I. Overview: Two Different Legal Worlds

When a person dies leaving (1) a legal spouse and (2) a live-in partner (a cohabitant), Philippine law treats inheritance and death benefits under different rule sets:

Inheritance / estate settlement is governed mainly by the Civil Code on succession, the Family Code (for marriage validity and property relations), and procedural rules on estate settlement.
Death benefits (SSS, GSIS, Pag-IBIG, PhilHealth, retirement plans, life insurance, company benefits) are governed by their own statutes, rules, and beneficiary designations, sometimes outside the estate.

A recurring reality: a live-in partner may be recognized for some benefits (depending on the benefit system’s rules and evidence), but may have no inheritance rights at all—unless the law recognizes a valid property relation or a valid transfer (e.g., insurance designation, valid donation, or proven ownership share).

II. Key Definitions and Typical Scenarios

1) Legal spouse

A person validly married to the deceased at the time of death, and the marriage was not void (or not voidable/annulled in a way that affects status at death). Separation in fact does not automatically end spousal status.

2) Live-in partner (cohabitant)

A person who lived with the deceased in a marital-like relationship without a valid marriage between them. This may include:

A relationship while the deceased’s marriage still existed (often called a “common-law” arrangement in casual speech, but there is no common-law marriage in Philippine law).
A relationship where both were free to marry but did not (a different legal treatment may apply to property acquired together).

3) Children: legitimate vs illegitimate

Children’s status matters for legitime (mandatory shares). Children of the live-in partner are often illegitimate unless the parents were legally able to marry and met requirements for legitimation (a separate legal topic).

III. Inheritance: Who Inherits When There Is a Legal Spouse and a Live-In Partner?

A. The live-in partner is not a compulsory heir

Under Philippine succession law, compulsory heirs (those with legitimes) generally include:

Legitimate children and descendants
Legitimate parents and ascendants (if no legitimate descendants)
The surviving spouse
Illegitimate children (with a legitime, but different treatment)

A live-in partner is not included among compulsory heirs. As a rule, the live-in partner does not inherit by intestacy (when there is no will).

B. The legal spouse is a compulsory heir

Regardless of cohabitation arrangements, the surviving legal spouse is ordinarily entitled to a legitime, unless disqualified by specific legal grounds (rare and fact-dependent), and subject to the final determination of marital validity and property regime.

C. If the deceased left no will (intestate succession)

If there are legitimate children:
- The estate is shared among the legitimate children and the surviving spouse according to the Civil Code’s rules on intestacy.
- Illegitimate children (if any) also inherit, but the computations differ.
If there are no children but there are legitimate parents/ascendants:
- Parents/ascendants and the surviving spouse share.
If there are no descendants or ascendants:
- The surviving spouse’s share increases; other relatives may inherit depending on degrees.

In all intestate scenarios, the live-in partner inherits nothing as heir.

D. If the deceased left a will (testate succession)

A live-in partner can only receive property if:

The will validly institutes the live-in partner as heir or gives a legacy/devise, and
The disposition does not violate the legitime of compulsory heirs, and
The disposition is not prohibited under rules on donations/benefits arising from illicit relations (see below), and
Formalities and capacity requirements for wills are met.

Even with a will, the spouse and compulsory heirs can reduce testamentary gifts that impair legitimes through reduction (inoficiosity) proceedings.

IV. Limits on Giving Property to a Live-In Partner

A. The “legitime” system restricts freedom to dispose

Because spouses and children typically have legitimes, a decedent cannot freely give the entire estate away to a live-in partner by will. Gifts beyond the free portion can be reduced.

B. Donations and testamentary dispositions in relationships that are legally problematic

Philippine law contains restrictions on donations (and in related contexts, testamentary benefits) between persons in certain relationships, particularly where the relationship is considered contrary to marriage laws/public policy. These restrictions are commonly invoked where a live-in relationship exists while one party is validly married to someone else. The practical risk:

Even if the deceased tried to transfer assets to the live-in partner, the legal spouse (or heirs) may challenge the transfer as void, voidable, or subject to reduction.

Practical takeaway: The more the relationship overlaps with an existing valid marriage, the more legally vulnerable inter vivos transfers to the live-in partner tend to be—especially when the spouse/heirs contest.

V. Property Relations: What Part of the Assets Are Even in the “Estate”?

Inheritance only covers the net estate of the deceased—property that actually belongs to the deceased at death, minus obligations, and after separating out co-ownership shares.

This is where live-in partners often have their strongest (and sometimes only) legal foothold: ownership, not inheritance.

