Co-Ownership and Titling (Philippine legal context)

This article is for general legal information in the Philippine context and discusses common doctrines and practices. It is not individualized legal advice.

1) The legal baseline: why “co-ownership” matters for same-sex couples

In the Philippines, same-sex couples cannot access the property regimes that automatically attach to a valid marriage (e.g., absolute community or conjugal partnership). Because there is no recognized marriage between same-sex partners under current Philippine law, property issues are usually handled through:

Ordinary property rules (ownership, co-ownership, contracts, obligations), and
Evidence of contributions and intent (what the parties paid, agreed, or documented).

As a result, co-ownership becomes the most practical, most commonly used framework when two people acquire real property together.

2) What “co-ownership” is (and is not)

2.1 Definition (practical)

A co-ownership exists when two or more persons own the same property at the same time, with each holding an ideal/undivided share (“pro indiviso”) in the whole.

You do not own “the left half” or “the upstairs.”
You own a fractional share of the entire property, until partition happens.

2.2 How co-ownership is created

Common ways same-sex couples end up as co-owners:

Joint purchase (both named as buyers in the deed)
One buys, later transfers a share to the other (sale/assignment/donation of an undivided share)
Inheritance where both become co-owners with others (less common as a couple-planning tool)
Mixed funding (one pays downpayment, the other pays amortizations; title may or may not reflect this unless documented)

3) Co-ownership rules that matter day-to-day

3.1 Right to use and possess

Each co-owner has the right to use the property consistent with its purpose and without excluding the other co-owners.

Exclusive occupation by one co-owner can trigger issues of reimbursement, accounting, or reasonable compensation, depending on facts and agreements.

3.2 Sharing in fruits, income, and expenses

Income (e.g., rent) and benefits generally follow the proportion of ownership.
Necessary expenses (taxes, repairs, loan payments if jointly obligated) can be subject to reimbursement or contribution rules.

3.3 Management and decisions

For administration/management (repairs, leasing, routine acts), decisions are generally governed by rules that look at the majority in interest (not merely headcount), unless you contract otherwise.

3.4 Selling or encumbering your share

A co-owner may generally:

Sell/assign/mortgage their undivided share without the others’ consent, but cannot validly sell specific physical portions as “mine” unless the property has been partitioned.

Practical consequence: If a partner sells an undivided share to a third party, the remaining partner may end up co-owning with someone else.

3.5 The right to partition (the “escape hatch”)

A key feature of co-ownership: any co-owner may generally demand partition (division) at any time, unless partition is legally or contractually barred for a period.

Partition can be:

Extrajudicial (by agreement; through a partition deed), or
Judicial (if no agreement; court-supervised partition or sale).

If the property cannot be conveniently divided (typical for houses/condos), the usual outcome is:

Buyout, or
Sale of the property and division of proceeds.

4) The special complication: cohabitation property doctrines (Articles 147 and 148)

Philippine law recognizes rules on property relations for couples living together “as husband and wife” without a valid marriage. These rules are often discussed in cohabitation disputes.

4.1 Article 147 (general idea)

This regime is typically associated with unions where the parties are capable of marrying each other but are not married (e.g., no marriage license, void marriage issues). It tends to treat properties acquired during cohabitation as co-owned subject to conditions.

4.2 Article 148 (general idea)

This regime is generally associated with unions where a valid marriage between them is not legally possible, or where the relationship falls into categories treated as not qualifying for Article 147. Under this framework, property is typically co-owned only in proportion to actual contributions, and proof of contribution becomes crucial.

4.3 Why this matters for same-sex couples

Because same-sex partners are not legally capable of marrying each other under current Philippine law, disputes may be approached under principles closer to Article 148 (contribution-based), alongside ordinary co-ownership and contract rules.

Practical takeaway: For same-sex couples, the safer planning assumption is: if a dispute arises, courts may look closely at actual monetary/property contributions, not just the fact of living together.

5) Titling options: how to reflect co-ownership on the title

5.1 Being named together on the Deed of Sale and on the Title

The most straightforward structure is to buy the property with both names as buyers (vendees).

Typical title style (conceptual):

“A, single, Filipino, and B, single, Filipino” as registered owners.

This places both partners on the Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) for land or Condominium Certificate of Title (CCT) for condo units.

5.2 Stating ownership shares (strongly recommended)

If you want ownership to reflect unequal contributions, state it clearly:

“A – 70% undivided share; B – 30% undivided share.”

If shares are not specified, disputes often devolve into arguments about presumed equal shares versus contribution-based allocation. Clear fractional shares help reduce litigation risk.

5.3 “And/or” and other risky phrasing

Avoid vague or nonstandard phrases in deeds and loan documents such as:

“A and/or B”
“in trust for” (unless you are deliberately creating a trust arrangement with proper documentation)

Registries and banks may treat such phrasing inconsistently. Use clear co-ownership language: “A and B, as co-owners” with indicated shares.

5.4 Buying in one name only, then transferring a share later

Sometimes the property is bought under one partner’s name due to financing, credit standing, or convenience. The other partner’s stake can be protected by later executing and registering an instrument such as:

Deed of Sale of Undivided Share
Deed of Assignment/Conveyance of Undivided Share
(Sometimes) Donation of Undivided Share (see cautions below)

Critical point: For real property, protection is strongest when the transfer is registered and reflected in the title/annotations. Unregistered private agreements are more vulnerable against third parties.

