100 Years of Chamber Movement in the Philippines:Its Role in National-Building
Featured Editorial of Philippine Panorama dated July 27, 2003
It was at the upper floor of the Botica de San Gabriel in Plaza Cervantes, Escolta, that the first Filipino Chamber Movement was born. The date was July 19, 1903. And the movement was called the Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines (CCP).The chamber actually traces its beginnings to the Camara de Comercio de Filipinas instituted by a Royal Decree of Queen Regent Maria Cristina of Spain on April 19, 1886. The remaining members of the Camara were also the founding members of the Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines (CCP).
From that illustrious group of 55 businessmen which included the who's who in Philippine business at that time, the chamber grew to over 1,000 members and became the vanguard of Philippine commerce and trade.
Sometime in the 1930s, CCP spearheaded the "Filipino First" movement that gave birth to the National Economic Protectionism Association or NEPA, giving the Filipinos a major role in the country's import and export trade. Several laws were also passed in Congress to empower Filipinos in the different areas of business. Among these were the law "Filipinizing" retail trade, restriction of rice and corn trade to nationals, and the Flag Law which gave Philippine-made products priority in government purchases.The onset of Philippine independence and the rise of industries in the 1950s created the need for several industry groups to form their own business organization to address their specific concerns. Thus, the Philippine Chamber of Industry (PCI) was born.Realizing the role of regional cooperation in trade, the Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines led the organization of the Confederation of Asian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (CACCI) in the mid-60s. The CAACI gave birth to the ASEAN Chamber of Commerce and Industry and remains an active member of the ASEAN Chamber to this day.
As the Chamber marched to the 1970s, it crystallized its role as champion of small and medium enterprises with the establishment of the Small Business Development Foundation in 1973. The SME Foundation was able to boost SME development by providing technical and management know-how as well as financial assistance to needy enterprises.
To further support trade expansion, the chamber pushed for the establishment of the Philippine Center for Trade and the Philippine International Trade Fairs. It was also instrumental in the formation of the Export Credit Insurance Corp.The chamber also helped strengthen the shipping industry, a vital component of trade, with the formation of the Philippine Shippers Council.During his term, President Ferdinand Marcos decreed the unification of the different business chambers in the country. Thus, in 1978, the CCP was merged with the PCI to create the Philippine Chamber of Commerce of Industry (PCCI), which, by virtue of Letter of Instruction No. 780, was to be recognized as the "sole official representative and voice of the entire private business community."In order to preserve its vital role in history and continue to be relevant to the needs of Philippine trade and business, the CCP was transformed into a non-profit and non-stock foundation known as the Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines Foundation, Inc. (CCPF).
In celebrating its 100th year anniversary, the CCPF has several activities lined up to commemorate it. One of their main activities is the establishment of the CCPF Centennial Awards Program. Two awards are actually being established, namely: 1) The Centennial Enterprise of the Republic Awards (CERA), and 2) the Centennial Chamber Founders of the Republic Award (CCFA).
As CCPF mark its hundreth year, it is both a reward and a reminder that more challenges lie in the years ahead. And its actions today, by honoring and remembering the members and achievement of the past, must serve as inspiration for the generations to come.True to its commitment, the CCPF has continued to be an advocate of Philippine commerce and trade by taking a stand on issues that affect Philippine business.CCPF may be remembered as among the first groups to take a stand on the proposed Charter Change last year by organizing various forums on constitutional reforms in universities for purposes of education and information dissemination.
The CCPF also encouraged the integration of commerce and trade skills in the curriculum of the Philippine educational system. Aiming to fulfill the role of enhancing the business educational system, CCPF hopes to make use of its own building in Intramuros, Manila as a training center and information base by making use of the facility for IT and skills training for graduating students.
Recognizing the vital role of SMEs in the Philippines, who are the majority of enterprises and major source of employment of Filipinos, the CCPF will continue supporting this sector by providing assistance where it is needed.
email address: nhoel_alagao@yahoo.com
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Conjugal Partnership of Gains: Property Relations in Marriage
We previously noted that we are breaking down the discussion on the property relations of the spouses during marriage, as follows: (1) Prenuptial agreements and introduction to property relations between husband and wife; (2) The system of absolute community; (3) Conjugal partnership of gains; (4) Complete separation of property; (5) Donations by reason of marriage; and (6) Comparison of the various types of property relations between spouses. This post is Part 3.What is the conjugal partnership 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; and2. those acquired by either or both spouses through their efforts or by chance.
In what instances shall the regime of CPG apply?
It applies only when the future spouses agree to it in the marriage settlement, if any. It also applies to conjugal partnerships of gains already established between spouses before the effectivity of the Family Code, without prejudice to vested rights. This is the default property relationship under the Civil Code, which was changed to that of absolute community of property under the Family Code.
When does the CPG begin?
It begins at the precise moment when the marriage is celebrated, exactly like in absolute community of property.
Can a spouse waive his/her share in the community property during marriage?
No. Except in case of judicial separation of property, any waiver of rights, shares and effects of the absolute community of property during the marriage can be made.
Are the rules on ordinary partnership applicable to the conjugal partnership of gains?
As a rule, yes, but only if not in what is expressly provided in the pertinent provisions of the Family Code or by the spouses in their marriage settlements.
What are the exclusive property of each spouse?
(1) That which is brought to the marriage as his or her own;
(2) That which each acquires during the marriage by gratuitous title (through pure liberality, as in donation and testate/intestate succession);
(3) That which is acquired by right of redemption, by barter or by exchange with property belonging to only one of the spouses; and
(4) That which is purchased with exclusive money of the wife or of the husband.
What is the significance of having an exclusive property?
