UY VS CA

FACTS:

Dr. Ernesto Jardelaza suffered stroke that rendered him comatose. Gilda, wife of the latter, filed a petition
in RTC Iloilo to be allowed as sole administrator of their conjugal property and be authorized to sell the
same as her husband is physically incapacitated to discharge his functions. She further contest that such
illness of the husband necessitated expenses that would require her to sell their property in Lot 4291 and
its improvement to meet such necessities. RTC ruled in favor of Gilda contending that such decision is
pursuant to Article 124 of FC and that the proceedings thereon are governed by the rules on summary
proceedings.

The son of the spouses, Teodoro, filed a motion for reconsideration contending that the petition made by
her mother was essentially a petition for guardianship of the person and properties of his father. As such
it cannot be prosecuted in accordance with the provisions on summary proceedings instead it should
follows the ruled governing special proceedings in the Revised Rules of Court requiring procedural due
process particularly the need for notice and a hearing on the merits. He further reiterated that Chapter 2
of the FC comes under the heading on Separation in Fact Between Husband and Wife contemplating a
situation where both spouses are of disposing mind. Hence, he argued that this should not be applied in
their case.

During the pendency of the motion, Gilda sold the property to her daughter and son in law. Upon the
appeal by Teodoro, CA reversed the decision of the lower court.

ISSUE: WON Gilda as the wife of a husband who suffered stroke, a cerebrovascular accident rendering
him comatose, without motor and mental faculties, may assume sole powers of administration of the
conjugal property and dispose a parcel of land with improvements.

HELD:

SC ruled in favor of Teodoro. The rule on summary proceedings does not apply to cases where the nonconsenting spouse is incapacitated or incompetent to give consent. In this case, trial court found that
subject spouse was incompetent who was in a comatose condition and with a diagnosis of brain stem
infract. Hence, the proper remedy is a judicial guardianship proceeding under the Revised Rules of
Court. The law provides that wife who assumes sole powers of administration has the same powers and
duties as a guardian. Consequently, a spouse who desires to sell real property as administrator of the

conjugal property, must observe the procedure for the sale of the wards estate required of judicial
guardians, and not the summary judicial proceedings under FC. SC further held that such incapacity of
the trial court to provide for an opportunity to be heard is null and void on the ground of lack of due
process.