Supreme Court Declares Same-Sex Couples Eligible for Property Co-Ownership Under Family Code
The Supreme Court of the Philippines has issued a groundbreaking ruling, affirming that same-sex couples can be legally recognized as co-owners of property under Article 148 of the Family Code. This decision mandates that such recognition is contingent upon providing verifiable evidence of their actual financial contributions to the acquisition of the property.
Landmark Case: Jennifer Josef vs. Evalyn Ursua
This pivotal ruling emerged from the case of Jennifer Josef vs. Evalyn Ursua (G.R. No. 267469, February 5, 2025), authored by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez. The Supreme Court Second Division upheld a complaint filed by a former cohabitant seeking partition of property and acknowledgment as a co-owner of a house and lot previously shared with her same-sex partner.
The two women had lived together as a same-sex couple. Approximately one year into their relationship, they jointly purchased a house and lot in Quezon City. To streamline banking transactions, they mutually agreed to register the property under the name of one partner.
Dispute Over Property and Legal Proceedings
Upon separating, the couple initially agreed to sell the property and divide the proceeds equally. One partner signed an Acknowledgment document confirming that the other partner had contributed half of the purchase price and renovation costs. However, the first partner later reversed her decision, refusing to sell and denying her partner's co-ownership status.
Consequently, the aggrieved partner filed an adverse claim on the property title and initiated a lawsuit for partition. When this failed, she escalated the complaint to the Regional Trial Court (RTC), presenting the signed Acknowledgment as evidence of co-ownership. The RTC dismissed the case due to insufficient proof of contribution and ordered her to pay damages.
An appeal to the Court of Appeals upheld the RTC's decision but waived the damages. Both parties then appealed to the Supreme Court, which ultimately overturned the rulings of the lower courts.
Clarification of Family Code Provisions
The Supreme Court meticulously clarified the provisions of the Family Code regarding property relations for cohabiting couples. Article 147 governs property relations for unmarried couples who are legally eligible to marry, granting them co-ownership of property acquired during cohabitation.
In contrast, Article 148 applies to couples who cohabit but cannot legally marry, such as same-sex couples, as Philippine law currently only recognizes marriage between a man and a woman. Under Article 148, co-ownership is recognized but limited to the extent of each partner's actual contribution to the property's purchase.
Proof of Contribution and Broader Implications
The Court declared that a signed Acknowledgment serves as sufficient proof of actual contribution, thereby establishing co-ownership between partners. This decision sets a significant legal precedent for same-sex couples seeking property rights.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court urged Congress and other government agencies to actively seek solutions to address the rights of same-sex couples, noting the absence of laws recognizing same-sex marriage. The Court emphasized that the judiciary alone cannot bear the full responsibility of safeguarding the freedoms and rights of homosexual couples.
In its statement, the Supreme Court articulated, "This Court does not have the monopoly to assure the freedom and rights of homosexual couples. With the political, moral, and cultural questions that surround the issue concerning the rights of same-sex couples, political departments especially the Congress must be involved to quest for solutions, which balance interests while maintaining fealty to fundamental freedoms."