A. If the deceased had a valid marriage: the marriage property regime matters

Depending on the date of marriage and marriage settlement:

Absolute Community of Property (ACP) is common: many assets acquired during marriage are presumed community property.
Conjugal Partnership of Gains (CPG) applies in other cases: generally, gains during marriage are conjugal.
Separation of property is possible by agreement or law in specific cases.

Result: A large portion of what the deceased held may be marital property, meaning:

The surviving spouse owns their share outright.
Only the deceased’s share (after liquidation) becomes part of the estate for distribution to heirs.

B. Property relations with a live-in partner may create co-ownership (not heirship)

Philippine law recognizes property regimes for certain unions outside marriage, particularly:

Where parties were free to marry each other but did not, and they lived together as husband and wife: property acquired through their joint efforts may be treated as co-owned.
Where a party is not free to marry (e.g., still validly married): courts tend to be stricter; a live-in partner may still prove contributions and claim a share under equitable principles/co-ownership rules, but the claim is highly fact-dependent and often contested.

A live-in partner can pursue:

Reimbursement for proven contributions (money, property, sometimes labor/services in certain circumstances),
Recognition of co-ownership over specific properties,
A claim that certain assets are exclusively owned by the partner (e.g., titled in their name, purchased with their funds).

Important: These claims are asserted against the estate and/or the legal spouse, typically in estate proceedings or separate civil actions, and require evidence.

C. Titled property vs beneficial ownership

A title in the deceased’s name creates a presumption of ownership, but it can be rebutted.
A title in the live-in partner’s name may still be challenged if funded by the deceased or if the transfer is attacked as void/illegal.
Bank accounts, vehicles, and shares likewise can be traced and disputed.

VI. Death Benefits: Different Systems, Different Rules

“Death benefits” can include:

SSS death benefit (private sector members)
GSIS survivorship / death benefits (government employees)
Pag-IBIG death benefit / provident claims
PhilHealth (primarily health coverage; death-related benefits are limited and program-specific)
Company retirement plans / provident funds
Life insurance (private insurance; also GSIS/SSS-related insurance features)
Employees’ Compensation (ECC) for work-related death

The key legal question is usually: Who is the “primary beneficiary” or rightful claimant under that system? That is not always identical to who inherits.

A. Social Security System (SSS)

SSS typically prioritizes beneficiaries in tiers, commonly:

Legal spouse and dependent legitimate/illegitimate children (subject to program definitions), and in some cases dependent parents when no spouse/children exist.

For a live-in partner:

A live-in partner is generally not treated as a spouse for SSS survivorship.
If the deceased’s legal marriage is void (not merely separated), the “spouse” status may be disputed, but SSS generally requires formal proof (marriage records, court decisions) and will act based on its rules and documentary evidence.
If the live-in partner is named in records as beneficiary, SSS rules may still override designation if it conflicts with statutory beneficiaries.

B. Government Service Insurance System (GSIS)

GSIS benefits typically recognize the legal spouse and dependent children under GSIS definitions and documentary requirements.

A live-in partner:

Usually cannot qualify as “spouse” absent a valid marriage.
Disputes often hinge on the validity of the marriage, legal separation effects, and proof of dependency for certain benefit types.

C. Pag-IBIG (HDMF)

Pag-IBIG claims (savings/provident) typically pay out to:

Declared beneficiaries, and/or
Legal heirs depending on the program rules and presence/absence of beneficiary designation.

A live-in partner might receive funds if:

Properly designated as a beneficiary under the program’s rules, and
No overriding statutory priority rule disqualifies the designation.

D. Employer benefits and retirement plans

Company policies vary widely:

Some follow “legal spouse/children” definitions strictly.
Some pay to the designated beneficiary on file.
Some release to the estate if no valid beneficiary exists.

A live-in partner’s claim depends on:

The plan’s beneficiary rules,
HR documentation (designation forms),
Proof of relationship and dependency if required.

E. Life insurance: beneficiary designation is powerful

In many cases, life insurance proceeds are paid directly to the named beneficiary and do not pass through probate/estate settlement, subject to important exceptions. This often makes life insurance the most effective vehicle by which a decedent can provide for a live-in partner.

However, vulnerability points include:

If the designation is challenged as invalid under law or public policy limits (especially if contested and tied to prohibited donations/benefits), or
If the beneficiary is disqualified (rare; depends on specific legal grounds), or
If premiums were paid with conjugal/community funds and the spouse asserts rights over the policy value or proceeds under property regime principles (fact-dependent and litigated in some cases).

VII. Competing Claims: What Usually Gets Litigated

A. Validity of the marriage

If the live-in partner claims the “legal spouse” is not actually a spouse, the dispute may involve:

Whether the marriage was void from the beginning (e.g., lack of license where required, bigamous marriage, etc.), or
Whether there is a final court decision affecting civil status.

