THELMA A. JADER-MANALO v. NORMA FERNANDEZ C.

formal affixing of Norma's signature, she was surprised

CAMAISA, GR No. 147978, 2002-01-23 when respondent spouses informed her that they were
backing out of the agreement because they needed
Facts:
"spot cash" for... the full amount of the consideration.
petitioner Thelma A. Jader-Manalo allegedly came
etitioner reminded respondent spouses that the
across an advertisement placed by respondents, the
contracts to sell had already been duly perfected and
Spouses Norma Fernandez C. Camaisa and Edilberto
Norma's refusal to sign the same would unduly
Camaisa, in the Classified Ads Section of the newspaper
prejudice petitioner. Still, Norma refused to sign the...
BULLETIN TODAY in its April, 1992 issue, for the sale of
contracts prompting petitioner to file a complaint for
their ten-door apartment in Makati, as well as that in
specific performance and damages against respondent
Taytay, Rizal.
spouses before the Regional Trial Court of Makati,
she was interested in buying the two properties so she Branch 136 on April 29, 1992, to compel respondent
negotiated for the purchase through a real estate Norma Camaisa to sign the contracts to sell.
broker, Mr. Proceso Ereno, authorized by respondent...
Issues:
spouses.
whether or not the husband may validly dispose of a
Petitioner made a visual inspection of the said lots with
conjugal property without the wife's written consent.
the real estate broker and was shown the tax
declarations, real property tax payment receipts, The issue thus posed for resolution in the trial court was
location plans, and vicinity maps relating to the whether or not the contracts to sell between petitioner
properties. and respondent spouses were already perfected such
that the latter... could no longer back out of the
Thereafter, petitioner met with the vendors who turned
agreement.
out to be respondent spouses. She made a definite
offer to buy the properties to respondent Edilberto Ruling:
Camaisa with the knowledge and conformity of his wife,
The Court does not find error in the decisions of both
respondent Norma Camaisa in the presence of the
the trial court and the Court of Appeals.
real... estate broker
The law requires that the disposition of a conjugal
This agreement was handwritten by petitioner and
property by the husband as administrator in
signed by Edilberto
appropriate cases requires the written consent of the
When petitioner pointed out the conjugal nature of the wife, otherwise, the disposition is void. Thus, Article
properties, Edilberto assured her of his wife's 124 of the Family Code provides:
conformity and consent to the sale.
Art. 124. The administration and enjoyment of the
The formal... typewritten Contracts to Sell were conjugal partnership property shall belong to both
thereafter prepared by petitioner. The following day, spouses jointly. In case of disagreement, the husband's
petitioner, the real estate broker and Edilberto met in decision shall prevail, subject to recourse to the court
the latter's office for the formal signing of the by the wife for a proper remedy, which must be...
typewritten Contracts to Sell. availed of within five years from the date of the
contract implementing such decision.
After Edilberto signed the... contracts, petitioner
delivered to him two checks, namely, UCPB Check No. In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or
62807 dated April 15, 1992 for P200,000.00 and UCPB otherwise unable to participate in the administration of
Check No. 62808 also dated April 15, 1992 for the conjugal properties, the other spouse may assume
P100,000.00 in the presence of the real estate broker sole powers of administration. These powers do not
and an employee in Edilberto's... office. include the powers of disposition or encumbrance
which must have... the authority of the court or the
The contracts were given to Edilberto for the formal
written consent of the other spouse. In the absence
affixing of his wife's signature.
of such authority or consent the disposition or
The following day, petitioner received a call from encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction
respondent Norma, requesting a meeting to clarify shall be construed as a continuing offer on the part of
some provisions of the contracts. the... consenting spouse and the third person, and may
be perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance
During the meeting, handwritten notations were made by the other spouse or authorization by the court
on the contracts to sell, so they arranged to incorporate before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors.
the notations and to meet again for the formal signing
of the contracts The properties subject of the contracts in this case were
conjugal; hence, for the contracts to sell to be effective,
When petitioner met again with respondent spouses the consent of both husband and wife must concur.
and the real estate broker at Edilberto's office for the
Respondent Norma Camaisa admittedly did not give her agreement. Hence, she filed a complaint for specific
written consent to the sale. Even granting that performance and damages.
respondent Norma actively participated in negotiating
for the sale of the subject properties, which she denied, ISSUE:
her written consent to the sale is required by law for Whether or not the husband may validly dispose of a
its... validity. Significantly, petitioner herself admits that conjugal property without the wife's written consent.
Norma refused to sign the contracts to sell. Respondent
HELD:
Norma may have been aware of the negotiations for the
Under Art. 124 of the Family Code: “In the event that
sale of their conjugal properties. However, being one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to
merely aware of a transaction is not consent. participate in the administration of the conjugal
properties, the other spouse may assume sole powers
it should be stressed that court authorization under Art. of administration. These powers do not include the
124 is only resorted to in cases where the spouse who powers of disposition or encumbrance which must
does not give consent is incapacitated. have the authority of the court or the written consent of
the other spouse. In the absence of such authority or
In this case, petitioner failed to allege and prove that consent the disposition or encumbrance shall be void.”
respondent
The properties subject to the contract in this case were
Norma was incapacitated to give her consent to the conjugal; hence, for the contracts to sell to be effective,
contracts. In the absence of such showing of the wife's the consent of both husband and wife must be
obtained. Respondent Norma Camaisa did not give her
incapacity, court authorization cannot be sought.
written consent to the sale. Even granting that
Principles: respondent Norma actively participated in negotiating
for the sale of the subject properties, which she denied,
Art. 124. The administration and enjoyment of the her written consent to the sale is required by law for its
conjugal partnership property shall belong to both validity. She may have been aware of the negotiations
for the sale of their conjugal properties, however that is
spouses jointly. In case of disagreement, the husband's not sufficient to demonstrate consent
decision shall prevail, subject to recourse to the court
by the wife for a proper remedy, which must be...
availed of within five years from the date of the LINCOLN L. YAO vs. HONORABLE NORMA C. PERELLO
contract implementing such decision. FACTS: The Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board
In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or (HLURB) issued a writ of execution for the satisfaction of
otherwise unable to participate in the administration of its judgment in favor of petitioner and against PR
the conjugal properties, the other spouse may assume Builders, Inc. and its managers, which included Pablito
sole powers of administration. These powers do not Villarin, private respondent’s husband. Pursuant to the
include the powers of disposition or encumbrance writ, the deputy sheriff levied on a parcel of land
which must have... the authority of the court or the registered in the names of spouses Villarin and the
written consent of the other spouse. In the absence property was scheduled for public auction. Private
of such authority or consent the disposition or respondent filed a petition for prohibition alleging that
encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction the subject property could not be levied on to answer
shall be construed as a continuing offer on the part of for the separate liability of her husband. The trial court
the... consenting spouse and the third person, and may granted the petition and exempted the subject property
be perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance from execution. Hence, the scheduled auction sale did
by the other spouse or authorization by the court not materialize. Consequently, petitioner filed a motion
before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors. for intervention, but the same was denied. Hence, this
petition for certiorari.
it should be stressed that court authorization under Art.
124 is only resorted to in cases where the spouse who ISSUE: Whether or not lower Court grave abuse of
does not give consent is incapacitated. discretion in denying petitioner’s motion for
intervention on the ground that the same was filed late.

