Facts: Josefina Castillo was only 24 years old when she and Eduardo G. Francisco were married on January 15, 1983. Eduardo was then employed as the vice president in a private corporation. In 1984, the Imus Rural Bank, Inc. (Imus Bank) executed a deed of absolute sale in favor of Josefina Castillo Francisco, married to Eduardo Francisco, covering two parcels of residential land with a house thereon. The Register of Deeds annotated at the dorsal portion of the said titles an Affidavit of Waiver executed by Eduardo where he declared that before his marriage to Josefina, the latter purchased two parcels of land, including the house constructed thereon, with her own savings, and that he was waiving whatever claims he had over the property. 

In 1990, Eduardo, who was then the General Manager and President of Reach Out Trading International, bought 7,500 bags of cement from Master Iron Works & Construction Corporation (MIWCC) but failed to pay for the same. The latter filed a complaint for recovery and trial court rendered judgment against Eduardo.  The court then issued a writ of execution and the sherrif issued a notice of levy on execution over the alleged property of Josefina for the recovery of the balance of the amount due under the decision of the trial court.  Petitioner filed a third party claim over the 2 parcels of land in which she claimed as her paraphernal property. 

 Josefina filed a complaint for damages against MIWCC and the sheriff. Before she could commence presenting her evidence, Josefina filed a petition to annul her marriage to Eduardo in the RTC of Parañaque on the ground that when they were married on January 15, 1983, Eduardo was already married to one Carmelita Carpio. The RTC declared the marriage null and void for being bigamous.

Issue: 

Whether or not the subject properties were paraphernal property of Josefina and can not be held liable for the Eduardo’s personal obligations.

Held: 

 No.The petitioner failed to prove that she acquired the property with her personal funds before her cohabitation with Eduardo and that she is the sole owner of the property. The evidence on record shows that the Imus Bank executed a deed of absolute sale over the property to the petitioner and titles over the property were, thereafter, issued to the latter as vendee after her marriage to Eduardo. 
It is to be noted that plaintiff-appellee got married at the age of 23. At that age, it is doubtful if she had enough funds of her own to purchase the subject properties as she claimed in her Affidavit of Third Party Claim. Confronted with this reality, she later claimed that the funds were provided by her mother and sister, clearly an afterthought in a desperate effort to shield the subject properties from appellant Master Iron as judgment creditor.

Their case fall under Article 148 and since they got married before the Family Code, the provision, pursuant to Art 256, can be applied retroactively if it does not prejudice vested rights.  

Where the parties are in a void marriage due to a legal impediment that invalidates such marriage, Art 148 should be applied.  In the absence of proof that the wife/husband has actually contributed money, property, or industry to the properties acquired during such union the presumption of co-ownership will not arise. (Josefina Francisco vs Master Iron Works & Construction Corporation, G.R. No. 151967, February 16, 2005)