Short answer. Yes. Under Family Code Article 155, the family home exemption from forced sale does not apply to debts owed to laborers, mechanics, architects, builders, and materialmen who built the house. If you did not pay the people who constructed your home, they can pursue a forced sale of that same property to collect what you owe.
What the law says
The family home shall be exempt from execution, forced sale or attachment except: (1) For nonpayment of taxes; (2) For debts incurred prior to the constitution of the family home; (3) For debts secured by mortgages on the premises before or after such constitution; and (4) For debts due to laborers, mechanics, architects, builders, materialmen and others who have rendered service or furnished material for the construction of the building.
Family Code, Article 155 — Debts That Defeat the Exemption. Read the full provision →
The family home exemption is real — but it has exceptions
Philippine law protects the family home from being seized and sold to pay ordinary debts. That protection is meaningful: a creditor who lent you money, for example, generally cannot force a sale of the home your family lives in. But the exemption is not absolute. Article 155 of the Family Code carves out four specific categories of debt that can defeat it, and the contractor who built your house falls squarely within one of them.
Construction debts are explicitly excluded from the protection
The fourth exception covers debts due to laborers, mechanics, architects, builders, materialmen and others who have rendered service or furnished material for the construction of the building. This is not an accident of drafting. The policy rationale is straightforward: the very people whose work created the home you are now trying to protect behind an exemption should not be shut out by that same exemption. Their unpaid labor and materials made the house what it is.
Three other exceptions worth knowing
The three other exceptions are unpaid real property taxes, debts that existed before the family home was constituted, and debts secured by a mortgage on the property. The mortgage exception is especially common: when a family uses a bank loan to finance construction and the lot is mortgaged as security, defaulting on that loan can lead to foreclosure regardless of the family home exemption. The exemption protects against creditors who have no special claim on the property; it does not nullify contracts the homeowner signed giving creditors exactly that kind of claim.
What this means if you are in a dispute with a contractor
If a contractor or supplier is threatening to enforce a judgment against your home, the key question is whether their claim arose from the construction of the building itself. Unpaid construction contracts and unpaid wages for workers who built the structure fall within the exception. Disputes over renovation of an already-standing home, or claims unrelated to construction, sit in a different position — the facts matter significantly. A lawyer can assess whether the particular claim is the kind Article 155 carves out of the exemption.
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.
- Mary Josephine Gomez et al., vs. Roel Sta. Ines, et al, G.R. No. 132537, October 14, 2005 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Urduja Ortiz-Aquino vs. Letecia Ortillo, Lisette Ortillo, And Sheriff Of The Office Of The Provincial Sheriff Of Lingayen, Pangasinan, G.R. No. 257235, November 8, 2023 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Cesar D. Taruc vs. Angelina D. Maximo, Maricel Buenaventura, George Jordan, and Jennifer Burgos, G.R. No. 227728, September 28, 2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Jose E. Honrado vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 166333, November 25, 2005 — read the decision on LawPhil →