HELD: NO. Petitioner’s claim that he had the right to

FACTS: intervene is without basis. Nothing in the said provision
Petitioner, Thelma A. Jader-Manalo made an offer to
buy the properties of the respondents from the
requires the inclusion of a private party as respondent
husband of Norma Fernandez C. Camaisa, respondent in petitions for prohibition. On the other hand, to allow
Edilberto Camaisa. After some bargaining, petitioner intervention, it must be shown that (a) the movant has
and Edilberto agreed upon the purchase price and a legal interest in the matter in litigation or otherwise
terms of payment. The agreement handwritten by the qualified, and (b) consideration must be given as to
petitioner was signed by Edilberto, with assurance from
him that he would secure his wife’s consent. Petitioner
whether the adjudication of the rights of the original
was later on surprised when she was informed that parties may be delayed or prejudiced, or whether the
respondent spouses were backing out of the intervenor’s rights may be protected in a separate
proceeding or not. Both requirements must concur as
the first is not more important than the second.
Moreover, even granting for the sake of argument that
petitioner indeed had the right to intervene, he must
exercise said right in accordance with the rules and
within the period prescribed therefor.
As provided in the Rules of Court, the motion for
intervention may be filed at any time before rendition
of judgment by the trial court, in this case Petitioner
filed his motion way beyond the period set forth in the
rules.