The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Big news for Tommy T - SCOTUS of the Philippines gives him a reason to return:
| ,.,..,.,..,.,.,.,..,.,.,,..,..,.,,..,.,,. | 02/10/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 10th, 2026 9:13 PM Author: ,.,..,.,..,.,.,.,..,.,.,,..,..,.,,..,.,,. Supreme Court recognizes co-ownership of property in same-sex relationships
MANILA - The Supreme Court recognized that same-sex couples who live together are considered co-owners of properties under Article 148 of the Family Code if there is proof of actual contribution.
In the decision of the 2nd Division promulgated on February 5, 2025, the court reversed the decisions of the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals and declared that the same-sex couples have 50% co-ownership of their disputed house and lot.
The court emphasized that while Article 147 specifically refers to the union between a man and a woman, Article 148 states that properties acquired during cohabitation can be considered as common property of a couple if the property was acquired during their cohabitation and there is evidence that the properties were acquired through their actual joint contribution.
In the case of the same-sex couple, the court stated that in the decision they also signed an Acknowledgement of Third-Party Interest in Real Property.
“Thus, with Article 148 of the Family Code and the Acknowledgement executed by respondent, petitioner is a co-owner to the extent of 50% share of the subject property,” the SC said in the decision penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Lopez.
The high court also said that the applicability of the provisions of the Family Code became a nuanced question considering that Philippine laws do not recognize same-sex marriage.
BACKGROUND
The case stemmed from the separation of the same-sex couple who started living together as a couple in an apartment in 2005.
A year later, they purchased a house and they both agreed to register the property solely in the name of the respondent.
In 2007, the respondent executed the acknowledgment following their separation and decision to sell the house.
Later on, the respondent changed her mind and refused to sell the property and recognize the petitioner as a co-owner.
“Having rightful interest over the subject property, petitioner has the right to demand the division of the subject property,” the SC said.
'GLARING YET UNJUSTIFIED DIFFERENCE'
In a separate concurring opinion, Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen emphasized that deciding otherwise will render legally invisible some forms of legitimate intimate relationships.
"To be different is not to be abnormal," Leonen said.
Meanwhile, Associate Justice Amy Lazaro‑Javier, in her concurrence, said that Article 148 is "broad enough to cover same-sex cohabitation and should not be limited to heterosexual relationships," the SC office reported.
Lazaro‑Javier recognized "the prevailing values in modern society as well as the glaring yet unjustified difference in the treatment of heterosexual couples vis-à-vis their homosexual counterparts."
SC AGAIN MENTIONS CONGRESS ON LGBTQ+ RIGHTS
In its decision, the court noted that it does not have the monopoly to assure the freedom and rights of same-sex couples and Congress must also be involved through the process of legislation that will expose the experiences of homosexuals who have been oppressed.
"Mostly, public reason needs to be first shaped through the crucible of campaigns and advocacies within our political forums before it is sharpened for judicial fiat," the SC said.
In a 2019 decision striking down the petition of gay lawyer Jesus Falcis to declare the articles in the Family Code stating marriage can only happen between a man and a woman unconstitutional, Leonen said same-sex couples "certainly deserve legal recognition in some way."
"However, whether such recognition should come by way of the exact same bundle of rights granted to heterosexual couples in our present laws is a proposition that should invite more public discussion in the halls of Congress," Leonen said.
Congress has been grappling with passing legislation that will allow same-sex partners to marry or enter into unions that grant them the same rights as heterosexual couples.
The Commission on Human Rights, as the country’s Gender and Development Ombud, in a position paper issued last year said the Philippines "takes a significant step toward building a society that values diversity, inclusivity and respect for human rights" by recognizing civil partnerships in same-sex couples.
|