1) Why this topic is complicated

In the Philippines, marriage is not just a relationship status—it is a legal institution that triggers:

an automatic property regime (who owns what during the marriage), and
automatic inheritance rights (who inherits by operation of law).

A common-law / live-in / cohabiting partner may have property rights, but generally does not have the same inheritance rights as a legal spouse. The biggest legal dividing line is whether there is a valid marriage and whether either partner had a legal impediment to marry (e.g., one partner was already married).

This article covers the legal landscape, the key rules, and the practical consequences.

2) Key definitions (Philippine context)

Legal spouse

A legal spouse is someone in a valid marriage—one that complies with legal requirements (capacity, license, authority of solemnizing officer, ceremony, etc.). Even if spouses are separated in fact, the marriage generally continues until death or a court decree (e.g., declaration of nullity, annulment, or legal separation—each has different effects).

Common-law partner / live-in partner

Philippine law does not treat “common-law spouse” as automatically equivalent to a spouse for inheritance. However, the Family Code recognizes property relations of couples living together without a valid marriage through two major rules:

Family Code Article 147 – cohabitation without impediment to marry (both are single/capable of marrying each other, but did not marry).
Family Code Article 148 – cohabitation with an impediment (e.g., one or both are married to someone else, or otherwise disqualified).

These two articles are the backbone of “property rights of live-in partners.”

3) Property rights during the relationship

A. If you are legally married: the marital property regime

Default regimes (depending on when you married)

Marriages celebrated on or after August 3, 1988 (Family Code effectivity):
- Default is Absolute Community of Property (ACP) unless a valid prenuptial agreement chooses another regime.
Many marriages before the Family Code:
- Often governed by Conjugal Partnership of Gains (CPG) under the Civil Code, unless modified by a marriage settlement.

Practical takeaway: A legal spouse usually has strong, built-in rights to property acquired during the marriage, even if not named on the title.

1) Absolute Community of Property (ACP) – broad sharing

Generally:

Property owned by either spouse before marriage and property acquired during marriage become part of the community, except certain exclusions (e.g., gratuitous acquisitions like inheritance/donations to one spouse only, personal and exclusive items, etc.).
Debts and obligations incurred for the family may bind the community.

2) Conjugal Partnership of Gains (CPG) – “gains during marriage”

Generally:

Each spouse retains ownership of exclusive properties brought into the marriage.
Properties acquired during marriage from work/industry or fruits/income of properties are usually conjugal.
Upon dissolution, net gains are divided.

3) Separation of property

Possible only through a valid marriage settlement (or in limited court-approved situations). Each spouse owns what they acquire, subject to family support obligations.

Key legal spouse protections

Strong presumptions favoring the marital partnership/community for properties acquired during marriage.
Rights to question sales/encumbrances of certain properties if consent is required.
Rights affecting the family home and disposition of common property.

B. If you are not married but living together: Articles 147 and 148

1) Article 147: Live-in partners with no impediment to marry

This is the “best-case” legal framework for a non-married couple.

Core rules:

Wages and salaries earned by each partner belong to that partner exclusively (as a rule), but…
Properties acquired during the union through work, industry, or efforts are generally treated as owned in equal shares (co-ownership), even if only one name is on the title, subject to proof and circumstances.
Contributions can be in money, work, industry, and household management/care may be recognized as contribution in many contexts.
There is often a presumption of equal shares unless one proves a different proportion.

Practical impact:

A live-in partner can claim a share in properties acquired during cohabitation—especially if the couple could have married each other legally.

2) Article 148: Live-in partners with an impediment (e.g., one is married)

This is far stricter.

Core rules:

Only properties acquired through actual joint contribution (money, property, industry) are co-owned in proportion to contribution.
No broad presumption of equal sharing. Evidence matters a lot (receipts, remittances, bank transfers, proof of direct payments).
Domestic services alone are treated much more cautiously under this framework.
There is a forfeiture concept in certain situations—especially when the relationship is wrongful (e.g., adultery/concubinage) and there are common children or an innocent party.

Practical impact:

If one partner is legally married to someone else, the live-in partner’s property rights may be limited and harder to prove.

4) Property title vs “real” ownership: why names on documents aren’t the whole story

For legal spouses

Even if property is titled in only one spouse’s name, it may still be community/conjugal depending on:

when it was acquired,
how it was paid,
what regime applies,
whether it falls under exclusions.

For live-in partners

Title is important, but not absolute:

A partner may still prove co-ownership under Article 147/148.
Evidence becomes decisive: proof of contributions, the timing of acquisition, source of funds, and intent.

5) What happens at death: inheritance (succession) rules

A. Legal spouse: strong, automatic inheritance rights

1) The spouse is a “compulsory heir”

A legal spouse is generally a compulsory heir, meaning:

the spouse is entitled to a legitime (a minimum share of the estate) that cannot be freely taken away except through valid disinheritance on legal grounds and with strict formalities.

2) Intestate succession (no will)

If a married person dies without a will, the surviving legal spouse inherits according to the Civil Code rules. Common patterns (simplified):

With legitimate children: the spouse generally receives a share equal to one legitimate child.
With illegitimate children only: the spouse and illegitimate children share the estate in a different proportion than legitimate-child cases (illegitimate children are protected heirs, but shares differ).
With legitimate parents/ascendants (and no children): the spouse and ascendants divide the estate.
With collateral relatives (siblings, etc.) and no children/parents: the spouse typically receives a significant portion and often excludes more remote collaterals.
If spouse is the only heir: spouse may inherit the entire estate.

(Exact shares vary by the combination of heirs—children, parents, illegitimate children, etc.)

3) Testamentary succession (there is a will)

Even with a will:

The spouse’s legitime must still be respected.
The testator can only freely dispose of the free portion after legitimes are satisfied.

4) Practical advantages in estate proceedings

A legal spouse is usually favored in:

appointment as administrator/executor (subject to court discretion),
claims involving the family home and community property liquidation,
access to marital documents and presumptions.

B. Common-law partner: generally not an heir by default

1) No automatic intestate inheritance

A common-law partner is generally not an intestate heir. That means:

If the deceased left no will, the live-in partner typically gets nothing from inheritance law, even after decades together.

The partner may still have:

property claims (co-ownership under Article 147/148),
reimbursement claims (proof-based), but those are different from inheritance.

2) Can a live-in partner inherit through a will?

Sometimes, yes—but it depends on the relationship and legal restrictions:

If the partners had no impediment to marry (Article 147 situation), a will can name the partner as:
- heir (within the free portion),
- legatee/devisee, as long as compulsory heirs’ legitimes are not impaired.
If the relationship is adulterous/concubinage at the time of disposition, Philippine law contains rules that can make certain testamentary dispositions void in favor of a paramour in specific circumstances.

Practical takeaway: A will may help a partner—but it must be structured around legitimes and the restrictions on dispositions to certain disqualified persons.

3) Donations and “hidden transfers”

Even outside wills, attempts to transfer wealth to a paramour can run into legal obstacles:

Rules on void donations to persons in adulterous/concubinage relationships may apply.
Transfers can be attacked as simulations, fraud against compulsory heirs, or void dispositions, depending on facts.

6) The “elephant in the room”: when there is a legal spouse and a live-in partner

This is the most conflict-prone setup: a person remains validly married but lives with another partner.

What the legal spouse can claim

The legal spouse retains rights in the marital property regime (ACP/CPG).
Properties acquired during the marriage may be presumed part of the community/conjugal partnership, even if acquired while separated in fact.
The legal spouse remains a compulsory heir unless legally disqualified under specific rules.

What the live-in partner can claim

The live-in partner’s property claims will likely fall under Article 148, requiring strong proof of actual contribution and limiting presumptions.
The live-in partner will generally have no intestate inheritance, and testamentary transfers may be vulnerable if disqualification rules apply.

Children often become the bridge

Even if the partner cannot inherit, children (legitimate or illegitimate) have inheritance rights. Illegitimate children are compulsory heirs and can inherit from the parent, which can indirectly benefit the household—but the shares and administration can be complex and contested.

7) The family home: special protection, different outcomes

The family home has special protections against execution and special rules upon death.

For legally married families, the family home protections and beneficiary structure are straightforward.
For unmarried setups, the Family Code allows a family home to be constituted by an unmarried head of a family, but who counts as beneficiaries and what protections apply can become fact-sensitive.

Practical takeaway: The family home concept can protect the residence in some cases, but it does not automatically turn a live-in partner into an heir.

8) Common real-world assets: who gets what?

A. House and lot

Married: likely ACP/CPG property depending on timing and funding; spouse has strong rights.
Live-in (no impediment): may be co-owned under Article 147.
Live-in (with impediment): co-ownership only to extent of proven contribution under Article 148.