The spouses retain the ownership, possession, administration and enjoyment of their exclusive properties. A spouse may also mortgage, encumber, alienate or otherwise dispose of his or her exclusive property, without the consent of the other spouse, and appear alone in court to litigate with regard to the same.
Either spouse may, during the marriage, transfer the administration of his or her exclusive property to the other by means of a public instrument, which shall be recorded in the registry of property of the place the property is located. However, the alienation of any exclusive property of a spouse administered by the other automatically terminates the administration over such property and the proceeds of the alienation shall be turned over to the owner-spouse.
What properties belong to the conjugal partnership?
(1) Those acquired by onerous title during the marriage at the expense of the common fund, whether the acquisition be for the partnership, or for only one of the spouses;
(2) Those obtained from the labor, industry, work or profession of either or both of the spouses;
(3) The fruits, natural, industrial, or civil, due or received during the marriage from the common property, as well as the net fruits from the exclusive property of each spouse;
(4) The share of either spouse in the hidden treasure which the law awards to the finder or owner of the property where the treasure is found;
(5) Those acquired through occupation such as fishing or hunting;
(6) Livestock existing upon the dissolution of the partnership in excess of the number of each kind brought to the marriage by either spouse; and
(7) Those which are acquired by chance, such as winnings from gambling or betting. However, losses therefrom shall be borne exclusively by the loser-spouse.
What is the presumption regarding properties acquired during marriage?
All property acquired during the marriage, whether the acquisition appears to have been made, contracted or registered in the name of one or both spouses, is presumed to be conjugal unless the contrary is proved.
What is the rule in case of purchase by installment?
Property bought on installments paid partly from exclusive funds of either or both spouses and partly from conjugal funds belongs to the buyer or buyers if full ownership was vested before the marriage and to the conjugal partnership if such ownership was vested during the marriage. In either case, any amount advanced by the partnership or by either or both spouses shall be reimbursed by the owner or owners upon liquidation of the partnership.
What is the rule in case a spouse has a credit payable to him over time?
Whenever an amount or credit payable within a period of time belongs to one of the spouses, the sums which may be collected during the marriage in partial payments or by installments on the principal shall be the exclusive property of the spouse. However, interests falling due during the marriage on the principal shall belong to the conjugal partnership.
What is the rule if improvements are made on that exclusive property using conjugal funds or through the acts or efforts of either or both spouses?The ownership of improvements, whether for utility or adornment, made on the separate property of the spouses at the expense of the partnership or through the acts or efforts of either or both spouses shall pertain to the conjugal partnership, or to the original owner-spouse, subject to the following rules:
1. When the cost of the improvement made by the conjugal partnership and any resulting increase in value are MORE than the value of the property at the time of the improvement, the entire property of one of the spouses shall belong to the conjugal partnership.
2. When the cost of the improvement made by the conjugal partnership and any resulting increase in value are LESS than the value of the property at the time of the improvement, the entire property shall remain with the owner-spouse.
3. In either case, the owner-spouse or the conjugal partnership, as the case may be, is entitled to reimbursement for the value of the principal property or the improvement, as the case may be.
4. It doesn’t matter if the improvements are for utility or adornment.
What are the charges upon and obligations of the conjugal partnership?
The conjugal partnership shall be liable for:
(1) The support of the spouse, their common children, and the legitimate children of either spouse; however, the support of illegitimate children shall be governed by the provisions of the Family Code on Support;
(2) All debts and obligations contracted during the marriage by the designated administrator-spouse for the benefit of the conjugal partnership of gains, or by both spouses or by one of them with the consent of the other;
(3) Debts and obligations contracted by either spouse without the consent of the other to the extent that the family may have benefited;
(4) All taxes, liens, charges, and expenses, including major or minor repairs upon the conjugal partnership property;
(5) All taxes and expenses for mere preservation made during the marriage upon the separate property of either spouse;
(6) Expenses to enable either spouse to commence or complete a professional, vocational, or other activity for self-improvement;
(7) Ante-nuptial debts of either spouse insofar as they have redounded to the benefit of the family;
(8) The value of what is donated or promised by both spouses in favor of their common legitimate children for the exclusive purpose of commencing or completing a professional or vocational course or other activity for self-improvement; and
(9) Expenses of litigation between the spouses unless the suit is found to groundless.
If the conjugal partnership is insufficient to cover the foregoing liabilities, the spouses shall be solidarily liable for the unpaid balance with their separate properties.
What are the rules concerning personal debts contracted before or during the marriage?
1. As a rule, the payment of personal debts contracted by the husband or the wife before or during the marriage shall not be charged to the conjugal partnership properties.
2. However, these debts shall be charged to the conjugal partnership properties insofar as they redounded to the benefit of the family.
3. If the spouse has no exclusive property, it may be charged to the conjugal partnership, subject to the provisions below.
What are the rules concerning fines and pecuniary indemnities imposed on each spouse?
These cannot be charged to the partnership. However, the payment of personal debts contracted by either spouse before the marriage, that of fines and indemnities imposed upon them, as well as the support of illegitimate children of either spouse, may be enforced against the partnership assets after the charges/obligations enumerated in above have been covered, if the spouse who is bound should have no exclusive property or if it should be insufficient; but at the time of the liquidation of the partnership, such spouse shall be charged for what has been paid for the purpose above-mentioned.
What is the rule in case of winnings or losses in gambling?
Any loss incurred by a spouse during the marriage in any game of chance or in betting, sweepstakes, or any other kind of gambling whether permitted or prohibited by law, shall be borne by that spouse, and shall not be charged to the conjugal partnership. Any winnings, on the other hand, shall form part of the conjugal partnership property.
