Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Persons - Docena v. Lapesura (Property Relations) GR 140153

    Uploaded by

    Jeffrey Endrinal
    349 views2 pages
    This case involved a petition filed by Antonio and Alfreda Docena to contest writs of demolition issued against property they claimed was conjugal property. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition because the certification of non-forum shopping was only signed by Antonio. The Supreme Court ruled that in this case, the certification signed by just the husband was sufficient compliance with the rules. As the property involved was conjugal, Antonio could validly exercise management alone. Given the property's nature and that Antonio and Alfreda lived apart, requiring the wife's separate signature would be too harsh an application of the forum shopping rules. The Supreme Court granted the petition and remanded the case back to the Court of Appeals.

    Original Description:

    Digest

    Original Title

    Persons - Docena v. Lapesura (Property Relations) Gr 140153 Copy

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This case involved a petition filed by Antonio and Alfreda Docena to contest writs of demolition issued against property they claimed was conjugal property. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition because the certification of non-forum shopping was only signed by Antonio. The Supreme Court ruled that in this case, the certification signed by just the husband was sufficient compliance with the rules. As the property involved was conjugal, Antonio could validly exercise management alone. Given the property's nature and that Antonio and Alfreda lived apart, requiring the wife's separate signature would be too harsh an application of the forum shopping rules. The Supreme Court granted the petition and remanded the case back to the Court of Appeals.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    349 views2 pages

    Persons - Docena v. Lapesura (Property Relations) GR 140153

    Uploaded by

    Jeffrey Endrinal
    This case involved a petition filed by Antonio and Alfreda Docena to contest writs of demolition issued against property they claimed was conjugal property. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition because the certification of non-forum shopping was only signed by Antonio. The Supreme Court ruled that in this case, the certification signed by just the husband was sufficient compliance with the rules. As the property involved was conjugal, Antonio could validly exercise management alone. Given the property's nature and that Antonio and Alfreda lived apart, requiring the wife's separate signature would be too harsh an application of the forum shopping rules. The Supreme Court granted the petition and remanded the case back to the Court of Appeals.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Endrinal, Jeffrey C.

    1D Persons and Family Relations

    G.R. No. 140153 March 28, 2001

    ANTONIO DOCENA and ALFREDA DOCENA, petitioners,


    vs.
    HON. RICARDO P. LAPESURA, in his capacity as Presiding Judge of the RTC, Branch III, Guian, Eastern
    Samar; RUFINO M. GARADO, Sheriff IV; and CASIANO HOMBRIA, respondents.

    FACTS:

    On June 1, 1977, private respondent Casiano Hombria filed a Complaint for the recovery of a parcel of
    land against his lessees, petitioner-spouses Antonio and Alfreda Docena. The petitioners claimed
    ownership of the land based on occupation since time immemorial.

    RTC rendered judgement in favour of petitioners. CA reversed the decision and ordering petitioners to
    vacate the land they have leased excluding the portions reclaimed by petitioners and which form part of
    the seashore. Pursuant to the Resolution, the public respondent sheriff issued an alias Writ of
    Demolition. The petitioners filed a Motion to Set Aside or Defer the Implementation of Writ of
    Demolition. Motion denied. A Motion for Reconsideration was likewise denied by respondent judge.

    The CA dismissed the Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition on the ground that the petition was filed
    beyond the 60-day period provided in the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure and that the certification of
    non-forum shopping attached thereto was signed by only one of the petitioners.

    ISSUE: Whether or not it is sufficient that the certification of non-forum shopping was signed by only
    one of the petitioners.

    RULING:

    Yes, such certificate signed by Antonio Docena alone should be deemed to constitute substantial
    compliance with the rules.

    Under the Family Code, the administration of the conjugal property belongs to the husband and the wife
    jointly. However, unlike an act of alienation or encumbrance where the consent of both spouses is
    required, joint management or administration does not require that the husband and wife always act
    together. Each spouse may validly exercise full power of management alone, subject to the intervention
    of the court in proper cases as provided under Article 124 of the Family Code. It is believed that even
    under the provisions of the Family Code, the husband alone could have filed the petition for certiorari
    and prohibition to contest the writs of demolition issued against the conjugal property with the Court of
    Appeals without being joined by his wife. The signing of the attached certificate of non-forum shopping
    only by the husband is not a fatal defect.

    The two petitioners in this case are husband and wife and their residence is the subject property alleged
    to be a conjugal property. In view of the property involved which is a conjugal property, the petition
    questioning the writ of demolition thereof originated from an action for recovery brought against the
    spouses and is clearly intended for the benefit of the conjugal partnership and the wife as point out was
    in the province of Samar whereas the petition was prepared in Metro Manila, a rigid application of the
    rules on forum shopping that would not authorize a husband’s signing the certification in his behalf and
    that of his wife is too harsh. Hence, petition was granted and the case was remanded to the CA for
    further proceedings.

    You might also like