264 CHEESMAN V.

IAC

TOPIC: Disposition and encumbrance, FC 124-125; FC

97, 121, 122

FACTS:

American married to a Filipina. Filipina wife sold land

and house on it, initially w/o protest from American
husband, but later contesting it, raising that the sale
was made w/o his knowledge and consent.

ISSUE: Whether Thomas can contest the validity of the

Contract?

HELD:

NO since he is an alien who is prohibited from owning

land in RP, he cannot claim that he has a share in the
conjugal property and thus, has no legal standing to
void the sale.

Thomas and Criselda have no conjugal property, or else

Consti violated: not only would he have interest over
the land, he would have a decisive vote as to its transfer
or disposition as well. To sustain such a theory would
permit indirect controversion of the constitutional
prohibition. If the property were to be declared
conjugal, this would accord to the alien husband a not
insubstantial interest and right over land, as he would
then have a decisive vote as to its transfer or
disposition. This is a right that the Constitution does not
permit him to have.