Practical effect: Benefit agencies and courts typically require official records and final judgments, not informal claims.

B. Proof of filiation and children’s shares

Children’s inheritance rights depend on establishing filiation:

Birth certificates, acknowledgment, court actions, DNA evidence (if litigated), etc.

C. Estate composition and liquidation of property regimes

Before distribution, the estate must be determined:

Separate the legal spouse’s share under ACP/CPG
Identify exclusive property of the deceased
Settle debts
Only then compute shares of heirs

D. Co-ownership or reimbursement claims of the live-in partner

The live-in partner may file claims for:

Co-owned property acquired during cohabitation (subject to rules and proof)
Reimbursement for contributions (money used for purchase, improvements, loan payments)
Constructive trust theories in some cases (highly fact-specific)

E. Collation and reduction of donations

If the deceased made transfers during life that affect legitimes:

Heirs can seek inclusion and reduction, depending on the nature and timing of transfers.

VIII. Procedural Roadmap: How These Disputes Typically Unfold

A. Estate settlement (judicial or extrajudicial)

Extrajudicial settlement is allowed only when:

The decedent left no will, and
There are no debts (or they are provided for), and
All heirs are of age (or represented), and
All heirs agree.

A live-in partner is not an heir, but may still appear as a claimant if asserting ownership/co-ownership. If there is a serious dispute, parties usually end up in judicial settlement.

Judicial settlement (testate or intestate):

Appointment of administrator/executor
Inventory
Liquidation of marital property regime (if applicable)
Payment of debts and expenses
Determination of heirs and shares
Distribution

B. Benefits claims (administrative processes)

For SSS/GSIS/Pag-IBIG/company benefits:

Separate filing with the agency/employer
Documentary requirements
If there are competing claimants, agencies may:
- Suspend release pending resolution, or
- Pay according to their rules and let parties litigate recovery, depending on internal procedures.

C. Parallel actions are common

It is common to see:

Estate case in court, plus
Separate actions on property ownership/co-ownership, plus
Administrative benefit disputes

IX. Evidence That Usually Matters

For the legal spouse

PSA marriage certificate
Proof of no nullity/annulment affecting status (or final decisions if any)
Proof of marital property regime and acquisition dates of assets

For the live-in partner

Proof of cohabitation (barangay certificates, lease, utilities, affidavits, photos/messages as secondary support)
Proof of financial contribution (bank transfers, receipts, loan records, remittances)
Proof of ownership (titles, deeds, registration documents)
Beneficiary designations (insurance forms, HR forms, Pag-IBIG/SSS/GSIS records, if applicable)

For children (especially illegitimate)

Birth certificates
Acknowledgment documents
Support records
Court determinations where needed

X. Common Misconceptions Corrected

“Common-law spouse” automatically inherits. Philippine law does not treat cohabitation as marriage; inheritance rights do not arise from mere cohabitation.
“If the spouse abandoned the deceased, the spouse loses inheritance automatically.” Not automatically. Disqualification is specific and requires legal grounds; mere separation or lack of contact is usually insufficient by itself.
“Insurance proceeds always belong to the beneficiary, no matter what.” Often true in practice, but disputes can arise from invalid designations, prohibited transfers, or property regime issues.
“Everything titled in the deceased’s name is the estate.” Not necessarily. Marital property regimes and co-ownership claims can remove portions from the estate.

XI. Practical Risk Areas and Planning Notes

A. For the legal spouse and legitimate family

Promptly initiate estate proceedings if assets are being dissipated.
Secure documents: titles, bank records, employment records.
Consider injunctions/receivership in serious cases.

B. For the live-in partner

Focus on ownership and contribution evidence, not “spousal” status.
If relying on benefits, ensure beneficiary designations and records are consistent and properly filed.
Be prepared for challenges based on marital status and legitime protection.

C. For both sides

Asset tracing is central: acquisition dates, funding sources, and property regime classification are often determinative.
Settlement is common because litigation is slow and expensive, but settlements must respect compulsory heirs’ legitimes and avoid invalid transfers.

XII. Bottom Line Rules (Philippines)

Inheritance: The legal spouse is a compulsory heir; a live-in partner is not an heir by intestacy and generally has no legitime.
Estate vs ownership: A live-in partner’s strongest claim is typically co-ownership/reimbursement, not inheritance.
Benefits: Death benefits depend on the specific benefit system and beneficiary rules; some benefits pay strictly to legal spouse/children, while others follow beneficiary designation.
Restrictions: Transfers to a live-in partner may be challenged if they impair legitimes or fall under legal prohibitions, especially where the relationship overlaps with a subsisting marriage.
Process: Expect parallel tracks—estate settlement, property claims, and administrative benefit claims—with documentation and proof determining outcomes.