Who has the authority to administer the conjugal partnership property?
The administration and enjoyment of the conjugal partnership shall belong to both spouses jointly. In case of disagreement, the husband’s decision shall prevail, subject to recourse to the court by the wife for proper remedy, which must be availed of within five years from the date of the contract implementing such decision.
In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to participate in the administration of the conjugal properties, the other spouse may assume sole powers of administration. These powers do not include disposition or encumbrance without authority of the court or the written consent of the other spouse. In the absence of such authority or consent, the disposition or encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction shall be construed as a continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse and the third person, and may be perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance by the other spouse or authorization by the court before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors.
Can either spouse make donations of conjugal partnership property?
As a rule, neither spouse may donate any conjugal partnership property without the consent of the other. However, either spouse may, without the consent of the other, make moderate donations from the conjugal partnership property for charity or on occasions of family rejoicing or family distress.
When does the conjugal partnership terminate?
(1) Upon the death of either spouse;
(2) When there is a decree of legal separation;
(3) When the marriage is annulled or declared void; or
(4) In case of judicial separation of property during the marriage.
Does the separation in fact or de facto separation between the spouses affect the conjugal partnership?No. However, the following are the effects:
(1) The spouse who leaves the conjugal home or refuses to live therein, without just cause, shall not have the right to be supported;
(2) When the consent of one spouse to any transaction of the other is required by law, judicial authorization shall be obtained in a summary proceeding;
(3) In the absence of sufficient conjugal partnership property, the separate property of both spouses shall be solidarily liable for the support of the family. The spouse present shall, upon petition in a summary proceeding, be given judicial authority to administer or encumber any specific separate property of the other spouse and use the fruits orproceeds thereof to satisfy the latter’s share.
What is the rule if a spouse abandons the other?
If a spouse without just cause abandons the other or fails to comply with his or her obligation to the family (referring to marital, parental or property relations), the aggrievedspouse may petition the court for receivership, for judicial separation of property, or for authority to be the sole administrator of the conjugal partnership property, subject tosuch precautionary conditions as the court may impose.
A spouse is deemed to have abandoned the other when he or she has left the conjugal dwelling without intention of returning. The spouse who has left the conjugal dwellingfor a period of three months or has failed within the same period to give any information as to his or her whereabouts shall be prima facie presumed to have no intention ofreturning to the conjugal dwelling.
What is the applicable procedure in the event of dissolution of the conjugal partnership regime?The following procedure shall apply:
(1) An inventory shall be prepared, listing separately all the properties of the conjugal partnership and the exclusive properties of each spouse.
(2) Amounts advanced by the conjugal partnership in payment of personal debts and obligations of either spouse shall be credited to the conjugal partnership as an asset thereof.
(3) Each spouse shall be reimbursed for the use of his or her exclusive funds in the acquisition of property or for the value of his or her exclusive property, the ownership of which has been vested by law in the conjugal partnership.
(4) The debts and obligations of the conjugal partnership shall be paid out of the conjugal assets. In case of insufficiency of said assets, the spouses shall be solidarily liable for the unpaid balance with their separate properties.
(5) Whatever remains of the exclusive properties of the spouses shall thereafter be delivered to each of them.
(6) Unless the owner had been indemnified from whatever source, the loss or deterioration of movables used for the benefit of the family, belonging to either spouse, even due to fortuitous event, shall be paid to said spouse from the conjugal funds, if any.
(7) The net remainder of the conjugal partnership properties shall constitute the profits, which shall be divided equally between husband and wife, unless a different proportion or division was agreed upon in the marriage settlements or unless there has been a voluntary waiver or forfeiture of such share as provided in this Family Code.
(8) The presumptive legitimes of the common children shall be delivered upon partition.
(9) In the partition of the properties, the conjugal dwelling and the lot on which it is situated shall, unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties, be adjudicated to the spouse with whom the majority of the common children choose to remain. Children below the age of seven years are deemed to have chosen the mother, unless the court has decided otherwise. In case there is no such majority, the court shall decide, taking into consideration the best interests of said children.
If a spouse dies, how is the conjugal partnership liquidated?
Upon the termination of the marriage by death, the conjugal partnership property shall be liquidated in the same proceeding for the settlement of the estate of the deceased. If no judicial settlement proceeding is instituted, the surviving spouse shall liquidate the conjugal partnership property either judicially or extra-judicially within six months from the death of the deceased spouse.
What happens if the foregoing procedure in the immediately preceding paragraph is not carried out?If the procedure on liquidation, as outlined above, is not followed: (a) any disposition or encumbrance involving conjugal partnership property by the surviving spouse shall be void; and (b) any subsequent marriage shall be governed by the mandatory regime of complete separation of property.
How is support charged during the liquidation?
From the common mass of property support shall be given to the surviving spouse and to the children during the liquidation of the inventoried property and until what belongs to them is delivered; but from this shall be deducted that amount received for support which exceeds the fruits or rents pertaining to them.
email address: nhoel_alagao@yahoo.com
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; and2. those acquired by either or both spouses through their efforts or by chance.
In what instances shall the regime of CPG apply?
It applies only when the future spouses agree to it in the marriage settlement, if any. It also applies to conjugal partnerships of gains already established between spouses before the effectivity of the Family Code, without prejudice to vested rights. This is the default property relationship under the Civil Code, which was changed to that of absolute community of property under the Family Code.
When does the CPG begin?
It begins at the precise moment when the marriage is celebrated, exactly like in absolute community of property.
Can a spouse waive his/her share in the community property during marriage?
No. Except in case of judicial separation of property, any waiver of rights, shares and effects of the absolute community of property during the marriage can be made.
