Short answer. It sets the decree aside, but it does not restore your property. The separation of property already effected, and any forfeiture of the guilty spouse's share, survive the reconciliation unless you both agree to revive your former property regime. The court's order must also be recorded in the civil registries.
What the law says
(2) The final decree of legal separation shall be set aside, but the separation of property and any forfeiture of the share of the guilty spouse already effected shall subsist, unless the spouses agree to revive their former property regime.
Family Code, Article 66 — Consequences of Reconciliation. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The court's order containing the foregoing shall be recorded in the proper civil registries.
Family Code, Article 66 — Consequences of Reconciliation. Read the full provision →
Two different things happen, and only one is automatic
The decree itself goes. Reconciliation also terminates the proceedings at whatever stage they have reached if no decree has yet issued, so the litigation ends either way. What does not follow is a return to the property arrangements you had before. The article is explicit that the separation of property already effected shall subsist, and it makes the exception depend on the spouses' agreement. Reconciling therefore leaves you fully married but, unless you act, holding your property separately.
The forfeiture survives too
Where a share was forfeited against the guilty spouse, that forfeiture also stands. It is worth understanding why: the property consequences were worked out and given effect at a time when the court had found a ground proved, and the law does not unwind completed transactions because the couple later reconciled. Third parties may have dealt with the property in the meantime. Whatever has already been executed stays executed, and what is available afterwards is agreement between the spouses, not automatic restoration.
Reviving the regime is a deliberate step
The words are unless the spouses agree to revive their former property regime, so a revival needs both of you and needs to be documented; going back to living together does not do it, and neither does the passage of time. This is the item couples most often overlook in the relief of having reconciled, and it surfaces years later — on a sale, on a loan, or on the death of one spouse, when the question of who owns what finally has to be answered.
See the recording through
The article closes with a requirement that is easy to miss: The court's order containing the foregoing shall be recorded in the proper civil registries. Until that entry exists, the public record still shows a decree of legal separation in force. Ask for a copy of the order and of the annotated registry record, and deal with the property question at the same time. Those two documents together are what make the reconciliation effective to everyone outside the marriage.
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.
- David A. Noveras vs. Leticia T. Noveras AM. No. P-06-2227 August 19, 2014 Office of the Court Administrator vs. Atty. Mario N. Melchor, Former Clerk of Court VI, RTC, Br. 16, Naval, Biliran (now Presiding Judge, MCTC, Calubian-San Isidro, Leyte), G.R. No. 188289, August 20, 2014 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Related provisions
- Family Code, Article 66 — Consequences of Reconciliation
- Family Code, Article 65 — Reconciliation: Joint Manifestation