Dear PAO,

My three siblings and I inherited a parcel of land from our deceased parents. Recently, I found out that my brother sold the property without our knowledge and consent. Is the sale valid?

Edward

Dear Edward,

The Supreme Court, in the case of Heirs of Gregorio Lopez, represented by Rogelia Lopez et al., v. Development Bank of the Philippines, GR 193551, Nov. 19, 2014, penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen, held that the heirs cannot alienate the shares in the estate that do not belong to them, to wit:

“We have consistently upheld the principle that ‘no one can give what one does not have.’ A seller can only sell what he or she owns, or that which he or she does not own but has authority to transfer, and a buyer can only acquire what the seller can legally transfer. x x x

“Title or rights to a deceased person’s property are immediately passed to his or her heirs upon death. The heirs’ rights become vested without need for them to be declared ‘heirs’. Before the property is partitioned, the heirs are co-owners of the property.

xxx

“The heirs cannot alienate the shares that do not belong to them. Article 493 of the Civil Code provides:

“Art. 493. Each co-owner shall have the full ownership of his part and of the fruits and benefits pertaining thereto, and he may therefore alienate, assign or mortgage it, and even substitute another person in its enjoyment, except when personal rights are involved. But the effect of the alienation or the mortgage, with respect to the co-owners, shall be limited to the portion which may be allotted to him in the division upon the termination of the co-ownership.

“Since Enrique’s right to the property was limited to his one-fourth share, he had no right to sell the undivided portions that belonged to his siblings or their respective heirs. Any sale by one heir of the rest of the property will not affect the rights of the other heirs who did not consent to the sale. Such sale is void with respect to the shares of the other heirs.

“Regardless of their agreement, Enrique could only convey to Marietta his undivided one-fourth share of the property, and Marietta could only acquire that share. This is because Marietta obtained her rights from Enrique who, in the first place, had no title or interest over the rest of the property that he could convey.”

Applying the foregoing to your case, your brother’s right to the property is limited to his one-fourth share. Accordingly, he has no right to sell the undivided portions that belong to you and your other siblings. Hence, considering that you and your other siblings did not give your consent, the sale entered into by your brother will not affect your and your other siblings’ rights over the subject property. At most, the buyer could only claim your brother’s share, nothing more.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated on.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]