Are the rules on ordinary partnership applicable to the conjugal partnership of gains?
As a rule, yes, but only if not in what is expressly provided in the pertinent provisions of the Family Code or by the spouses in their marriage settlements.
What are the exclusive property of each spouse?
(1) That which is brought to the marriage as his or her own;
(2) That which each acquires during the marriage by gratuitous title (through pure liberality, as in donation and testate/intestate succession);
(3) That which is acquired by right of redemption, by barter or by exchange with property belonging to only one of the spouses; and
(4) That which is purchased with exclusive money of the wife or of the husband.
What is the significance of having an exclusive property?
The spouses retain the ownership, possession, administration and enjoyment of their exclusive properties. A spouse may also mortgage, encumber, alienate or otherwise dispose of his or her exclusive property, without the consent of the other spouse, and appear alone in court to litigate with regard to the same.
Either spouse may, during the marriage, transfer the administration of his or her exclusive property to the other by means of a public instrument, which shall be recorded in the registry of property of the place the property is located. However, the alienation of any exclusive property of a spouse administered by the other automatically terminates the administration over such property and the proceeds of the alienation shall be turned over to the owner-spouse.
What properties belong to the conjugal partnership?
(1) Those acquired by onerous title during the marriage at the expense of the common fund, whether the acquisition be for the partnership, or for only one of the spouses;
(2) Those obtained from the labor, industry, work or profession of either or both of the spouses;
(3) The fruits, natural, industrial, or civil, due or received during the marriage from the common property, as well as the net fruits from the exclusive property of each spouse;
(4) The share of either spouse in the hidden treasure which the law awards to the finder or owner of the property where the treasure is found;
(5) Those acquired through occupation such as fishing or hunting;
(6) Livestock existing upon the dissolution of the partnership in excess of the number of each kind brought to the marriage by either spouse; and
(7) Those which are acquired by chance, such as winnings from gambling or betting. However, losses therefrom shall be borne exclusively by the loser-spouse.
What is the presumption regarding properties acquired during marriage?
All property acquired during the marriage, whether the acquisition appears to have been made, contracted or registered in the name of one or both spouses, is presumed to be conjugal unless the contrary is proved.
What is the rule in case of purchase by installment?
Property bought on installments paid partly from exclusive funds of either or both spouses and partly from conjugal funds belongs to the buyer or buyers if full ownership was vested before the marriage and to the conjugal partnership if such ownership was vested during the marriage. In either case, any amount advanced by the partnership or by either or both spouses shall be reimbursed by the owner or owners upon liquidation of the partnership.
What is the rule in case a spouse has a credit payable to him over time?
Whenever an amount or credit payable within a period of time belongs to one of the spouses, the sums which may be collected during the marriage in partial payments or by installments on the principal shall be the exclusive property of the spouse. However, interests falling due during the marriage on the principal shall belong to the conjugal partnership.
What is the rule if improvements are made on that exclusive property using conjugal funds or through the acts or efforts of either or both spouses?The ownership of improvements, whether for utility or adornment, made on the separate property of the spouses at the expense of the partnership or through the acts or efforts of either or both spouses shall pertain to the conjugal partnership, or to the original owner-spouse, subject to the following rules:
1. When the cost of the improvement made by the conjugal partnership and any resulting increase in value are MORE than the value of the property at the time of the improvement, the entire property of one of the spouses shall belong to the conjugal partnership.
2. When the cost of the improvement made by the conjugal partnership and any resulting increase in value are LESS than the value of the property at the time of the improvement, the entire property shall remain with the owner-spouse.
3. In either case, the owner-spouse or the conjugal partnership, as the case may be, is entitled to reimbursement for the value of the principal property or the improvement, as the case may be.
4. It doesn’t matter if the improvements are for utility or adornment.
What are the charges upon and obligations of the conjugal partnership?
The conjugal partnership shall be liable for:
(1) The support of the spouse, their common children, and the legitimate children of either spouse; however, the support of illegitimate children shall be governed by the provisions of the Family Code on Support;
(2) All debts and obligations contracted during the marriage by the designated administrator-spouse for the benefit of the conjugal partnership of gains, or by both spouses or by one of them with the consent of the other;
(3) Debts and obligations contracted by either spouse without the consent of the other to the extent that the family may have benefited;
(4) All taxes, liens, charges, and expenses, including major or minor repairs upon the conjugal partnership property;
(5) All taxes and expenses for mere preservation made during the marriage upon the separate property of either spouse;
(6) Expenses to enable either spouse to commence or complete a professional, vocational, or other activity for self-improvement;
(7) Ante-nuptial debts of either spouse insofar as they have redounded to the benefit of the family;
(8) The value of what is donated or promised by both spouses in favor of their common legitimate children for the exclusive purpose of commencing or completing a professional or vocational course or other activity for self-improvement; and
(9) Expenses of litigation between the spouses unless the suit is found to groundless.
If the conjugal partnership is insufficient to cover the foregoing liabilities, the spouses shall be solidarily liable for the unpaid balance with their separate properties.
What are the rules concerning personal debts contracted before or during the marriage?
1. As a rule, the payment of personal debts contracted by the husband or the wife before or during the marriage shall not be charged to the conjugal partnership properties.
2. However, these debts shall be charged to the conjugal partnership properties insofar as they redounded to the benefit of the family.
3. If the spouse has no exclusive property, it may be charged to the conjugal partnership, subject to the provisions below.
What are the rules concerning fines and pecuniary indemnities imposed on each spouse?
