1) What “conjugal property” means today (and why the label matters)

In Philippine family property law, the term “conjugal” is often used loosely to refer to property owned by spouses as a marital mass. Legally, however, the governing property regime depends on (a) the spouses’ marriage settlement (pre-nuptial agreement), if any, and (b) the date of marriage.

The two common regimes

Absolute Community of Property (ACP)
- Default for marriages celebrated on or after August 3, 1988 (effectivity of the Family Code), if there is no marriage settlement.
- General idea: with limited exceptions, property owned before and acquired during the marriage becomes part of the community. (Family Code, Arts. 75, 88–93)
Conjugal Partnership of Gains (CPG)
- Commonly applies to marriages before August 3, 1988 without a marriage settlement (under the Civil Code regime), and to some couples who expressly adopted it.
- General idea: spouses keep certain exclusive properties, but the “gains” during marriage (and fruits/income) form the conjugal partnership. (Family Code, Arts. 105–123, with transitional application depending on marriage date)

Because authority to sell/donate and who must consent are similar under ACP and CPG, people still say “conjugal property” in practice—but determining the correct regime is crucial when you’re dealing with death, separation, and liquidation.

2) What “unsettled conjugal property” means

“Unsettled conjugal property” usually refers to marital property after the regime has been dissolved but before liquidation and partition have been completed.

When the regime is dissolved

Dissolution happens upon events such as:

Death of a spouse (ACP/CPG dissolves upon death)
Declaration of nullity / annulment (with property effects governed by the Family Code’s liquidation rules)
Legal separation (property regime dissolved; liquidation follows)
Judicial separation of property (for specified grounds)

Why “unsettled” matters

Before liquidation:

The property mass is still subject to settlement of obligations (debts, charges, reimbursements) and division.
Persons who eventually own portions (surviving spouse, heirs, sometimes creditors) do not yet have clearly segregated, titled shares in specific assets.
This creates a high-risk zone for transfers, because a seller often has no authority to convey “the whole property”, and may only have power (at most) to convey an undivided interest, subject to later liquidation and partition.

3) Two different “shares” people mean—and the rules differ

The word “shares” in this topic commonly points to either:

A) “Shares” as an undivided interest in real/other property (pro-indiviso share)

Example: a house is still in the name of the spouses; one spouse died; no settlement yet. An heir or the surviving spouse wants to “sell my share.”

This is governed by:

family property rules on dissolution/liquidation, plus
co-ownership principles (Civil Code) once the parties are effectively co-owners pending partition.

B) “Shares” as corporate shares of stock that are part of the marital mass

Example: stock certificates acquired during marriage are ACP/CPG property; one spouse wants to donate or sell the shares.

This is governed by:

family property rules on consent/authority, plus
rules on transfers of shares under corporate practice (endorsement, deed of assignment, recording in the corporation’s stock and transfer book).

A careful analysis starts by identifying which “shares” are involved.

4) Baseline rule during marriage: sale or donation of community/conjugal property needs joint authority

Even before dissolution, the Family Code is strict:

Under ACP (Family Code, Art. 96)

Administration belongs to both spouses jointly.
Disposition or encumbrance of community property requires the written consent of the other spouse or authority of the court.
Dispositions without such consent/authority are treated as void.

Under CPG (Family Code, Art. 124)

Same practical rule: disposition or encumbrance of conjugal property requires written consent of the other spouse or court authority; otherwise void.

Key takeaway: even while both spouses are alive and married, one spouse acting alone generally cannot validly sell or donate ACP/CPG property.

5) After dissolution (death/separation/nullity): who can sell or donate, and what exactly can be transferred?

Once the regime is dissolved, the most common scenario is death. The analysis below focuses on death, then notes parallels for other dissolution events.

A) Upon death: the “marital mass” becomes subject to liquidation, and the deceased’s estate is involved

On death:

The marital property regime dissolves.
The property must be liquidated: debts and charges are paid, reimbursements are made, and only then are the net shares determined.
The deceased spouse’s share becomes part of the estate, to be transferred to heirs via settlement.

Practical consequence

A surviving spouse does not automatically have authority to sell “the property” just because they lived there or managed it before. What exists is:

the surviving spouse’s prospective/undetermined share in the net marital mass, and
the estate’s interest (for heirs/creditors), which typically requires settlement processes before clean conveyance.

