Art. 96. The administration and enjoyment of the community property shall belong to both spouses jointly

Section 4. Ownership, Administrative,

ENJOYMENT AND DISPOSITION OF THE COMMUNITY PROPERTY

Art. 96. The administration and enjoyment of the community property shall belong to both spouses jointly. In case of disagreement, the husband’s decision shall prevail, subject to recourse to the court by the wife for proper remedy, which must be availed of within five years from the date of the contract implementing such decision.

In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to participate in the administration of the common properties, the other spouse may assume sole powers of administration. These powers do not include disposition or encumbrance without authority of the court or the written consent of the other spouse. 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as a binding contract upon the acceptance by the other spouse or authorization by the court before the offer is withdrawn by either or both offerors. (206a)

In this provision, joint administration and enjoyment (of the community property) highlight the fact that the spouses are co-owners. However, the administration can only be delegated to one. 

The joint administration does not mean that the husband and wife always act together. 

For instance, verification and certification in a petition or complaint filed in court must be signed by all petitioners; however, with spouses, the signature of one spouse is substantial compliance (even when both spouses are petitioners of the case). 

Each of the spouses may be reasonably presumed to have personal knowledge of any action or claim. Each may act individually even without the consent of the other in case of repairs to the property as these matters may require an immediate response.

Improving or embellishing property is to be decided by both. 

Preservation may be made by one spouse but if practicable, the spouse should notify the other.

If the alteration redounds to the benefit of the family, the ACP  will be held liable under Article  94 (2) and implies that making such alteration is valid.

- Rules on co-ownership apply only suppletory in character. For example, if A repairs the roof, G's consent is not needed. If A beautifies the roof, he or she needs the consent of G.

- If G disapproves, A incurs liability which will apply to the separate property unless G ratifies it.

- If not, G can demand that the roof be removed and the original be returned at the expense of A.

- But if it redounds to the benefit of the family because it has prevented the complete decay of the old leaking roof, the alteration will be paid through the absolute community even without G's consent.

- Under the rules of co-ownership,  would have been invalid.

When there is disagreement, the husband's decision shall prevail (an intermediate modus vivendi before going to the court). It is usually the husband who makes the ultimate choices, especially in serious matters. But it is subject to recourse by the wife, which must be availed of within five (5) years which may proceed in a summary proceeding pursuant to Article 253 of the Family Code.

The assumption of the powers of a spouse is limited and restricted, and no longer includes disposition, alienation, or encumbrance. 
the power to administrer is broadly treated in the first paragraph of Article 96 but may be limited by the law as in the case of the second paragraph.

Effect of alienation and encumbrance

Any disposition by one spouse of the said properties, completely without the knowledge of the other is null and void. Under the Civil Code, it was voidable only. There is no prescriptive period as such contract is null and void.

If a Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) of real estate indicates that the person named therein is single when he is married, and the buyer believed in good faith that it was true, it cannot be voided. The remedy is to compel the erring spouse to account for the proceeds of the sale. If the buyer acts in bad faith, then the sale can be voided. If there was knowledge by one spouse but there was no consent, it is voidable.

Within five (5) years, the wife can ask that the contract will be annulled. But if the wife ratifies it, expressly or impliedly, then there is no more cause of action. The contract will be deemed to suffer no legal infirmities. The wife can nullify the whole contract and not just her share in the property involved.

If it was the decision of the wife implemented, the husband can file an injunction suit to stop the implementation of the contract as not being enforceable, as the wife did not have his authority.

Likewise, the husband may file an action to nullify the contract as contrary to law and public policy.

Effect of Incapacity of one of the spouses on administration:
If one of the spouses is incapacitated, then the other can assume the sole powers of administration.
Appointment as the sole administrator may be made through summary proceeding.

According to Article 253, if the spouse is absent or separated or has abandoned the other, the other may be appointed as the sole administrator through summary proceeding.

If the spouse is an incompetent who is comatose os semi-comatose, the remedy is judicial guardianship.
If the administrating spouse cannot dispose or encumber the property without judicial approval or written consent of the incapacitated spouse. Otherwise, it is void.