These cannot be charged to the partnership. However, the payment of personal debts contracted by either spouse before the marriage, that of fines and indemnities imposed upon them, as well as the support of illegitimate children of either spouse, may be enforced against the partnership assets after the charges/obligations enumerated in above have been covered, if the spouse who is bound should have no exclusive property or if it should be insufficient; but at the time of the liquidation of the partnership, such spouse shall be charged for what has been paid for the purpose above-mentioned.
What is the rule in case of winnings or losses in gambling?
Any loss incurred by a spouse during the marriage in any game of chance or in betting, sweepstakes, or any other kind of gambling whether permitted or prohibited by law, shall be borne by that spouse, and shall not be charged to the conjugal partnership. Any winnings, on the other hand, shall form part of the conjugal partnership property.
Who has the authority to administer the conjugal partnership property?
The administration and enjoyment of the conjugal partnership shall belong to both spouses jointly. In case of disagreement, the husband’s decision shall prevail, subject to recourse to the court by the wife for proper remedy, which must be availed of within five years from the date of the contract implementing such decision.
In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to participate in the administration of the conjugal properties, the other spouse may assume sole powers of administration. These powers do not include disposition or encumbrance without authority of the court or the written consent of the other spouse. In the absence of such authority or consent, the disposition or encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction shall be construed as a continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse and the third person, and may be perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance by the other spouse or authorization by the court before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors.
Can either spouse make donations of conjugal partnership property?
As a rule, neither spouse may donate any conjugal partnership property without the consent of the other. However, either spouse may, without the consent of the other, make moderate donations from the conjugal partnership property for charity or on occasions of family rejoicing or family distress.
When does the conjugal partnership terminate?
(1) Upon the death of either spouse;
(2) When there is a decree of legal separation;
(3) When the marriage is annulled or declared void; or
(4) In case of judicial separation of property during the marriage.
Does the separation in fact or de facto separation between the spouses affect the conjugal partnership?No. However, the following are the effects:
(1) The spouse who leaves the conjugal home or refuses to live therein, without just cause, shall not have the right to be supported;
(2) When the consent of one spouse to any transaction of the other is required by law, judicial authorization shall be obtained in a summary proceeding;
(3) In the absence of sufficient conjugal partnership property, the separate property of both spouses shall be solidarily liable for the support of the family. The spouse present shall, upon petition in a summary proceeding, be given judicial authority to administer or encumber any specific separate property of the other spouse and use the fruits orproceeds thereof to satisfy the latter’s share.
What is the rule if a spouse abandons the other?
If a spouse without just cause abandons the other or fails to comply with his or her obligation to the family (referring to marital, parental or property relations), the aggrievedspouse may petition the court for receivership, for judicial separation of property, or for authority to be the sole administrator of the conjugal partnership property, subject tosuch precautionary conditions as the court may impose.
A spouse is deemed to have abandoned the other when he or she has left the conjugal dwelling without intention of returning. The spouse who has left the conjugal dwellingfor a period of three months or has failed within the same period to give any information as to his or her whereabouts shall be prima facie presumed to have no intention ofreturning to the conjugal dwelling.
What is the applicable procedure in the event of dissolution of the conjugal partnership regime?The following procedure shall apply:
(1) An inventory shall be prepared, listing separately all the properties of the conjugal partnership and the exclusive properties of each spouse.
(2) Amounts advanced by the conjugal partnership in payment of personal debts and obligations of either spouse shall be credited to the conjugal partnership as an asset thereof.
(3) Each spouse shall be reimbursed for the use of his or her exclusive funds in the acquisition of property or for the value of his or her exclusive property, the ownership of which has been vested by law in the conjugal partnership.
(4) The debts and obligations of the conjugal partnership shall be paid out of the conjugal assets. In case of insufficiency of said assets, the spouses shall be solidarily liable for the unpaid balance with their separate properties.
(5) Whatever remains of the exclusive properties of the spouses shall thereafter be delivered to each of them.
(6) Unless the owner had been indemnified from whatever source, the loss or deterioration of movables used for the benefit of the family, belonging to either spouse, even due to fortuitous event, shall be paid to said spouse from the conjugal funds, if any.
(7) The net remainder of the conjugal partnership properties shall constitute the profits, which shall be divided equally between husband and wife, unless a different proportion or division was agreed upon in the marriage settlements or unless there has been a voluntary waiver or forfeiture of such share as provided in this Family Code.
(8) The presumptive legitimes of the common children shall be delivered upon partition.
(9) In the partition of the properties, the conjugal dwelling and the lot on which it is situated shall, unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties, be adjudicated to the spouse with whom the majority of the common children choose to remain. Children below the age of seven years are deemed to have chosen the mother, unless the court has decided otherwise. In case there is no such majority, the court shall decide, taking into consideration the best interests of said children.
If a spouse dies, how is the conjugal partnership liquidated?
Upon the termination of the marriage by death, the conjugal partnership property shall be liquidated in the same proceeding for the settlement of the estate of the deceased. If no judicial settlement proceeding is instituted, the surviving spouse shall liquidate the conjugal partnership property either judicially or extra-judicially within six months from the death of the deceased spouse.
What happens if the foregoing procedure in the immediately preceding paragraph is not carried out?If the procedure on liquidation, as outlined above, is not followed: (a) any disposition or encumbrance involving conjugal partnership property by the surviving spouse shall be void; and (b) any subsequent marriage shall be governed by the mandatory regime of complete separation of property.
How is support charged during the liquidation?
From the common mass of property support shall be given to the surviving spouse and to the children during the liquidation of the inventoried property and until what belongs to them is delivered; but from this shall be deducted that amount received for support which exceeds the fruits or rents pertaining to them.
email address: nhoel_alagao@yahoo.com
A Billion Deaths
Worldwide, a billion people will die from smoking this century, according to the World Health Organization.
Smoking kills. It is that plain and simple. There is no more doubt today that tobacco (cigarette smoking) is the predominant cause of lung cancer, besides other malignancies and cardiovascular diseases that maim, kill men and women and hurt our society, especially our children. In the United States alone, almost half a million die each year from smoking-related illnesses. These are preventable deaths! Demographic studies have shown that smokers are about 10 times more prone to die premature deaths than non-smokers. This unnecessary loss of lives is at an immense direct cost for non-smokers in terms of increased health risks from passive smoking, in higher health insurance premiums and taxes, not to mention personal and family tragedies in all shapes and forms.
As we have alluded to in a previous column, second-hand smoke is even more dangerous. Innocent bystanders are forced to inhale cigarette smoke at their workplaces or in public places, thus increasing their health risk. In one stick of cigarette, there are about 4000 chemicals and 200 of them cancerous. The Environmental Protection Agency engineers have shown that even the best available ventilation and air-moving equipment were unable to reduce carcinogenic (cancer-causing) air contamination to a safe level for a non-smoker sharing work space with a habitual smoker. Physical isolation of the tobacco addict is most essential as shown by these scientific studies.
Tobacco use leads to four times as many excess deaths annually compared to all other drugs and alcohol abuse combined, ten times more than all automobile fatalities per year, twelve times more than deaths from AIDS, and much more than all the American military casualties (in all wars) in this century put together. That’s how dangerous and damaging tobacco is to the human body and to society as a whole.
At the beginning of the past century, lung cancer was almost an insignificant health problem for the world. It became a minor problem in the 1930s (death rate of 5 per 10,000). Today, it has become the main killer among men and women. Since women started "really" smoking in the 1950s, "because it was glamorized in ads by actresses and models as a sophisticated and fashionable habit," lung cancer in females has increased at least six-fold, an alarming rate, with death rate comparable to that in males. Women also have added risks: osteoporosis, thrombophlebitis (vein inflammation and blood clot formation), arthritis, infertility, cervical cancer, and menstrual irregularities. Pregnant smokers face miscarriages, stillbirths, low-birth weight and SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) babies. Almost 30,000 female lives are snuffed out every year as a result of smoking. Of the 4 billion cigarette-related deaths in the world each year, about half a billion are women. It is now the top killer among women. Today, one woman dies from cigarette-related illness every three minutes! Indeed, "you’ve come a long way Baby!" (as a cigarette ad once proudly proclaimed).
But what is puzzling and bothersome to me is the great dichotomy with which our society (and most especially the government!) deals with the cigarette-health risk issue. On one hand, they are most vocal and vigilant against the so called illegal drugs and other substances that pose a moderate public health dilemma, promulgating most aggressive laws and heavy criminal sanctions against their production, distribution and use. On the other hand, society and the government have long subsidized with tax monies the production and distribution of tobacco, which is by far the country’s most serious and deadly substance. Yes, our government and society are peddling drugs, not the moderately dangerous ones but the most deadly one, tobacco. The one that makes lives miserable. The one that kills the bread winner or the mother in the family, victimizing the children and their future. The one that separates loved ones. The one that destroys hopes and dreams.
Having said that, I strongly feel that people who wish to smoke (or to jump off a tall building) have the right to do it. That is their constitutional right, and while I am against tobacco as an individual and as a physician, I shall defend the right of the cigarette smokers to smoke, since there is no law against it. The only exception to that right, or any other right under our constitution, is when its exercise adversely affects or conflicts with, or curtails, the rights of others. The smoker has the right to smoke and enjoy it, but he does not have the right to force or expose his loved ones, his friends, or strangers, to the more dangerous and more carcinogenic (secondhand) fumes coming from his cigarettes. This is where the lines have to be drawn, morally, socially and legally.
email address: nhoel_alagao@yahoo.com
Smoking kills. It is that plain and simple. There is no more doubt today that tobacco (cigarette smoking) is the predominant cause of lung cancer, besides other malignancies and cardiovascular diseases that maim, kill men and women and hurt our society, especially our children. In the United States alone, almost half a million die each year from smoking-related illnesses. These are preventable deaths! Demographic studies have shown that smokers are about 10 times more prone to die premature deaths than non-smokers. This unnecessary loss of lives is at an immense direct cost for non-smokers in terms of increased health risks from passive smoking, in higher health insurance premiums and taxes, not to mention personal and family tragedies in all shapes and forms.
As we have alluded to in a previous column, second-hand smoke is even more dangerous. Innocent bystanders are forced to inhale cigarette smoke at their workplaces or in public places, thus increasing their health risk. In one stick of cigarette, there are about 4000 chemicals and 200 of them cancerous. The Environmental Protection Agency engineers have shown that even the best available ventilation and air-moving equipment were unable to reduce carcinogenic (cancer-causing) air contamination to a safe level for a non-smoker sharing work space with a habitual smoker. Physical isolation of the tobacco addict is most essential as shown by these scientific studies.
Tobacco use leads to four times as many excess deaths annually compared to all other drugs and alcohol abuse combined, ten times more than all automobile fatalities per year, twelve times more than deaths from AIDS, and much more than all the American military casualties (in all wars) in this century put together. That’s how dangerous and damaging tobacco is to the human body and to society as a whole.