B) What can be sold before liquidation?

1) Selling the entire specific property (e.g., “I’m selling the whole house”)

This is usually problematic unless:

there is proper authority in an estate proceeding (judicial settlement), or
all persons who must consent (surviving spouse + all heirs, and where required, with court approval) execute the sale in a manner consistent with settlement rules.

Without the participation/authority of the estate and other interested parties, a deed selling the “whole property” is exposed to challenges—because the seller may not own the entire thing and may not have authority to dispose of the estate’s portion.

2) Selling only an undivided interest (“I sell my share”)

This is often legally possible in concept—but what is actually transferred is limited:

A person who is (or will be) an owner in the mass (surviving spouse and/or heirs) can generally transfer their undivided/ideal interest, subject to:
- the outcome of liquidation (debts, reimbursements, charges), and
- eventual partition.

But buyers must understand: they are typically buying into a co-ownership or an interest that will later be quantified, not a particular room, floor, or specific portion.

Civil Code co-ownership principle: a co-owner may sell or assign their ideal share, but cannot sell a physically determinate portion as exclusively theirs before partition.

3) Selling hereditary rights (heir’s share in the estate)

If succession has opened (death occurred), heirs acquire hereditary rights. An heir may dispose of their hereditary rights—even before partition—though the buyer’s position is generally that of a successor to the seller’s rights, subject to partition and settlement outcomes.

Important feature: When hereditary rights are sold to a “stranger,” co-heirs may have a right of legal redemption under certain conditions (Civil Code, Art. 1088), within the statutory period, after written notice of the sale. This can make pre-partition sales commercially risky.

C) Donations before liquidation

Donations are typically scrutinized more strictly because:

they reduce the mass available to satisfy obligations and legitimes, and
they can violate restrictions on disposition of property belonging partly to others (estate/heirs/co-owners).

A donation of “the whole property” by only one interested person (e.g., surviving spouse alone) is generally vulnerable, because the donor cannot give what they do not solely own.

Even a donation of an undivided share is possible in theory, but it:

may be impaired by pending obligations of the marital mass/estate,
may trigger collation/advancement issues in inheritance (depending on donee identity and facts),
must comply with formalities (especially for immovables), and
may be affected by limits protecting compulsory heirs’ legitimes.

6) The consent/authority map in common “unsettled” situations

Situation 1: Both spouses alive, property is ACP/CPG, one spouse wants to sell/donate alone

Sale/encumbrance: requires written consent of the other spouse or court authority (Family Code, Arts. 96 and 124).
Donation: as a disposition, likewise requires appropriate spousal authority; plus donation formalities and other limitations may apply.

Consequence of lack of consent/authority: disposition is generally treated as void.

Situation 2: One spouse deceased, no settlement yet; surviving spouse wants to sell

Common claim: “It’s conjugal; I’m the spouse; I can sell.” Legal reality: the surviving spouse cannot validly sell what belongs to the estate/heirs.

A clean transfer typically needs one of the following:

Judicial settlement: the court (through an executor/administrator) authorizes sale, especially if needed to pay obligations or to facilitate partition; or
Extrajudicial settlement (when permitted) with participation of all heirs and the surviving spouse, plus compliance with publication/bond requirements and tax clearances; then the property can be sold by those who have authority under the settlement instrument.

If the surviving spouse sells alone, at best the deed may be treated as conveying only whatever rights the seller truly has—often an undivided interest—and even that may be contested depending on form and circumstances.

Situation 3: Heir sells “my share” in an unsettled conjugal property

This commonly occurs when heirs want cash immediately.

What is usually transferred:

the heir’s hereditary rights or ideal share, not a specific physically identified portion.

Risks/limitations:

subject to estate obligations and liquidation outcomes,
subject to co-heirs’ redemption rights in certain cases (Civil Code, Art. 1088),
subject to later partition (the buyer may end up with a different asset or value than expected).

Situation 4: Unsettled property after legal separation/nullity/annulment

When a marriage is terminated or spouses are legally separated, liquidation rules apply (Family Code provisions on dissolution and liquidation, including requirements for partition and delivery of presumptive legitimes in certain cases). Transfers made while liquidation/partition requirements are being bypassed can be attacked, especially if they prejudice mandatory property effects imposed by law.

