Case Digest (G.R. No. L-28771)
Facts:
Cornelia Matabuena v. Petronila Cervantes, G.R. No. L-28771. March 31, 1971, the Supreme Court En Banc, Fernando, J., writing for the Court. The plaintiff-appellant was Cornelia Matabuena, sister and nearest collateral relative of the deceased Felix Matabuena; the defendant-appellee was Petronila Cervantes, the donee of a deed of donation and later the decedent’s widow. The core question presented was whether the Civil Code prohibition on donations between spouses during marriage extends to persons living together in a common-law (concubinage) relationship.Chronologically, on February 20, 1956, Felix executed a deed of donation inter vivos in favor of Petronila, and she accepted it; at that time they were living together as husband and wife but were not formally married. They later married on March 28, 1962. Felix died intestate on September 13, 1962. Plaintiff filed a complaint asserting ownership of the disputed parcel as the nearest collateral relative, alleging the 1956 donation was void; she also executed an affidavit of self-adjudication in 1962 and had the land declared in her name, paying estate and inheritance taxes.
At the trial court, the parties stipulated to the foregoing facts. The trial court (lower court) dismissed plaintiff’s complaint on November 23, 1965, holding that Article 133 of the Civil Code voids donations made between spouses during marriage but that the 1956 donation was valid because at the time of the donation the parties were not yet married; they became spouses only upon their 1962 marriage. The case was appealed to the Supreme...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the prohibition in Art. 133 of the Civil Code — that "every donation between the spouses during the marriage shall be void" — extend to donations made between persons living together as husband and wife without benefit of marriage (a common-law relationship)?
- If the donation is declared void, what are the heirs’ respective rights in the property given that the parties subsequently mar...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)