At the beginning of the past century, lung cancer was almost an insignificant health problem for the world. It became a minor problem in the 1930s (death rate of 5 per 10,000). Today, it has become the main killer among men and women. Since women started "really" smoking in the 1950s, "because it was glamorized in ads by actresses and models as a sophisticated and fashionable habit," lung cancer in females has increased at least six-fold, an alarming rate, with death rate comparable to that in males. Women also have added risks: osteoporosis, thrombophlebitis (vein inflammation and blood clot formation), arthritis, infertility, cervical cancer, and menstrual irregularities. Pregnant smokers face miscarriages, stillbirths, low-birth weight and SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) babies. Almost 30,000 female lives are snuffed out every year as a result of smoking. Of the 4 billion cigarette-related deaths in the world each year, about half a billion are women. It is now the top killer among women. Today, one woman dies from cigarette-related illness every three minutes! Indeed, "you’ve come a long way Baby!" (as a cigarette ad once proudly proclaimed).
But what is puzzling and bothersome to me is the great dichotomy with which our society (and most especially the government!) deals with the cigarette-health risk issue. On one hand, they are most vocal and vigilant against the so called illegal drugs and other substances that pose a moderate public health dilemma, promulgating most aggressive laws and heavy criminal sanctions against their production, distribution and use. On the other hand, society and the government have long subsidized with tax monies the production and distribution of tobacco, which is by far the country’s most serious and deadly substance. Yes, our government and society are peddling drugs, not the moderately dangerous ones but the most deadly one, tobacco. The one that makes lives miserable. The one that kills the bread winner or the mother in the family, victimizing the children and their future. The one that separates loved ones. The one that destroys hopes and dreams.
Having said that, I strongly feel that people who wish to smoke (or to jump off a tall building) have the right to do it. That is their constitutional right, and while I am against tobacco as an individual and as a physician, I shall defend the right of the cigarette smokers to smoke, since there is no law against it. The only exception to that right, or any other right under our constitution, is when its exercise adversely affects or conflicts with, or curtails, the rights of others. The smoker has the right to smoke and enjoy it, but he does not have the right to force or expose his loved ones, his friends, or strangers, to the more dangerous and more carcinogenic (secondhand) fumes coming from his cigarettes. This is where the lines have to be drawn, morally, socially and legally.
email address: nhoel_alagao@yahoo.com
Migz Zubiri and bioethanol
Bioethanol is a natural fuel for man. Before the discovery of massive deposits of oil, man used wood for fuel. Even the trains burned wood for its fuel before shifting to coal.
Did you know that the first cars were built to run on ethanol? The very first car produced by the Ford Motor Company in the 1882, the Quadricycle, ran on ethanol. The Model T of Ford, the first mass-produced car, built in 1908, was designed with a carburetor that could run on ethanol fuel produced by America’s farmers. In fact, the first mass-produced care in America was advertised as fulfilling Ford’s vision to "build a vehicle affordable to the working family and powered by a fuel that would boost the rural farm economy."
The shift to oil-based petroleum came with the discovery of massive deposits of oil in Canada, the United States and eventually in the rest of the world, especially the Middle East. The current high price of oil makes the world think again of alternatives to oil-based petroleum. Thus, the Philippines has to look to alternatives, which, in this case, is bioethanol.
As usual, any new program will bring on believers and doubters.
In the case of bioethanol, Senator Juan Miguel (Migz) Zubiri is the main advocate and he is taking on all comers. Says Zubiri: "With all due respect to Nobel Laureate Dr. Hartmut Michel, I would like to explain that the situation in the Philippines is much more different than that in the United States and Europe. In the US, the feedstock for bioethanol production is corn and in Europe, the feedstock for biodiesel production is soybeans and sunflower."
The bioethanol feedstock both in the US and in Europe comes from its food inventory, thus the concern that this will be taking away needed food from the human population is proper.
Zubiri explains that the Philippine program for bioethanol is patterned after the successful one of Brazil, which uses sugarcane as its primary feedstock and the Indian program, which is built on the jatropha plant.
Under the Philippines’ Biofuels Act, explains Zubiri, "the Department of Agriculture is mandated to make sure steps are taken so that biofuel production won’t eat into our food supply and will not affect our food security."
The concern is also that land, which could be used to produce food, may be diverted into bioethanol production. (But hasn’t much of the land that was being used for rice production already been converted into subdivisions? Why belabor a solution to the country’s dependence on foreign oil by assigning it as the main culprit for lower food production when most of us city dwellers are living in subdivisions that used to be rice farms?)
Migz points out that agricultural land used for food production will not be reduced: "We will tap one million hectares of idle government land to plant jatropha. There are tracts of land in the countryside with nothing planted on them except cogon grass. We will also utilize local jatropha production to lessen our dependence on imported diesel products.
"This will not only be about biodiesel production but also about livelihood, employment and reforestation programs all rolled into one. This is the key to the development of our countryside."
Jatropha and coconut oil will be the main ingredients in our diesel mix.
For gasoline, the main ingredient will be bioethanol, which will come from sugarcane.
It is in the issue of sugar as bioethanol feedstock where the criticism against Zubiri turns personal and irrational. It is pointed out that as a legislator, Zubiri ought to keep away from laws hat affect sugar production because his family was in the sugar business as millers and planters.
Migz points out that "we don’t need to tap other lands but will use only areas already planted to sugar. Sugar is not a basic food source, it is an additive, and so won’t compete directly with the population’s food requirement. We should also consider that the sugar industry is now experiencing a slump because of the low price worldwide. Sugar from Thailand is now 20 percent cheaper than our sugar and with this price it would kill the industry and render five million people jobless in the provinces of Negros, Iloilo, Bukidnon, Tarlac, Pampanga and Batangas."
Zubiri explains: "The bioethanol program is turning sugar into a high value crop. We expect incomes and salaries to increase with this higher value. What we want to achieve is a higher standard of living for our people in the countryside and produce biofuels without being subjected to OPEC’s $100 per barrel price."