7) Sale vs. Donation: why donation is often more legally fragile

A) Sales (onerous transfers)

Sales are supported by consideration, and in some scenarios (e.g., necessary liquidation, paying debts), a sale may be justified or authorized. Still, authority must be correct, and what is sold must match what the seller owns.

B) Donations (gratuitous transfers)

Donations can collide with:

the rights of other co-owners/heirs,
estate obligations,
legitimes of compulsory heirs,
restrictions on certain spousal donations (notably, donations between spouses during marriage are generally prohibited except moderate gifts on occasion—Family Code, Art. 87).

Even when the donor is not donating to the spouse, the key problem in “unsettled conjugal property” is often lack of sole ownership and lack of authority over the estate/co-owners’ interests.

8) Formal requirements that often decide validity (especially for donations)

A) For real property (land/house)

Transfers must be in a proper public instrument to be registrable and enforceable against third persons.
For donations of immovable property, the law requires specific formalities (public instrument, acceptance, etc.). Failure in form can invalidate the donation regardless of good intentions.

B) For corporate shares (shares of stock)

Even if spouses/estate authority is correct, share transfers typically require:

deed of assignment or endorsed stock certificate,
compliance with corporate by-laws and restrictions (e.g., right of first refusal, nationality rules for certain industries),
recording in the corporation’s stock and transfer book for the transferee to be recognized as a stockholder.

If shares are part of ACP/CPG:

during marriage, the spousal consent rule (Arts. 96/124) overlays the corporate steps;
after death, estate settlement authority overlays the corporate steps.

9) Typical problem patterns (and how courts usually look at them conceptually)

Pattern 1: “One-signature deed” over conjugal/community property

If executed during marriage without written spousal consent/court authority: generally treated as void under Arts. 96/124.

Pattern 2: Surviving spouse sells the whole “conjugal” property before settlement

The sale often gets challenged because the estate/heirs’ portion was conveyed without authority.
Buyers may be deemed to have bought at their risk, especially where title shows both spouses or indicates the deceased.

Pattern 3: Heir sells a specific asset as “mine” before partition

Courts tend to treat this as a transfer only of the heir’s undivided interest, not exclusive ownership of that specific asset—unless later partition happens to award that asset to the seller’s share.

Pattern 4: Donation to one child/heir while property is unsettled

Donation can be attacked as impairing legitimes, bypassing settlement rules, or violating co-ownership/estate limitations.
Even if eventually accounted for as an advancement, the donation may still fail if the donor lacked authority or formality.

10) Practical compliance checklist for safer transfers

A) Identify the governing property regime

Marriage date (pre- or post-August 3, 1988)
Existence and terms of marriage settlement

B) Identify the “unsettled” reason

Death → estate settlement and liquidation required
Legal separation/nullity/annulment → liquidation/partition requirements under the Family Code

C) Identify who must sign / authorize

During marriage: both spouses (or court authority if one cannot/will not consent)
After death: surviving spouse + heirs and/or court-appointed administrator/executor with authority, depending on the settlement route and nature of the transaction

D) Match the deed to what is legally transferable

If only an undivided interest is transferable at the moment, the instrument should say so clearly (avoid falsely describing ownership of the whole).
If transferring hereditary rights, describe it as such and consider co-heirs’ redemption implications.

E) Complete statutory and administrative requirements

Proper deed form (especially for donations of immovables)
Title/registry requirements for real property
Corporate book recording requirements for share transfers
Tax compliance (estate tax where death is involved; donor’s tax for donations; documentary stamp taxes where applicable), since registries and corporations often require tax clearances before recognizing transfers

11) Key principles to remember (Philippine context)

Spousal consent/court authority is central to dispositions of ACP/CPG property during marriage. (Family Code, Arts. 96, 124)
After dissolution, liquidation comes first conceptually; a person rarely has authority to convey the entire asset alone.
Before partition, what can usually be conveyed (if at all) is an ideal/undivided interest or hereditary rights, not a specific segregated portion—unless authority and partition align later.
Donations are more fragile in unsettled settings due to formalities, authority limits, and inheritance protections (including legitimes and restrictions on certain spousal donations).
Buyers/donees inherit the “unsettled” risk: pending debts, reimbursements, redemption rights of co-heirs, and the outcome of liquidation/partition can materially change what the transferee ultimately receives.