to Barrido as the custodial spouse, and awarded her moral, exemplary, and attorney’s fees. Nonato appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Bacolod City, Branch 53, which on July 21, 2004 reversed the MTCC decision and rendered judgment ordering equitable partition of the property, reimbursement to the children ...Case Digest (G.R. No. 72870)
Facts:
- Marriage and Property Acquisition
- Respondent Leonardo V. Nonato and petitioner Marietta N. Barrido acquired during their marriage a house and lot in Eroreco, Bacolod City, covered by TCT No. T-140361, as conjugal property.
- On March 15, 1996, their marriage was declared void ab initio for psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code.
- Partition Proceedings before MTCC
- On January 29, 2003, Nonato filed a Complaint for Partition in the MTCC of Bacolod City, Branch 3, seeking to divide the subject property.
- Barrido raised as defenses: (a) lack of jurisdiction because partition is an action incapable of pecuniary estimation; and (b) the property had been sold to their children, Joseph Raymund and Joseph Leo, by virtue of a Deed of Sale.
- MTCC Decision (September 17, 2003)
- Applied Article 129 of the Family Code and adjudicated the conjugal dwelling to Barrido, as the spouse with whom the majority of the common children chose to remain.
- Awarded P10,000.00 moral damages, P10,000.00 exemplary damages, P2,000.00 attorneys’ fees, and P575.00 litigation expenses to Barrido.
- RTC Decision (July 21, 2004)
- Reversed the MTCC, ruling that the property be equitably partitioned between the former spouses, that the children be reimbursed for amounts advanced on the mortgages, and that the presumptive legitimes of the children be delivered pursuant to Article 51 of the Family Code.
- Ordered adherence to co-ownership rules in partition.
- CA Decision (November 16, 2006) and Resolution (January 24, 2007)
- Affirmed the RTC ruling, holding that: (a) the MTCC had jurisdiction since the assessed value of P8,080.00 fell below the P20,000.00 threshold; and (b) despite the RTC’s misapplication of Article 129 instead of Article 147, the equitable partition order was correct.
- Denied Barrido’s motion for reconsideration; Barrido then filed a Petition for Review with the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Whether the MTCC had jurisdiction over the partition case involving the subject property.
- Whether the house and lot remained conjugal or had already been sold to the children.
- Whether Article 129 of the Family Code applied to the partition of the property in a void marriage, or whether Article 147 governed.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)