SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 243844. February 11, 2019.]
ANGELINA S. LANSANG, petitioner,vs. HEIRS OF REY D. ALMARIO, REPRESENTED BY VIRGINIA G. ALMARIO, AND THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF MANILA, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 11 February 2019 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 243844 (Angelina S. Lansang v. Heirs of Rey D. Almario, represented by Virginia G. Almario, and the Register of Deeds of Manila)
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the June 28, 2018 Decision 2 and the December 17, 2018 Resolution 3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No.104248 for failure of petitioner Angelina S. Lansang (petitioner) to sufficiently show that the CA committed any reversible error in affirming the September 12, 2014 Decision 4 of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 22, which declared void the Deed of Donation 5 executed by the late Rey D. Almario (Rey), and accordingly, ordered the cancellation of Condominium Certificate of Title Nos. 71142 6 and 71143 7 covering the subject properties stated therein.
As correctly ruled by the CA, the marriage celebrated 8 in 1959 between Rey and Virginia Almario subsisted because a divorce decree obtained by Filipino citizens is not recognized in the Philippines. 9 Thus, the subject properties, which were bought during their marriage, remained to be conjugal in nature, especially since petitioner failed to prove that Rey obtained those properties using his exclusive funds. 10 Being conjugal properties, the disposition thereof requires the consent of both spouses, 11 which does not obtain in this case. As such, the Deed of Donation should be annulled and the certificates of title issued in petitioner's name must be cancelled. Moreover, it was no longer necessary to inquire into whether or not the donation was inofficious 12 for impairing respondents' legitime; since the donation has already been declared void, it could no longer be reduced for being inofficious. 13
SO ORDERED." (HERNANDO, J., designated Additional Member per Special Order Nos. 2629 and 2630 dated December 18, 2018.)
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 5-17.
2.Id. at 20-27. Penned by Associate Justice Zenaida T. Galapate-Laguilles with Associate Justices Remedios A. Salazar-Fernando and Jane Aurora C. Lantion, concurring.
3.Id. at 29-30.
4.Id. at 72-79. Penned by Presiding Judge Marino M. Dela Cruz, Jr.
5.Id. at 59-60.
6.Id. at 57.
7.Id. at 58.
8. See attached Marriage Contract; id. at 48.
9. See id at 23.
10. See id. at 24-25.
11. Article 125 of the FAMILY CODE provides:
Article 125. Neither spouse may donate any conjugal partnership property without the consent of the other[.]
12. Article 752 of the CIVIL CODE states:
Article 752. The provisions of Article 750 notwithstanding, no person may give or receive, by way of donation, more than he may give or receive by will.
The donation shall be inofficious in all that it may exceed this limitation.
13. Article 909 of the CIVIL CODE reads:
Article 909. x x x x
Donations made to strangers shall be charged to the part of the estate of which the testator could have disposed by his last will.
Insofar as they may be inofficious or may exceed the disposable portion, they shall be reduced according to the rules established by this Code. (Emphasis supplied)