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

TWENTIETH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

HOUSE BILL NO. 991

Introduced by Representative Jaime R. Fresnedi

EXPLANATORY NOTE

This legislative proposal seeks to amend a number of provisions found in Executive
Order No. 209, otherwise known as the “Family Code of the Philippines,” to emphasize the
equal role of the father and the mother in a family. Currently, Articles 14, 96, 124, 211, and 225
of the Family Code give primacy to the decisions of husbands or fathers and treat as secondary
the decisions of wives or mothers when it comes to family matters, particularly in parental
concerns as well as in the administration and enjoyment of properties.

This bill seeks to amend the aforementioned provisions of the Family Code so that
spouses may stand on equal footing with one another when it comes to making decisions that
affect the well-being of the family. Thus, this bill moves toward creating a legal landscape that
reflects the value of equality that our society ought to uphold if we are to be truly considered a
democratic nation-state.

In view of the foregoing, the immediate passage of this bill is earnestly sought.

JAIME & FRESNEDI
Refresentative
Lone District, Muntinlupa City


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

TWENTIETH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

HOUSE BILL NO._591

Introduced by Rep. Jaime R. Fresnedi

ANACT
ENSURING THE FUNDAMENTAL EQUALITY OF MEN AND WOMEN UNDER
THE LAWS ON MARRIAGE AND FAMILY RELATIONS, AMENDING FOR THE
PURPOSE ARTICLES 14, 96, 124, 211 AND 225 OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 209,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “FAMILY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES”

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

SECTION 1. Article 14 of Executive Order No. 209, otherwise known as the “Family
Code of the Philippines”, is hereby amended to read as follows:

“Art. 14. In case either or both of the contracting parties [not having been
emancipated by a previous marriage,] are between the ages of eighteen and
twenty-one, they shall, in addition to the requirements of the preceding articles,
exhibit to the local civil registrar, the consent to their marriage of [their father,
mother, surviving parent,] EITHER PARENT, or guardian, or [persons] THE
PERSON WHO HAS [having] legal charge of them, AS PROVIDED UNDER
THE CODE AND UNDER THIS CODE AND OTHER RELEVANT LAWS,
in the orders mentioned. Such consent shall be manifested in writing by the
interested party, who personally appears before the proper local civil registrar, or
in the form of an affidavit made in the presence of two witnesses and attested
before any official authorized by law to administer oaths. The personal
manifestation shall be recorded in both applications for marriage license, and the
affidavit, if one is executed instead, shall be attached to said applications.”

SEC. 2. Article 96 of Executive Order No. 209 is hereby amended to read as follows:

“Art, 96. The administration and enjoyment of the community property
shall belong to both spouses jointly. ANY ACT OF ADMINISTRATION BY
EITHER SPOUSE WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE OTHER SHALL
BE UNENFORCEABLE UNTIL IT IS SUBSEQUENTLY RATIFIED BY
THE NON-CONSENTING SPOUSE. In case of disagreement the husband’s
decision shall prevail, subject to] SPOUSES SHALL MAKE EARNEST
EFFORTS TO SETTLE THEIR DIFFERENCES: PROVIDED, THAT


SHOULD THE SPOUSES FAIL TO ENTER INTO A COMPROMISE,
EITHER SPOUSE SHALL HAVE recourse to the court [by the wife] for a
proper remedy IN A SUMMARY PROCEEDING, which must be availed of
within five years from the date [of] the contract WAS ENTERED INTO, BY
THE PARTIES OR UPON KNOWLEDGE OF THE NON-CONSENTING,
SPOUSE, WHICHEVER COMES LATER. limplementing such decision}
THE COURT, IN DECIDING THE CASE, SHALL CONSIDER THE BEST
INTEREST OF THE FAMILY. DAMAGES AND EXPENSES OF
LITIGATION, WHICH DID NOT REDOUND TO THE BENEFIT OF THE
FAMILY, SHALL BE BORNE BY THE CONTRACTING SPOUSE AND
SHALL NOT BE CHARGED TO THE COMMUNITY PROPERTY.

“In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to
participate in the administration of the common properties, the other spouse may
assume sole powers of administration. These powers do not include the powers of
disposition or encumbrance which must have the authority or consent, the
disposition or encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction shall be
construed as a continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse and the third
person, and may be perfected as a binding contract upon the [acceptance]
RATIFICATION by the other spouse or authorization by the court before the
offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors.”