The Sugar Alliance of the Philippines (SAP) points out that the bioethanol program "will give the farmers another product not in lieu of sugar but in addition to sugar thus encouraging them to work their farms to their full production potential."
Besides, according to the SAP, a study of sugar as bioethanol feedstock in 2004 in Sao Paulo Brazil came up with figure of 1:8 for the energy conversion efficiency of sugar as feedstock for ethanol. This means that for one unit of energy input, eight unites of energy is generated. This is superior to that of corn that has a ratio of only 1:1.1.
As politician, it is only right that Migz Zubiri look into what can improve both the lives of our people and the country’s economy. Bioethanol can do both, besides creating savings for the country by substituting what we can produce for what we are currently importing as very expensive barrels of oil.
Senator Juan Miguel Zubiri is looking out for the stakeholders in the sugar industry, which is also primarily the sector where he had been garnering his main political support. Nothing wrong with that since what Migz is pushing for is also what this country needs to do to survive.
It is noteworthy that a senator is looking into things that are more positive and useful than what are usually the subjects of Senate investigations!
Did you know that the first cars were built to run on ethanol? The very first car produced by the Ford Motor Company in the 1882, the Quadricycle, ran on ethanol. The Model T of Ford, the first mass-produced car, built in 1908, was designed with a carburetor that could run on ethanol fuel produced by America’s farmers. In fact, the first mass-produced care in America was advertised as fulfilling Ford’s vision to "build a vehicle affordable to the working family and powered by a fuel that would boost the rural farm economy."
The shift to oil-based petroleum came with the discovery of massive deposits of oil in Canada, the United States and eventually in the rest of the world, especially the Middle East. The current high price of oil makes the world think again of alternatives to oil-based petroleum. Thus, the Philippines has to look to alternatives, which, in this case, is bioethanol.
As usual, any new program will bring on believers and doubters.
In the case of bioethanol, Senator Juan Miguel (Migz) Zubiri is the main advocate and he is taking on all comers. Says Zubiri: "With all due respect to Nobel Laureate Dr. Hartmut Michel, I would like to explain that the situation in the Philippines is much more different than that in the United States and Europe. In the US, the feedstock for bioethanol production is corn and in Europe, the feedstock for biodiesel production is soybeans and sunflower."
The bioethanol feedstock both in the US and in Europe comes from its food inventory, thus the concern that this will be taking away needed food from the human population is proper.
Zubiri explains that the Philippine program for bioethanol is patterned after the successful one of Brazil, which uses sugarcane as its primary feedstock and the Indian program, which is built on the jatropha plant.
Under the Philippines’ Biofuels Act, explains Zubiri, "the Department of Agriculture is mandated to make sure steps are taken so that biofuel production won’t eat into our food supply and will not affect our food security."
The concern is also that land, which could be used to produce food, may be diverted into bioethanol production. (But hasn’t much of the land that was being used for rice production already been converted into subdivisions? Why belabor a solution to the country’s dependence on foreign oil by assigning it as the main culprit for lower food production when most of us city dwellers are living in subdivisions that used to be rice farms?)
Migz points out that agricultural land used for food production will not be reduced: "We will tap one million hectares of idle government land to plant jatropha. There are tracts of land in the countryside with nothing planted on them except cogon grass. We will also utilize local jatropha production to lessen our dependence on imported diesel products.
"This will not only be about biodiesel production but also about livelihood, employment and reforestation programs all rolled into one. This is the key to the development of our countryside."
Jatropha and coconut oil will be the main ingredients in our diesel mix.
For gasoline, the main ingredient will be bioethanol, which will come from sugarcane.
It is in the issue of sugar as bioethanol feedstock where the criticism against Zubiri turns personal and irrational. It is pointed out that as a legislator, Zubiri ought to keep away from laws hat affect sugar production because his family was in the sugar business as millers and planters.
Migz points out that "we don’t need to tap other lands but will use only areas already planted to sugar. Sugar is not a basic food source, it is an additive, and so won’t compete directly with the population’s food requirement. We should also consider that the sugar industry is now experiencing a slump because of the low price worldwide. Sugar from Thailand is now 20 percent cheaper than our sugar and with this price it would kill the industry and render five million people jobless in the provinces of Negros, Iloilo, Bukidnon, Tarlac, Pampanga and Batangas."
Zubiri explains: "The bioethanol program is turning sugar into a high value crop. We expect incomes and salaries to increase with this higher value. What we want to achieve is a higher standard of living for our people in the countryside and produce biofuels without being subjected to OPEC’s $100 per barrel price."
The Sugar Alliance of the Philippines (SAP) points out that the bioethanol program "will give the farmers another product not in lieu of sugar but in addition to sugar thus encouraging them to work their farms to their full production potential."
Besides, according to the SAP, a study of sugar as bioethanol feedstock in 2004 in Sao Paulo Brazil came up with figure of 1:8 for the energy conversion efficiency of sugar as feedstock for ethanol. This means that for one unit of energy input, eight unites of energy is generated. This is superior to that of corn that has a ratio of only 1:1.1.
As politician, it is only right that Migz Zubiri look into what can improve both the lives of our people and the country’s economy. Bioethanol can do both, besides creating savings for the country by substituting what we can produce for what we are currently importing as very expensive barrels of oil.
Senator Juan Miguel Zubiri is looking out for the stakeholders in the sugar industry, which is also primarily the sector where he had been garnering his main political support. Nothing wrong with that since what Migz is pushing for is also what this country needs to do to survive.
It is noteworthy that a senator is looking into things that are more positive and useful than what are usually the subjects of Senate investigations!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