6) Essential documents and registration steps (high-level)

In a typical purchase and titling process:

Contract/Deed: Deed of Absolute Sale (notarized) naming both buyers, with shares stated
Taxes: Payment of applicable transfer taxes and documentary stamp tax, plus related clearances
BIR processing: Issuance supporting registration requirements
Local requirements: Transfer tax, tax clearance, etc.
Registry of Deeds: Registration of the deed and issuance of new title (TCT/CCT) in both names
Assessor’s Office: Updating tax declaration and real property tax records

7) Mortgages, bank loans, and “who is on the loan vs who is on the title”

7.1 Title and loan are related but not identical

You can be on the title without being a borrower, and
You can be a borrower (or co-maker/guarantor) without being on the title—though banks often prefer alignment.

7.2 If one partner is not on the title

If only one partner is on title but both are paying:

Document payments and intent (receipts, bank transfers, amortization schedules, written agreement).
Consider registering an actual undivided share transfer or other security arrangement if feasible.

8) Breakup scenarios: what happens to a co-owned property?

Without marriage rules, separation outcomes mostly follow co-ownership + contracts + evidence.

Common pathways:

Buyout: One partner buys the other’s undivided share (sale of share; then title consolidation)
Sale to a third party: Property sold; net proceeds divided according to ownership shares (or proven contributions)
Partition:
- If physically divisible: subdivide and issue separate titles (rare for houses; more plausible for raw land)
- If not divisible: partition by sale (court may order sale and distribution if parties cannot agree)

Dispute accelerant: unclear shares + undocumented contributions + exclusive possession by one partner.

9) Death scenarios: the biggest risk area for same-sex couples

9.1 Co-ownership does not create inheritance rights

If one co-owner dies, their undivided share generally becomes part of their estate and passes to their heirs under succession law (legitimate/illegitimate children, parents, spouse—where applicable, etc.).

A surviving same-sex partner is not automatically an heir by virtue of the relationship.

Result: you may end up co-owning with the deceased partner’s relatives.

9.2 Tools to address survivorship (planning options)

(A) Will (testament)

A will can leave property (including an undivided share) to a partner within the limits of compulsory heirship. If there are compulsory heirs, they are protected by legitime rules, limiting what can be freely given away.

(B) Buy-sell funding

Use a structure where funds are available for the surviving partner to buy the deceased’s share from the estate (often paired with insurance and a clear valuation method).

(C) Life insurance beneficiary designation

Insurance proceeds can provide liquidity for a buyout. Beneficiary designations are not the same as inheriting the property, but they can solve the cash problem that causes forced sales.

(D) Usufruct or lease arrangements

If ownership transfer is constrained by legitime or family dynamics, granting a partner a right to use/occupy (through a lease or a usufruct-type arrangement where legally viable) can protect housing stability, though it has its own formalities and limitations.

10) Donations between partners: a caution

Donations of real property interests are heavily formal and sometimes vulnerable to challenges based on:

Form requirements (public instrument, acceptance, registration), and
Potential policy arguments in certain “illicit relationship” contexts.

While classic prohibitions are typically framed around adultery/concubinage concepts, risk analysis becomes fact-specific. In many planning situations, a sale for value (even at fair consideration) or a testamentary route is less attack-prone than an outright inter vivos donation—especially when there are family members who may contest.

11) Alternatives to simple co-ownership (still Philippine-law grounded)

11.1 Corporation or partnership structures

A couple may hold property through a corporation (subject to constitutional land ownership rules: for landholding corporations, Filipino ownership thresholds matter). This can help with:

Clear proportional interests via shares
Succession planning via share transfers
Governance rules via bylaws

But it adds:

Cost, compliance, and corporate maintenance
Risks if the structure is used to circumvent constitutional restrictions (especially involving foreigners)

11.2 Condominium ownership

Condo units are titled through CCTs and can be co-owned similarly. Foreign ownership restrictions differ for condominium projects (subject to condominium and constitutional limitations, including the project’s foreign ownership cap).

11.3 Long-term lease instead of co-ownership

For couples who want stability without shared title (or where one partner is foreign and land ownership is restricted), a lease can secure occupancy rights without transferring ownership.

12) Foreign partner issues (common in same-sex relationships)

If one partner is a foreigner, Philippine constitutional restrictions on land ownership become central:

Foreigners generally cannot own land.
Condo ownership may be possible subject to the project’s foreign ownership limits.
Structures using nominees or simulated sales carry serious legal risk (void transactions, exposure in disputes).

For mixed-nationality couples, lawful options often focus on:

Condo ownership compliant with caps
Long-term lease
Properly structured corporate ownership (if compliant)
Clear contractual protections without violating constitutional rules

13) Best practices for same-sex couples buying property together (co-ownership + titling)

Put both names on the deed and title if both intend ownership.
State fractional shares explicitly in the deed (especially if contributions differ).
Document contributions (downpayment sources, amortizations, renovations).
Execute a co-ownership agreement covering:
- expense sharing
- exclusive use rules
- buyout and valuation mechanism
- dispute resolution
- what triggers a sale
Plan for death, not just breakup:
- consider a will (within legitime limits)
- ensure liquidity for buyouts
Register what must be registered—unregistered arrangements are fragile against heirs and third parties.
Avoid nominee arrangements that try to “work around” land ownership restrictions.

14) Key idea to remember

For same-sex couples in the Philippines, property security is less about relationship labels and more about (a) clear titling, (b) clear shares, (c) written agreements, and (d) proof of contribution and intent. Co-ownership is workable and lawful, but it becomes unpredictable when the paper trail is vague—especially in breakup and inheritance scenarios.