Conjugal Property Distinguished from System of Absolute Community:

In terms of marriage settlements, the Family Code provides the following:

The future spouses may in the marriage settlements; agree upon the regime of absolute community, conjugal partnership of gains, complete separation of property, or any other regime. In the absence of marriage settlements, or when the regime agreed upon is void, the system of absolute community of property as established in this Code shall govern.[1]

In order to have a better appreciation and understanding between conjugal partnership of gains and the system of absolute community, it is best to know their difference. These two property regimes are just a part of other property regimes spouses may enter into.

Conjugal Property Distinguished from System of Absolute Community:

What is a system of absolute community?

This is one of the regimes or systems of property relations between the spouses and the default system in the absence of a prenuptial agreement or when the agreed system is null and void. This system commences at the precise moment that the marriage is celebrated, and any stipulation for the commencement of the community regime at any other time is void. In a nutshell, the husband and the wife are considered as co-owners of all properties they bring into the marriage (those that they owned before the marriage), as well as the properties acquired during the marriage, except for certain properties express excluded by law (listed below). The rules on co-ownership apply in all matters not provided under the Family Code.[2]

What is the Conjugal Property of Gains?

Oftentimes referred to as the CPG, it is one of the property relations between the spouses, under which the husband and wife place in a common fund the proceeds, products, fruits and income from their separate properties and those acquired by either or both spouses through their efforts or by chance, and, upon dissolution of the marriage or of the partnership, the net gains or benefits obtained by either or both spouses shall be divided equally between them, unless otherwise agreed in the marriage settlements. In other words, the following are placed in a common fund:

1. The proceeds, products, fruits and income from their separate properties; and
2. Those acquired by either or both spouses through their efforts or by chance.[3]

What are their differences?

A. In the system of absolute community, all the properties owned by the spouses at the time of the marriage become community property. In the conjugal partnership, each spouse retains his or her property before the marriage, and only the fruits and income of such properties become part of the conjugal properties during the marriage.

B. In the system of absolute community, what is divided equally between the spouses or their heirs upon the dissolution and liquidation of the community property is the net remainder of the properties of the absolute community, so that it may happen that a piece of land owned by either spouse before the marriage, being the only property left after the dissolution of the absolute community, would be divided between the spouses or their heirs. In the conjugal partnership of gains, however, the separate properties of the spouses are returned upon the dissolution of the partnership, and only the net profits of partnership are divided equally between the spouses or their heirs.

C. The system of absolute community is based essentially on mutual trust and confidence between the spouses and fosters oneness and unity between them. This is in fact the tradition and custom among the great majority of Filipinos and this is the reason why the Family Code adopts this system instead of the conjugal partnership of gains, which is taken from Spanish law. In conjugal partnership of gains, the capital or properties of the spouses are kept separate and distinct from the benefits acquired by them during the marriage. This constitutes an insurmountable obstacle to the presumption of solidarity between the spouses.[4]

D. It is easier to liquidate the absolute community property because the net remainder of the community properties are just divided between the spouses or their heirs. In the conjugal partnership, the exclusive properties of the parties will have to be identified and returned, and sometimes, this identification is very difficult. [5]

---

[1] Article 75, Family Code of the Philippines

[2] http://jlp-law.com/blog/system-of-absolute-community-property-relations-in-marriage/

[3] http://jlp-law.com/blog/conjugal-partnership-gains-property-relations-marriage/

[4] National Bank v. Quintos, 46 Phil. 370

[5] Justice Alicia Sempio-Diy, Handbook on the Family Code of the Philippines, p62, 1995 Edition

Legal Latin Words

LATIN	MEANING
Lex Prospicit, Non Respicit	The law looks forward, not backward
Lex de Futuro, Judex de Praterio	The law provides for the future, the judge for the past
Absolute Sentencia Expositore Non Indiget	When the language of the law is clear, no explanation of its required
Optima Statuti interpretatix Est Insum Statutum	The best interpreter of the statute is the statute itself
Ratio Legis	Interpretation according to spirit
Ratio Legis Est Anima	The reason of the law is its soul
Cessante Ratione Cesat Ipsa Lex	When the reason for the law ceases, the law ceases also to exist
Expresio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius	Express mention is implied exclusion
Generalia specialibus non derogant	A general law does not nullify a specific or special law
Dura Lex Sed Lex	The law may be harsh but it is still the law
Cogitationis Poenam Nemo Emeret	No man may be punished for his thought
Actus Non Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea	The act itself does not make a man guilty unless his intention were so
Actus Me Invito Factus Non Est Meus Actus	An act done by me against my will is not my act
Ignorantia Legis Neminem Excusant	Ignorance of the law excuse no one
Ignorantia Facto Excusat	Ignorance or mistake in point of fact is an excuse
Ubi Lex Non Distinguit Nea Nos Distiguere Debemos	Where the law does not distinguish, we should not distinguish
Mens Legislatores	Liberal construction
Reddendo Singula Singulis	Referring each to each
Cassus Omissus Pro Omisso Habbendus Est	A case omitted is to be held as intentionally omitted
Noscitur a sociis	Finding the context
Ejusdem generis	When general words follow the designation of particular things, or classes of persons or subjects, the general words will usually be construed to include only those persons or things of the same class or general nature as those specifically enumerated.