B. Vehicles

Same logic as above; proof and timing matter.

C. Bank accounts

Account name is evidence, not always decisive.
Estate proceedings and marital property rules can override simple “who is named.”

D. Businesses and shares of stock

For married couples: shares acquired during marriage may fall into community/conjugal property.
For live-in partners: partner must prove contribution/ownership arrangement; corporate records matter.

E. Life insurance

Beneficiary designations can matter a lot, but they can be challenged in certain situations, especially if the beneficiary is legally disqualified under applicable rules and the designation is treated as a form of gratuitous disposition.

F. Pensions and government benefits

Many benefits are designed primarily around the legal spouse and dependents; some programs recognize long-term partners under certain conditions, but documentation and eligibility can be strict and agency-specific.

9) Litigation “battle lines”: how disputes usually play out

If you’re the legal spouse (or lawful heirs)

Typical claims:

include property in ACP/CPG liquidation,
challenge transfers to a partner as void/inauthentic/simulated,
enforce legitimes and compulsory heir rights,
recover properties registered in another’s name but acquired with marital funds.

If you’re the common-law partner

Typical claims:

file an action for partition or recognition of co-ownership under Article 147/148,
prove actual contributions (payments, remittances, construction costs, loan amortizations),
assert reimbursement, unjust enrichment, or trust-type theories depending on facts.

Evidence that tends to matter:

receipts, bank records, loan documents,
proof of remittances tied to asset acquisition,
messages showing intent (careful: authenticity matters),
witness testimony (often secondary to documents),
timelines (cohabitation start, acquisition date, marriage status at acquisition).

10) Planning tools: how couples try to avoid disasters

For legally married couples

Prenuptial agreement (before marriage) to select property regime.
Clear titling and records.
Wills that respect legitimes.
Estate planning around family home and liquidity for taxes/settlements.

For unmarried couples with no impediment (Article 147)

Document contributions and ownership intent.
Consider eventually marrying if that aligns with goals (marriage materially changes inheritance and property protections).
Use wills carefully (while respecting compulsory heirs if any).

For relationships with impediments (Article 148 scenarios)

Be extremely cautious: property and inheritance rights for the partner are legally fragile.
Protect children’s rights (as they are heirs even if the partner is not).
Keep clean documentation of who paid for what to support any co-ownership/reimbursement claim.

11) Common myths (and the legal reality)

Myth: “After 5/7/10 years of living together, you become common-law spouses with the same rights as married couples.” Reality: There is no automatic time-based conversion into marriage-equivalent inheritance rights. Property rights may arise under Articles 147/148, but inheritance is different.

Myth: “If the title is in my name, it’s mine.” Reality: Marriage property regimes and co-ownership rules can override the title.

Myth: “My live-in partner will inherit automatically.” Reality: Generally not, unless structured through valid estate planning—and even then, restrictions and legitimes may limit what’s possible.

12) Quick comparison table (high level)

Issue	Legal Spouse	Common-Law Partner (No Impediment – Art 147)	Common-Law Partner (With Impediment – Art 148)
Property regime	ACP/CPG/Separation applies automatically	Co-ownership of acquisitions during union, often equal-share presumption	Co-ownership only to extent of proven contribution; strict proof
Intestate inheritance	Yes (spouse is a compulsory heir)	Generally none	Generally none; plus added disqualification risks in some scenarios
Inheritance via will	Yes, but legitime rules apply	Possible within free portion (subject to legitimes)	Often vulnerable to disqualification/void disposition rules depending on facts
Proof burden	Often aided by legal presumptions	Moderate	Heavy
If legal spouse also exists	Legal spouse has strong rights	Partner’s claims become more complex	Partner’s claims are most vulnerable

13) Bottom line

Legal spouses have automatic, powerful rights in both property (through the marital property regime) and inheritance (as compulsory heirs).
Common-law partners may have meaningful property rights, but these depend heavily on:
- whether there was an impediment to marry,
- the ability to prove contributions and timing,
- and the legal spouse/children/heirs situation.
For inheritance, a common-law partner is usually not protected by default. Without careful planning (and within legal limits), the partner may end up with no inheritance, even in long relationships.

This is a general legal discussion for Philippine context and is not a substitute for advice on a specific case. If you describe your situation (marital status history, dates of cohabitation, how assets were acquired, existence of children, and whether there is a will), the legal consequences can be mapped much more precisely.