Text of the provision

Art. 383. In the appointment of a representative, the spouse present shall be preferred when there is no legal separation. If the absentee left no spouse, or if the spouse present is a minor, any competent person may be appointed by the court.

(183a)

Civil Code of the Philippines, Republic Act No. 386, approved June 18, 1949, effective August 30, 1950. Reproduced in full; verified verbatim against the LawPhil and ChanRobles official-text renderings.

What this article means

In appointing a representative, the spouse present is preferred where there is no legal separation. If the absentee left no spouse, or the spouse present is a minor, the court may appoint any competent person.

The preference for the present spouse applies only where the couple is not legally separated; a spouse who is legally separated from the absentee, even if otherwise available, loses that priority under this provision. The rule also covers two situations where the present spouse cannot serve: where the absentee left no spouse at all, and where the spouse who is present is a minor and therefore lacks capacity to administer property. In either case, the statute leaves the choice of a suitable representative to the court’s discretion, rather than naming a fixed next-in-line relative.

Questions about this provision

Related provisions

Cases interpreting this article

Note. The text of the provision above is reproduced in full from the official enactment (Republic Act No. 386), verified against the LawPhil and ChanRobles renderings. The annotation and commentary around it are the work of Vivas & Nobles Law Office and are general legal information, not legal advice. How a provision applies to a particular situation depends on facts that only a lawyer reviewing your case can assess.