Introduction

In the Philippine legal system, the disposition of marital property is governed by strict rules to protect the interests of both spouses and ensure family stability. A common question arises when property acquired during marriage is titled solely in the name of one spouse: Must the other spouse sign the deed of sale for the transaction to be valid? This issue is particularly relevant in the context of conjugal property, where assets are shared between husband and wife, regardless of registration details. Under the Family Code of the Philippines (Executive Order No. 209, as amended), the answer hinges on the nature of the property regime, the classification of the asset as conjugal, and the requirement for mutual consent in acts of alienation. This article explores the legal framework, requirements, exceptions, consequences, and related jurisprudence to provide a comprehensive understanding of the topic.

Property Regimes in Philippine Marriages

To address the query, it is essential to first understand the property relations between spouses. The Family Code establishes three main regimes:

Absolute Community of Property (ACP): This is the default regime for marriages solemnized on or after August 3, 1988, unless the spouses execute a prenuptial agreement opting for another system. Under ACP, all properties owned by the spouses at the time of marriage and those acquired thereafter form part of the community property, with few exceptions (e.g., properties acquired by gratuitous title like donations or inheritances).
Conjugal Partnership of Gains (CPG): This applies to marriages before August 3, 1988, or when chosen via prenuptial agreement. In CPG, only the fruits of separate properties and acquisitions from labor, industry, or profession during marriage are considered conjugal. Properties brought into the marriage remain separate.
Complete Separation of Property: This regime, requiring a prenuptial agreement or court order, treats all properties as separate, eliminating shared ownership.

The term "conjugal property" traditionally refers to assets under CPG but is often used colloquially to describe shared marital assets under either ACP or CPG. For this article, we focus on shared properties under these regimes, as the rules for disposition are similar.

Classification of Property as Conjugal

Property is presumed conjugal if acquired during marriage, unless proven otherwise. Article 116 of the Family Code states: "All property acquired during the marriage, whether the acquisition appears to have been made, contracted or registered in the name of one or both spouses, is presumed to be conjugal unless the contrary is proved." This presumption applies to both ACP and CPG.

Key points on classification:

Onerous Acquisitions: Properties bought with conjugal funds or through joint efforts are conjugal.
Registration Irrelevant: The title's inscription in one spouse's name does not negate its conjugal nature. For instance, a house and lot purchased during marriage with income from employment is conjugal, even if titled solely to the husband.
Burden of Proof: The spouse claiming the property as separate must provide clear evidence, such as proof of acquisition using exclusive funds.
Exclusive Properties: Exceptions include properties acquired before marriage, by donation/inheritance, or with exclusive money. These remain separate and can be sold by the owner-spouse alone.

If the property in question is indeed conjugal, the rules on administration and disposition come into play.

Title vs. Ownership: A Crucial Distinction

A common misconception is that the name on the title determines sole ownership and the right to sell. However, Philippine law distinguishes between registration (which provides notice to third parties) and actual ownership. The Torrens system under Presidential Decree No. 1529 ensures indefeasible titles, but this does not override marital property rules.

Registered Owner: The person named on the certificate of title is the legal owner for registration purposes.
Beneficial Ownership: In conjugal setups, both spouses have beneficial interest, meaning the property belongs to the partnership or community.
Implication for Sales: Even if titled in one name, selling conjugal property without the other spouse's involvement risks invalidity, as the sale affects shared interests.

This distinction is rooted in protecting the family unit, as marital properties often include the family home or essential assets.

Requirement for Spousal Consent in the Sale of Conjugal Property

The Family Code explicitly requires mutual consent for the alienation or encumbrance of conjugal or community property, irrespective of the title's name.

For Absolute Community of Property (Article 96 and 124): Administration is joint. In case of disagreement, the husband's decision prevails temporarily, but the wife can challenge it in court within five years. Crucially, disposition (e.g., sale) or encumbrance requires the written consent of the other spouse or court authority if one is incapacitated. Without this, the transaction is void.
For Conjugal Partnership of Gains (Article 166 and 172): Similar rules apply. The husband is the default administrator, but alienation requires the wife's consent. If withheld unreasonably, the husband may seek court approval. Absence of consent renders the sale void.

In practice:

Deed of Sale: Both spouses must sign the deed if the property is conjugal. Notarial acknowledgment often requires both to appear.
Form of Consent: Consent can be in writing, such as a special power of attorney (SPA) from the non-titled spouse, or joint execution of the deed.
Family Home: Additional protections under Article 152-162 apply. The family home, if conjugal, cannot be sold without the written consent of the spouse and a majority of beneficiaries of legal age. Violation can lead to nullity.

This requirement stems from the principle that conjugal property is co-owned, and one spouse cannot unilaterally diminish the partnership's assets.

Consequences of Selling Without Spousal Consent

A sale without the required consent has severe repercussions:

Void Transaction: The deed is null and void ab initio (from the beginning). The buyer acquires no rights, and the property remains conjugal.
Continuing Offer Doctrine: Under Articles 124 and 172, if one spouse consents and the third party acts in good faith, the transaction is treated as a continuing offer. It can be ratified later by the non-consenting spouse or court, but until then, it is ineffective.
Liability: The selling spouse may face civil liability for damages or criminal charges if fraud is involved (e.g., estafa under the Revised Penal Code).
Buyer's Recourse: A good-faith buyer can seek reimbursement from the seller but cannot enforce ownership against the non-consenting spouse.
Annotation on Title: Buyers should check for annotations indicating marital consent requirements, though not always present.

In annulment or legal separation cases, unauthorized sales can influence property division.

Exceptions to the Spousal Signature Requirement

While the rule is stringent, exceptions exist:

Separate Property: If proven exclusive (e.g., inherited), only the owner-spouse signs.
Sole Administration: If one spouse is absent, incapacitated, or abroad, the other may petition the court for sole administration powers, including sale authority (Article 124/172).
Urgent Necessity: In rare cases, court approval can be sought for sales benefiting the family, even without consent.
Abandonment or Separation: If spouses are de facto separated, courts may allow unilateral disposition, but this requires judicial declaration.
Prenuptial Agreements: If the agreement modifies default rules, it may permit independent disposition, but such clauses must not violate public policy.
Small-Value Transactions: Minor dispositions for daily family needs do not require consent, but real property sales are not considered minor.

These exceptions are narrowly construed to prevent abuse.

Relevant Jurisprudence

Philippine Supreme Court decisions reinforce these principles:

Guiang v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 125172, 1998): Held that sale of conjugal property without wife's consent is void, emphasizing the need for mutual agreement.
Abalos v. Macatangay (G.R. No. 155043, 2004): Ruled that even if titled in one name, conjugal nature requires both signatures; buyer in bad faith loses protection.
Homeowners Savings & Loan Bank v. Dailo (G.R. No. 153802, 2005): Confirmed that mortgage of conjugal property without spousal consent is null, applying the continuing offer doctrine.
Aguirre v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 122249, 2003): Stressed the presumption of conjugality and the voidness of unauthorized dispositions.
Tinitigan v. Tinitigan (G.R. No. 221450, 2017): Reiterated that family home sales need additional consents, invalidating a deed signed only by one spouse.

These cases illustrate consistent judicial protection of spousal rights.

Practical Considerations in Real Estate Transactions

In executing a deed of sale:

Due Diligence: Buyers should demand proof of marital status (marriage certificate) and spousal consent. Verify property classification via tax declarations or deeds.
Notarization: Notaries often require both spouses' presence or an SPA.
Registration: The Register of Deeds may refuse to transfer title without evidence of consent.
Tax Implications: Capital gains tax and documentary stamp tax apply, but invalid sales can lead to disputes with the Bureau of Internal Revenue.
Foreign Spouses: If one spouse is a foreigner, additional rules under the Constitution (prohibiting alien land ownership) may apply, but consent rules remain.
Post-Marriage Changes: In annulment, nullity, or death, property regimes dissolve, altering disposition rules (e.g., heirs' involvement).

Parties should consult lawyers to draft compliant deeds and avoid litigation.

Conclusion

In summary, for conjugal property in the Philippines—even when titled in one spouse's name—the other spouse must generally sign the deed of sale or provide written consent for the transaction to be valid. This requirement safeguards marital assets and prevents unilateral actions that could harm the family. While exceptions exist, they are limited and often require court intervention. Understanding these rules is crucial for spouses, buyers, and real estate professionals to ensure lawful and secure transactions. Failure to comply can result in void contracts, financial losses, and legal battles, underscoring the importance of adherence to the Family Code's provisions.