Short answer. Generally no. Creditors of a co-owner may take part in the division and object before it happens, but once a partition has been executed they cannot impugn it — unless it was tainted by fraud, or carried out despite a formal opposition they had presented to prevent it.
What the law says
The creditors or assignees of the co-owners may take part in the division of the thing owned in common and object to its being effected without their concurrence.
Civil Code, Article 497 — Creditors in Partition. Read the full provision →
What the law says
But they cannot impugn any partition already executed, unless there has been fraud, or in case it was made notwithstanding a formal opposition presented to prevent it
Civil Code, Article 497 — Creditors in Partition. Read the full provision →
Creditors have a voice before the division
A co-owner's creditors are not strangers to how the property is split, because the share their debtor receives is what they may ultimately look to for payment. Article 497 gives them a role while the partition is still in progress: the creditors or assignees of the co-owners may take part in the division of the thing owned in common and object to its being effected without their concurrence. They can watch the division being made and register their objection, so that a debtor cannot quietly accept a poor or collusive share that leaves them with nothing worth pursuing.
A completed partition is hard to unwind
That protection is front-loaded. Once the division is done, the article shuts the door: but they cannot impugn any partition already executed. A creditor who stood by while the co-owners divided the property cannot come back afterwards and demand it be undone merely because he dislikes the result. The law favours the stability of a completed partition, and expects a creditor who wanted a say to exercise it at the time. Silence during the division is generally taken as acceptance of what the division produced.
The two ways in
The bar is not absolute. A finished partition can still be attacked in two situations named in the same clause: where there has been fraud, or where it was made notwithstanding a formal opposition presented to prevent it. Fraud covers a division rigged to cheat the creditor — shares understated or shuffled to put value beyond his reach. The second ground rewards the creditor who did speak up: if he lodged a formal opposition and the co-owners proceeded anyway, he keeps the right to challenge the result the law would otherwise have made final.
Object in time, and in form
The practical lesson for a creditor is that timing and formality decide everything. An informal grumble is not the formal opposition the article rewards, and waiting until the property is divided forfeits the objection unless outright fraud can be shown — a heavier thing to prove. A creditor who suspects a co-owner is about to receive less than his due, or to collude with the others, should intervene in the division itself and put his opposition on record, rather than assume he can set aside the outcome once the shares have been drawn. The article also preserves the debtor's own right to maintain the partition's validity.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Julita Rombaua Panganiban, et al. vs. Julita S. Oamil, G.R. No. 149313, January 22, 2008 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Fe U. Quijano vs. Atty. Darill Almante, G.R. No. 164277, October 8, 2014 — read the decision on LawPhil →