Scribd
Upload
207 views1 page

Uy Digest

1) Benigno and Rose Marie Toda filed a joint petition for judicial approval of their conjugal partnership separation on April 1, 1981, which was signed on March 30, 1981 with a compromise agreement. 2) The Court of Appeals held that the compromise agreement separating the conjugal partnership was only effective on June 9, 1981, when the trial court approved it. 3) The Supreme Court affirmed, finding that under the Civil Code, separation of property requires judicial approval to be effective, not just the agreement of the parties. The conjugal partnership was therefore only dissolved when approved by the court on June 9, 1981.

Uploaded by

Diana Hernandez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
207 views1 page

Uy Digest

1) Benigno and Rose Marie Toda filed a joint petition for judicial approval of their conjugal partnership separation on April 1, 1981, which was signed on March 30, 1981 with a compromise agreement. 2) The Court of Appeals held that the compromise agreement separating the conjugal partnership was only effective on June 9, 1981, when the trial court approved it. 3) The Supreme Court affirmed, finding that under the Civil Code, separation of property requires judicial approval to be effective, not just the agreement of the parties. The conjugal partnership was therefore only dissolved when approved by the court on June 9, 1981.

Uploaded by

Diana Hernandez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

BENIGNO TODA, JR v.

COURT OF APPEALS and ROSE MARIE


TUASON-TODA
ROSE MARIE TUASON-TODA v. BENIGNO TODA, JR.
G.R. Nos. 78583-4 and G.R. Nos.78696-7 March 26,1990,
REGALADO, J.

The separation of property is not effected by the


mere execution of the contract or agreement of the parties,
but by the decree of the court approving the same. It,
therefore, becomes effective on y upon judicial approval,
without which it is void.

Facts:

Benigno and Rose Marie Toda were married until the


alleged infidelity of Benigno which promted Romse Marie to
file for the termination of their marriage for alleged
mismanagement and dissipation of conjugal funds against
Bengigno. The parties agreed to file a joint petition for judicial
approval of conjugal partnership on April 1, 1981. This
petition was signed by the both of them on March 30, 1981
embodied with a compromise agreement in the separation of
their properties. Such agreement was approved in June 9,
1981.

Issue:

Whether or not the CA is correct in stating that the


compromise agreement is effective only on June 9, 1981.

Ruling:

Yes. The CA is correct in holding that the


compromise agreement became effective only on June 9,
1981, the date when it was approved by the trial court, and
not on March 30,1981 when it was signed by the parties.
Under Article 190 of the Civil Code, "(i)n the absence of an
express declaration in the marriage settlements, the
separation of property between spouses during the marriage
shall not take place save in virtue of a judicial order." Hence,
the separation of property is not effected by the mere
execution of the contract or agreement of the parties, but by
the decree of the court approving the same. It, therefore,
becomes effective on y upon judicial approval, without which
it is void. Furthermore, Article 192 of said Code explicitly
provides that the conjugal partnership is dissolved only upon
the issuance of a decree of separation of property.

Consequently, the conjugal partnership of Benigno


and Rose Marie should be considered dissolved only on June
9, 1981 when the trial court approved their joint petition for
voluntary dissolution of their conjugal partnership.
Conformably thereto, the cash dividends declared on July 1,
1981 and July 25,1981 in the amount of P2,191.62 and
P40,196.12, respectively, should pertain to Rose Marie; and
that declared on April 2,5, 1981 in the amount of P37,126.30
ought to be paid to Benigno, pursuant to Paragraph 4 (c) of
the compromise agreement which awards to Benigno the
conjugal assets not otherwise specifically assigned to Rose
Marie.

You might also like