Manacop vs CA

Manacop vs. CA

GR No. 104875, November 13, 1992

FACTS:

Florante Manacop and his wife Euaceli purchased on March 1972, a residential lot with a bungalow located in Quezon City.  The petitioner failed to pay the sub-contract cost pursuant to a deed of assignment signed between petitioner’s corporation and private respondent herein (FF Cruz & Co).  The latter filed a complaint for the recovery for the sum of money with a prayer for preliminary attachment against the former.  Consequently, the corresponding writ for the provisional remedy was issued which triggered the attachment of a parcel of land in Quezon City owned by the Manacop Construction President, the petitioner.  The latter insists that the attached property is a family home having been occupied by him and his family since 1972 and is therefore exempt from attachment.

ISSUE: WON the subject property is indeed exempted from attachment.

HELD:

The residential house and lot of petitioner became a family home by operation of law under Article 153 of the Family Code.  Such provision does not mean that said article has a retroactive effect such that all existing family residences, petitioner’s included, are deemed to have been constituted as family homes at the time of their occupation prior to the effectivity of the Family Code and henceforth, are exempt from execution for the payment of obligations incurred before the effectivity of the Family Code on August 3, 1988.  Since petitioner incurred debt in 1987, it preceded the effectivity of the Code and his property is therefore not exempt form attachment.

The petition was dismissed by SC.