G.R. No. 152658. July 29, 2005.
LILY ELIZABETH BRAVO-GUERRERO, ET AL., Petitioners, vs. EDWARD P. BRAVO, ET AL., Respondents.

FACTS

Spouses Mauricio and Simona Bravo owned two parcels of land in Makati. They had three children: Roland, Cesar (who died without issue), and Lily Bravo-Diaz. Lily had a son, David Diaz, Jr. Roland had six children, including petitioners Lily Elizabeth Bravo-Guerrero, Ofelia Bravo, and respondent Edward Bravo. In 1966, Simona executed a General Power of Attorney (GPA) authorizing Mauricio to “mortgage or otherwise hypothecate, sell, assign and dispose of” her properties. Mauricio mortgaged the properties and later, in 1970, executed a Deed of Sale with Assumption of Mortgage conveying the properties to “Roland A. Bravo, Ofelia A. Bravo and Elizabeth Bravo” (his son and two granddaughters) for a nominal sum plus assumption of the mortgages. The deed was notarized but not annotated on the titles.
After both spouses died, Edward Bravo filed an action for judicial partition, claiming co-ownership by succession. He later sought to annul the 1970 Deed of Sale as simulated. David Diaz, Jr., Lily’s son, intervened, also impugning the sale’s validity and praying for partition. The trial court upheld the sale, finding it was for valuable consideration and duly notarized, and denied partition.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the Deed of Sale executed by Mauricio Bravo in 1970 is valid, thereby precluding judicial partition of the properties.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals and declared the Deed of Sale void. The legal logic rests on the absence of Simona’s valid consent to the sale of conjugal property. Under Article 166 of the Civil Code, the husband cannot alienate or encumber any real property of the conjugal partnership without the wife’s consent. The General Power of Attorney executed by Simona in 1966 was insufficient to constitute such consent for a sale. Article 1878 of the Civil Code explicitly requires a special power of attorney for the agent to convey real property. A general power, like the one here, does not comply with this mandatory requirement. Consequently, Mauricio lacked the authority to sell Simona’s half-interest in the conjugal properties.
Furthermore, the Court found the sale void as to Simona’s share. The purported consideration—a minimal cash payment and assumption of mortgages—was not proven to have been actually paid or assumed by the vendees, as loan receipts remained in Mauricio’s name. The transaction was effectively a donation of conjugal property made by the husband alone without the wife’s consent, which is void. With the sale declared void, the properties remained part of the conjugal estate of Mauricio and Simona. Upon their deaths, these properties passed to their legal heirs. The Court thus ordered the properties partitioned, with one-half going to the heirs of Lily Bravo-Diaz (represented by David Jr.) and the other half to be divided equally among the six children of Roland Bravo.