SEC. 3, Article 124 of Executive Order No. 209 is hereby amended to read as follows:

“Art. 124. The administration and enjoyment of the conjugal partnership
shall belong to both spouses jointly. ANY ACT OF ADMINISTRATION BY
EITHER SPOUSE WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE OTHER SHALL
BE UNENFORCEABLE UNTIL IT IS SUBSEQUENTLY RATIFIED BY
THE NON-CONSENTING SPOUSE. In case of disagreement, the [husband’s
decision shall prevail subject to] SPOUSES SHALL MAKE EARNEST
EFFORTS TO SETTLE THEIR DIFFERENCES: PROVIDED, THAT
SHOULD THE SPOUSES FAIL TO ENTER INTO A COMPROMISE,
EITHER SPOUSE SHALL HAVE recourse to the court [by the wife] for a
proper remedy IN A SUMMARY PROCEEDING, which must be availed of
within five years from date [of] the contract [implementing such decision] WAS
ENTERED INTO, BY THE PARTIES OR UPON KNOWLEDGE OF THE
NON-CONSENTING SPOUSE, WHICHEVER COMES LATER. THE
COURT, IN DECIDING THE CASE, SHALL CONSIDER THE BEST
INTEREST OF THE FAMILY. DAMAGES AND EXPENSES OF
LITIGATION, WHICH DID NOT REDOUND TO THE BENEFIT OF THE
FAMILY, SHALL BE BORNE BY THE CONTRACTING SPOUSE AND
SHALL NOT BE CHARGED TO THE COMMUNITY PROPERTY.

“In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to
participate in the administration of the conjugal properties, the other spouse may
assume sole powers of administration. These powers do not include the powers of
disposition or encumbrance which must have the authority of the court or the
written consent of the other spouse. In the absence of such authority or consent,
the disposition or encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction shall be
construed as a continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse and the third

2


person, and may be perfected as a binding contract upon the [acceptance]
RATIFICATION by the other spouse or authorization by the court before the
offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors.

SEC.4, Article 211 of Executive Order No. 209 is hereby amended to read as follows:

“Art. 211. The father and the mother shall jointly exercise parental
authority over the persons of their common children. In case of disagreement, the
[father’s decision shall prevail, unless there is a judicial order to the contrary|
PARENTS SHALL MAKE EARNEST EFFORTS TO SETTLE THEIR
DIFFERENCES, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE BEST
INTEREST OF THE CHILD: PROVIDED, THAT SHOULD THEY FAIL
TO ENTER INTO A COMPROMISE, EITHER PARENT SHALL HAVE.
RECOURSE TO THE COURT FOR PROPER REMEDY.

Children shall always observe respect and reverence toward their parents
and are obliged to obey them as long as the children are under parental authority.

SEC. 5. Article 225 of Executive Order No. 209 is hereby amended to read as follows:

“Art, 225. The father and the mother shall jointly exercise legal
guardianship over the property of [the unemancipated common] THE MINOR
child without the necessity of a court appointment. ANY EXERCISE OF
GUARDIANSHIP BY EITHER PARENT WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF
THE OTHER SHALL BE UNENFORCEABLE, UNTIL IT IS
SUBSEQUENTLY RATIFIED BY THE NON-CONSENTING PARENT. in
case of disagreement, {the father’s decision shall prevail, unless there is a judicial
order to the contrary] EITHER PARENT SHALL HAVE RECOURSE TO
THE COURT WITHIN FIVE (5) YEARS FROM THE DATE THE
CONTRACT WAS ENTERED BY THE PARTIES THERETO, OR UPON
KNOWLEDGE OF THE NON-CONSENTING PARENT, WHICHEVER
COMES LATER. THE COURT, IN DECIDING THE CASE, SHALL TAKE
INTO CONSIDERATION THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD.
DAMAGES AND EXPENSES OF LITIGATION, WHICH DID NOT
REDOUND TO THE BENEFIT OF THE MINOR CHILD, SHALL BE
BORNE BY THE CONTRACTING PARENT AND SHALL NOT BE
CHARGED TO THE PROPERTY OF THE MINOR CHILD.

“Where the market value of the property or the annual income of the
MINOR child exceeds P50,000, the parent concerned shall be required to furnish
a bond in such amount as the court may determine, by not less than ten per centum
(10%) of the value of the property or annual income, to guarantee the performance
of the obligations prescribed for general guardians.

“A verified petition for approval of the bond shall be filed in the proper
court of the place where the MINOR child resides, or, if the MINOR child resides
ina foreign country, in the proper court of the place where the property or any part
thereof is situated.


The petition shall be docketed as a summary special proceeding in which
all incidents and issues regarding the performance of the obligations referred to in
the second paragraph of this Article shall be heard resolved.

“The ordinary rules on guardianship shall be merely suppletory except
when the MINOR child is under substitute parental authority, or the guardian is a
stranger, or a parent has remarried, in which case the ordinary rules on
guardianship shall apply.”

s 8. Separability Clause. ~ If any provision of this Act shall be deemed
unconstitutional or invalid, the other provisions not affected there shall remain in force and
effect.

SEC. 9. Repeating Clause. ~ All Acts, Presidential Decrecs, Executive Orders and
inistrative Orders, Rules and Regulations and other such issuances or parts thercof which
are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SEC. 10. Effectivity: - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days afler its publication in
the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Approved,