HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

7 RECEIvEo
Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DATE: (His apis
Quezon City, Metro Manila tive 3234 om
SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS ov ae
First Regular Session 7
REGISTRATION UNIT

315

House Bill No. BILLS AND INDEX SERVICE

INTRODUCED BY: HON. GWENDOLYN F. GARCIA

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Not until fairly recently, the provisions of the new Civil Code concerning
marriage and family relations had remained relatively constant if not firmly
established for almost six decades since its adoption in 1950 and for more
than 100 years before that under the Old Civil Code. Lately, however, in view
of the effectivity and adoption of Executive Order No. (EO) 209 as amended
by EO 227 (The Family Code of the Philippines), a radical change has been
made with respect to the aforementioned provisions on property relations in
marriage. Changes, which if analyzed with careful scrutiny, would have far-
reaching ramifications leading one to question the very wisdom for the
change:

A case in point is Art. 75 of Title IV of the Family Code of the Philippines which
states that by virtue of a legal mandate, the property relations between
husband and wife shall be under the system of absolute community which is
@ far departure from the long accepted system of conjugal partnership of
gains. The system of absolute community as contemplated under the new
family code partakes of the kind of property relations whereby both spouses,
upon entering marriage, shall become owners in common of all properties
they had previously owned individually prior to their mariage.

Put simply, the prior separate and personal ownership of each individual
spouse's property ceases to exist but shall henceforth become common
property of the marriage regardless of the size of contribution or value of
property brought into the marriage by the respective spouses. Undoubtedly,
from a theoretical standpoint, the system of absolute community would
appear to be the most ideal type or mode of priority relations between
spouses because it impresses and projects an image of an “all for one and
‘one for all" attitude for the marital partnership. It, however, fails to consider
the vagaries of life, the idiosyncrasies of people, and that spouses, as human
beings, are only too prone to human weaknesses and errors.


Although the provisions on absolute community under the Family Code
contains safeguards designed purportedly to protect the spouses concerned
in cases where certain types of abuses would be committed by the other
spouse, it leaves too much leeway for the abuse to be flagrantly committed
for the very reason that the safeguards are evidently very difficult to enforce.
Likewise, from a practical and legal standpoint, it would appear that this
provision of the Family Code suffers from a legal flaw which in all probability
can be attributed to inadvertence because the system of absolute
community had failed to take into consideration other provisions of the Civil
Code which, in certain unique instances, become interrelated because they
involve a common subject matter; property.

By this, we refer to the inevitable violation of the provisions of the Civil Code
under Wills and Succession regarding reservatroncal as provided for under
Art. 891 of the Civil Code, which states, to wit;

"The ascendant who inherits from his descendant any property which the
latter may have acquired by operation of law for the benefit of the relatives
who are within the third degree and who belong to the line from which said
property came."

Since under the system of absolute community all property, regardless
of origin owned by the respective spouses prior to the marriage become by
operation of law common property of the marriage, it covers all types of
property and necessarily this includes properties inherited under
circumstances where the obligation under reservatroncal obtains. The
system of absolute community as mandated under the Family Code clearly
cannot be reconciled with the provisions of reservatroncal under the Civil
Code.

Apart from the legal infirmity from which the Family Code suffers, there are
matters worthy of consideration. For one thing, the system of conjugal
partnership — has been adopted and practiced for over four decades now -
has been generally accepted, practiced, and yes, firmly established in our
marital institutions and recognized in other institutions as well. Scores of
jurisprudence from no less than the highest judicial institution itself would lend
support fo the fact that the system of conjugal partnership of gains has not
only been firmly established, accepted, and recognized but has, in more
ways than one, become an institution itself.

It may also be safe to say that no recent trend or current event or
development has transpired in our jurisdiction which raises the moral and
legal justification to warrant the change from the well-established system of
Conjugal partnership of gains to the untried system of absolute community in
‘our marital institutions. To effect a change just for the sake of change despite
the absence of overriding grounds suits no purpose and becomes a needless
exercise. The system of conjugal partnership of gains stands on a firm


foundation, and has withstood the rigors of time, tested and proven.
Evidently, there appears no cogent reason to effect a change.

Under the atorestated premises, it is therefore proposed that the provisions of
the Family Code on the System of Absolute Community be revised and that
the system of conjugal partnership of gains be reinstated as the basis for the
property relations of our marital institutions.

Approval, therefore, is earnestly sought.

HON, LYN F. GARCIA



Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:
Quezon City, Metro Manila

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

House Bill No,_ 315.

INTRODUCED BY: HON. GWENDOLYN F. GARCIA

AN ACT AMENDING ARTICLE 75 OF TITLE IV OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 209, AS.
AMENDED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 227, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE FAMILY
CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines
in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Article 75 of Title IV of the Family Code of the Philippines is hereby
amended to read as follows:

“ART. 75. The future spouses may, in the marriage settlements, agree
upon the regime of absolute community, conjugal partnership of gains,
complete separation of property, or any other regime. In the absence
of marriage settlements, or when the regime agreed upon is void, the
system of [absolute community of property] CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP
OF GAINS as established in this Code shall govern.”

SEC. 2. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in the
Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Approved,