Psychological incapacity

Article 36 of the Family Code of the Philippines provides:

A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligation of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization.

Psychological incapacity is a ground for the declaration of absolute nullity of the marriage. Psychological incapacity should refer to no less than a mental (not physical) incapacity that causes a party to be truly cognitive of the basic marital covenants that concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by the parties to the marriage which, as so expressed by Article 68 of the Family Code, include their mutual obligations to live together, observe love, respect and fidelity and render help and support. [1] In simpler terms, psychological incapacity is the condition of a person who does not have the mind, will, and the heart for the performance of marriage obligations.[2]

[1] Santos v CA, GR No. 112019, January 4, 1995

[2] PARAS, Civil Code of the Philippines Annotated Book 1 Persons and Family Relations, p422, 14th Edition

THE INVESTIGATIVE POWER OF CONGRESS

A politically-interested friend of mine randomly asked me why does congress, our legislative body, conducts investigations. Since an investigation, according to him is judicial in nature. I guess this is a significant question since ordinary citizens can always see these hearings in TV and its proceedings are the meat of late night news. His question is a good topic to elaborate and in the broader light, every citizen must at least have a basic understanding of the powers of congress for them to better engage the law-makers and the law-making process. The spirit of the question asks about the investigative powers of congress.

The legislative investigation is enshrined in Article 6, Section 21 of the Constitution:

The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure. The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected.

Why is there a need for Legislative Investigations?

Arnault v. Nazareno[1] states the foundation of the power of legislative investigation. The court said through Justice Ozaeta that the power of inquiry – with process to enforce it – is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function. A legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect or change and where the legislative body does not itself possess the requisite information - which is not in frequently true – recourse must be had to others who do possess it. In simpler and general terms; for congress to make good laws, it needs good information from the once that implements it. Thus legislative investigation is that tool to extract information.

What do you mean by “Aid of Legislation”?

In aid of legislation serves as a limitation to the broad investigative powers of congress, so as the publishing of the rules of procedure and the protection of the rights of persons. “In aid of legislation” is an essential element in the jurisdiction of the legislative body. Moreover, it is not necessary that every question propounded to a witness must be material to a proposed legislation.[2] “In other words, the materiality of the question must be determined by its direct relation to the subject of the inquiry and not by its indirect relation to any proposed or possible legislation. The reason is that the necessity or lack of necessity for legislative action and the form and character of the action itself are determined by the sum total of the information to be gathered as a result of the investigation, and not by a fraction of such information elicited form a single question.[3]

Does the absence of published rules, as cited in the constitutional provision, bar congress from investigation?

The second limitation speaks of the need to publish the rules of procedure regarding legislative inquiry. The need for publication became a focus in the case of Neri v. Senate case. This case states that the Senate currently conducting the investigation had not published its rules. The Court emphasised that publication gives the notice that is required for due process since investigation can affect the rights of non-members of congress. In effect, in the absence of published rules, investigation cannot proceed.[4]

What is the basis of congress to contempt people under investigation?

The third limitation of the power of legislative inquiry concerns the protection of the rights of persons articulated in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. However, corollary to the protection of individual rights in the exercise of their investigative power, it should also be understood that Congress can hold people in contempt in its judgement. Jurisprudence provides that the congress in its right of self-preservation can impose penalty in its existence or while in session.

Experience has shown that mere requests for such information are often unavailing, and also that information which is volunteers is not always accurate or complete; so some means of compulsion is essential to obtain what is needed.[5] The fact that the Constitution expressly gives to Congress the power to punish its Members for disorderly behaviour, does not by necessary implication exclude the power to punish for contempt any other person.[6] This must be so, inasmuch as the basis of the power to impose such a penalty is the right which the Legislature has to self-preservation, and which right is enforceable during the existence of the legislative body. [7]

The power to contempt is articulated further by Arnault vs. Nazareno. The petitioner argued that the Senate lacks authority to commit him for contempt for a term beyond its period of legislative session. According to the Supreme Court:

That investigation has not been completed because of the refusal of the petitioner as a witness to answer certain questions pertinent to the subject of the inquiry. The Senate has empowered the committee to continue the investigation during the recess. By refusing to answer the questions, the witness has obstructed the performance by the Senate of its legislative function, and the Senate has the power to remove the obstruction by compelling the witness to answer the questions thru restraint of his liberty until he shall have answered them. That power subsists as long as the Senate, which is a continuing body, persists in performing the particular legislative function involved. To hold that it may punish the witness for contempt only during the session in which investigation was begun, would be to recognize the right of the Senate to perform its function but at the same time to deny to it an essential and appropriate means for its performance. Aside from this, if we should hold that the power to punish for contempt terminates upon the adjournment of the session, the Senate would have to resume the investigation at the next and succeeding sessions and repeat the contempt proceedings against the witness until the investigation is completed-an absurd, unnecessary, and vexatious procedure, which should be avoided. As against the foregoing conclusion it is argued for the petitioner that the power may be abusively and oppressively exerted by the Senate which might keep the witness in prison for life. But we must assume that the Senate will not be disposed to exert the power beyond its proper bounds. And if, contrary to this assumption, proper limitations are disregarded, the portals of this Court are always open to those whose rights might thus be transgressed.

Who is exempt from Legislative Inquiry?

The President, on whom executive power is vested, is beyond the reach of Congress, except through the power of impeachment. It is based on the President's position as the highest official of the executive branch, and the due respect accorded to a co-equal branch of government which is sanctioned by a long-standing custom. Members of the Supreme Court are exempt from this power of inquiry on the basis not only of separation of powers but also on the fiscal autonomy and the constitutional independence of the judiciary.[8]

Conclusion

The power of inquiry flows from the fundamental principle of the separation of powers which our Constitution enshrines. It enables the legislative branch of government to do its job with precision under the delicate relationship with the other co-equal branches of government and the limitations of the power set forth in Article 6, Section 21 of the Constitution. For ordinary citizens, it is important to understand that the law-making process entails vast powers which if unchecked, can invade and insult our individual rights and freedoms. Legislative inquiry as an implied power of the legislature should be at its best, supported for it aids in creating good laws, and at its worst, guarded for it can be a tool to play circus among the self-interests and passions of law-makers.

[1] 87 Phil. 29, 45 (1950)

[2] BERNAS, The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary, p.760, 2009 Ed.

[3] 87 Phil. At 45.

[4] BERNAS, The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary, p.762, 2009 Ed.

[5] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S., 135; 71 L.ed.,580; 50 A.L.R.,1.

[6] Anderson v. Dunn, 6 Wheaton, 204; 5 L. Ed., 242.

[7] Avancwna, C.J., concurring in Lopez v. De los Reyes, 55 Phil. 170, 186 (1930)

[8] Sabio vs. Gordon, G.R. No. 174318, October 17, 2006

LAW SCHOOL FOR BEGINNERS LIKE ME

Law midterm exam week is over! For us freshmen, this experience serves as the beginning of the end of our ordinary lives. In my case, I entered Law school having only a slight idea on what degree of studying I should do and on how to answer in exams. When I begun to dissect the innocently looking case and question printed on paper, I began to realize the immensity and gravity in the study of Law. For beginners, these are few points which might help.

Mere studying is not enough. You do just study hard, you have to study smart. You really have to also dissect the Law books and understand the strands, the wisdom, the exceptions, the requisites, generalities and all its intricate attributes. Every word, every punctuation, every clause in a provision has a legal implication and as law students, you are expected to understand every single bit of it. So this is why law books are freakishly thick. Mastery of the Law really depends so much on our particular study habits. So as early as freshmen year, it is always ideal to identify your study style and develop a study plan based on that. Needless to say, be committed to that study plan.

The mastery of the Law is just a component of the whole learning experience. The indispensable partner of this knowledge of the Law is the skill of legal analysis. Needless to say (and ideally speaking), the law should serve men and not the other way around. It is how you apply the law in human experience that gives the former its life and meets its purpose. In the exams, our score mainly depends on the quality of our legal reasoning. This skill as we were told can be developed by constantly reading the news. In almost all aspects of the news, laws can be applied. It is in this constant mental exercise of application where this skill can prosper.

One professor would always tell us that at the end of the day, the legal profession is all about communication. Language is the third component that every law student is expected to have at least a basic understanding of. Our legal writing professor would always tell us to practice writing – legally. This really means writing with the absence of flowery words and with the prime purpose of persuading the reader to your side.

More than just technical/academic skills, the most important trait to develop in Law school is resiliency. Law school, even how smart you are, is a frustrating experience. This needs no further articulation. What is important then is how grounded you are in your reason for taking up such “extraordinary” experience to say the least. When you are definitely convinced that this is the path you are meant to do, then perseverance and hard work will naturally radiate in all your actions in and out of Law school.