Short answer. Yes. Article 127 of the Family Code says that in the absence of sufficient conjugal partnership property, the separate property of both spouses shall be solidarily liable for the family's support. You can also petition for judicial authority to administer or encumber your spouse's specific separate property for that purpose.
What the law says
In the absence of sufficient conjugal partnership property, the separate property of both spouses shall be solidarily liable for the support of the family.
Family Code, Article 127 — Separation in Fact. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The spouse present shall, upon petition in a summary proceeding, be given judicial authority to administer or encumber any specific separate property of the other spouse and use the fruits or proceeds thereof to satisfy the latter's share.
Family Code, Article 127 — Separation in Fact. Read the full provision →
Separation in fact does not disturb the conjugal regime, with exceptions
Article 127 starts by preserving the conjugal partnership despite the couple living apart, then carves out specific exceptions. One of those exceptions is the situation you describe — what happens when conjugal property alone cannot cover the family's needs. It is listed as its own, separate rule from the general principle that separation in fact leaves the conjugal regime otherwise intact, alongside other exceptions the article carves out for support and for transactions requiring spousal consent.
The rule that lets you reach separate property
Article 127 states it directly: In the absence of sufficient conjugal partnership property, the separate property of both spouses shall be solidarily liable for the support of the family. Once conjugal property genuinely falls short, the article makes both spouses' separate property answerable for the family's support, solidarily, rather than leaving the shortfall unaddressed or forcing the family to simply go without.
How you actually reach your spouse's separate property
Article 127 also gives the spouse present a concrete mechanism: The spouse present shall, upon petition in a summary proceeding, be given judicial authority to administer or encumber any specific separate property of the other spouse and use the fruits or proceeds thereof to satisfy the latter's share. That authority comes through a summary proceeding and a court petition, not by simply taking control of the property on your own.
Why the summary proceeding requirement matters
Because your spouse's separate property is, by definition, not jointly owned, Article 127 does not let you administer or encumber it unilaterally even when conjugal property is insufficient. The judicial authorization through a summary proceeding is what makes reaching into a specific piece of your spouse's separate property proper, tying the exercise of that authority to a court's oversight rather than to your own decision alone, since the property being reached still belongs to your spouse individually.
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.
- 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 →