Short answer. Both, in sequence. Without your written consent or court authority the disposition is void. But the law treats it as a continuing offer, so your acceptance can still perfect it as a binding contract — unless one of the offerors has already withdrawn the offer.
What the law says
In the absence of such authority or consent, the disposition or encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction shall be construed as a continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse and the third person, and may be perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance by the other spouse or authorization by the court before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors.
Family Code, Article 96 — Administration of the Community Property. Read the full provision →
Void means void, not merely voidable
The word the article uses is void, and it is doing real work. A voidable contract is valid until someone annuls it, and the right to annul prescribes. A void one produces no effect from the start, so the sale did not transfer ownership at any point, and the buyer's registration of a title does not cure that. Nor does your knowledge of the sale, your silence, or the fact that you cashed part of the price by living on it. Consent to a disposition of community property has to be written; verbal approval and acquiescence are not the same thing as the consent the article requires.
The continuing offer is the escape hatch
The second sentence softens the first in a way that surprises people. The void transaction is treated as a standing offer made jointly by the selling spouse and the buyer, addressed to you. If you accept it, or if a court authorises the disposition, the contract is perfected from that moment. So a wife who is content with the sale but was never asked can make it good rather than unwind it. What she cannot do is accept on different terms; acceptance means accepting the transaction as it was made, and anything else is a new negotiation with a buyer free to refuse.
The offer can be withdrawn out from under you
Your window closes before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors. Either the buyer or your husband can pull out unilaterally, and once one of them does, nothing is left for you to accept and the transaction stays void. This is why delay is expensive. A buyer watching the price of the property fall, or a spouse who has changed his mind, has every reason to withdraw first. If your intention is to accept, do it in writing and get it to both of them, dated; if your intention is to have the property back, act on that footing promptly instead.
Decide which outcome you actually want
The two paths are inconsistent and you must choose. Recovering the property means treating the sale as a nullity and dealing with a buyer who will want the price returned. Confirming the sale means accepting the offer while it is still open and turning your attention to the proceeds and where they went. Before choosing, gather the deed, the title with all its annotations, proof of the property's community character, and any writing bearing your signature that the buyer might present as consent. That last item is where these cases usually turn.
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.
- Maryline Esteban vs. Radlin Campano, and all persons claiming rights under him, G.R. No. 235364, April 26, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Arturo Sarte Flores vs. Sps. Enrico L. Lindo, Jr. and Edna C. Lindo, G.R. No. 183984, April 13, 2011 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Philip Mattews vs. Benjamin A. Taylor and Joselyn C. Taylor, G.R. No. 164584, June 22, 2009 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Belinda Alexander vs. Spouses Jorge and Hilaria Escalona and Reygan Escalona, G.R. No. 256141, July 19, 2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →