Short answer. No. Article 1811 of the Civil Code provides that a partner's right in specific partnership property is not subject to legal support. That right is tied to the partnership's own assets, so a family member's support claim against you cannot be enforced by reaching into specific partnership property.
What the law says
A partner's right in specific partnership property is not subject to legal support
Civil Code, Article 1811 — Co-Ownership of Specific Property. Read the full provision →
Specific partnership property is shielded from a support claim
The Civil Code deliberately insulates the firm's own assets from a partner's purely personal obligations. Among the incidents of a partner's co-ownership, Article 1811 states that a partner's right in specific partnership property is not subject to legal support. Legal support is the obligation to provide for a family member's needs, and it is a genuine and important duty. But the law does not let it be satisfied by reaching into the identified assets that belong to the partnership and its business. Your interest in a particular partnership asset is not a personal pool your relatives can draw against to enforce support directly against those items.
Why the partnership's assets are protected this way
Specific partnership property is dedicated to the common enterprise and is co-owned with your partners, who have their own stake in it. If a partner's personal creditors, or a family member enforcing support, could seize specific partnership assets, the other innocent partners and the business itself would be disrupted by an obligation that has nothing to do with the firm. The same article makes a partner's right in specific property not assignable except together with all the partners' rights, and not subject to attachment or execution except on a claim against the partnership. The shield against support fits that pattern: the firm's assets answer for the firm, not for a partner's private duties.
What this does not mean
This protection is narrow, and it is important not to overread it. It shields your right in specific partnership property; it does not abolish your duty of support, nor does it place all your wealth beyond reach. A partner has a separate, personal interest in the partnership, broadly his share in the profits and surplus, and that personal interest stands on different footing from specific partnership assets. Support obligations are enforced against what you personally own and are entitled to. So a relative is not left without a remedy; they are simply directed away from the firm's specific property and toward your own patrimony.
The practical takeaway
If a family member is pursuing support against you, the specific assets of your partnership are not the target the law allows them to hit, which protects your co-partners and the business from a purely personal claim. But you should not treat this as a way to hide from a support obligation, because your own personal assets and your personal interest in the partnership remain answerable. Where a support dispute intersects with partnership interests, the line between what is "specific partnership property" and what is your own personal share can be decisive, and it is worth having that boundary examined carefully in your particular situation.
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.
- Roger V. Navarro vs. Hon. Jose L. Escobido, Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 37, Cagayan de Oro City, and Karen T. Go, doing business under the name Kargo Enterprises, G.R. No. 153788, November 27, 2009 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Arcadio and Maria Luisa Carandang vs. Heirs of Quirino A. De Guzman, et al, G.R. No. 160347, November 29, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →