SUCCESSION

The phrase dependent parents should,

therefore, include all parents, whether
legitimate or illegitimate and whether by
nature or by adoption. When the law does
not distinguish, one should not distinguish.
The law is clear that the biological
parents retain their rights of
succession to the estate of their child
who was the subject of adoption. While
the benefits arising from the death of an
SSS covered employee do not form part of
the estate of the adopted child, the
pertinent provision on legal or intestate
succession at least reveals the policy on the
rights of the biological parents and those by
adoption vis--vis the right to receive
benefits from the adopted.
As a result, it was held that Cornelios
death at the time of Johns minority
resulted in the restoration of
petitioners parental authority over
the adopted child.
- Bartolome v. SSS

-oo0ooThe survivorship agreement is a contract

which imposed a mere obligation with a
term--being death. Such contracts are
permitted under Article 2012 on aleatory
contracts. When Dolores predeceased
her husband the latter acquired upon her
death a vested right over the funds in the
account. The conveyance is therefore not
mortis causa.
Survivorship agreement is per se not
contrary to law and no demonstration
here that survivorship agreement had been
executed for unlawful purposes or as held
by the respondent court in order to frustrate
our laws on wills, donations and conjugal
partnership.
Vitug v CA

Aleatory Contract (Art. 2010) one of

the parties or both reciprocally bind
themselves to give or to do something in
consideration of what the other shall give
or do upon the happening of an event
which is uncertain, or which is to occur at
an indeterminate time.
-oo0ooWhile we agree with the CA that the
donation mortis causa was invalid in the
absence of a will, it erred in concluding that

the heirs acquired the subject property

through ordinary acquisitive prescription.
The subject parcel of land is a titled
property; thus, acquisitive prescription is
not applicable. Upon the death of
Bernardina, Mansueto and Amelia, being
her legal heirs, acquired the subject
property by virtue of succession, and not by
ordinary acquisitive prescription.
Forged deed is generally null and cannot
convey title, the exception thereto,
pursuant to Section 55 of the Land
Registration Act (LRA), denotes the
registration of titles from the forger to the
innocent purchaser for value.
- Peralta v. Heirs of Abalon

-oo0ooThe donation being then mortis causa, the

formalities of a will should have been
observed but they were not, as it was
witnessed by only two, not three or more
witnesses following Article 805 of the Civil
Code. Further, the witnesses did not
even sign the attestation clause the
execution of which clause is a requirement
separate from the subscription of the will
and the affixing of signatures on the
left-hand margins of the pages of the will.
The signatures on the left-hand corner of
every page signify that the witnesses
are aware that the page they are signing
forms part of the will.
The signatures to the attestation clause
establish that the witnesses are
referring to the statements contained in
the attestation clause itself.
The witnesses did not acknowledge the will
before the notary public, which is not in
accordance with the requirement of Article
806 of the Civil Code that every will must
be acknowledged before a notary
public by the testator and the
witnesses.
The requirement that all the pages of the
will must be numbered correlatively in
letters placed on the upper part of each
page was not also followed.
But even assuming arguendo that the
formalities were observed, since it was not
probated, no right to Lot Nos. 674 and 676
was transmitted to Maria. Matilde thus
validly disposed of Lot No. 674 to
respondent by her last will and testament,
subject of course to the qualification that
her (Matildes) will must be probated. With

respect to Lot No. 676, the same had, as

mentioned earlier, been sold by Matilde to
respondent on August 26, 1991.
- Aluad vs. Aluad

-oo0ooESSENTIAL REQUISITES OF NOTARIAL WILLS

(804-809)
1. must be in WRITING
2. must be executed in a language or
dialect known to the testator
3. must be subscribed (signed) at the end
thereof by the testator himself or by the
testators name written by another
person in his presence, and by his
express direction
4. must be attested and subscribed by 3
or more credible witnesses in the
presence of the testator and of one
another
5. the testator or the person requested by
him to write his name, and the
instrumental witnesses of the will shall
sign each and every page thereof
except the last, on the left margin
6. all the pages shall be numbered
correlatively in letters placed on the
upper part of each page
7. the attestation (attestation clause)
shall provide:
a. Number of pages used
b. That the testator signed (or
expressly caused another to sign
his name) the will and every page
thereof in the presence of the
instrumental witnesses
c. That the instrumental witnesses
witnessed and signed the will and
all the pages thereof in the
presence of the testator and of one
another
8. if the testator is deaf, or deaf-mute he
must personally read the will, if able to
do so; otherwise, he shall designate 2
persons to read it and communicate to
him

if the testator is blind, the will shall be

read to him twice; by one of the
subscribing witnesses and by the notary
public who acknowledged the will
ESSENTIAL REQUISITES OF HOLORAPHIC
WILL (810)
- must be entirely written, dated, and
signed by the hand of the testator
himself.

-oo0ooA donation is deemed one mortis

causa where the combined effect of the
circumstances surrounding the execution
of the deed of donation the most
essential elements of ownershipthe
right to dispose of the donated properties
and the right to enjoy the products,
profits, possessionremain with the
donor during his or her lifetime, and
would accrue to the donees only after
such donors death.
-Sicad vs. Court of Appeals
-oo0ooThe determination of who are the legal
heirs of the deceased must be made in
the proper special proceedings in court,
and not in an ordinary suit for recovery of
ownership and possession of property.
This must take precedence over the
action for recovery of possession and
ownership. The Court has consistently
ruled that the trial court cannot make a
DECLARATION OF HEIRSHIP in the civil
action for the reason that such a
declaration can only be made in a special
proceeding.
Matters relating to the rights of filiation
and heirship must be ventilated in the
proper probate court in a special
proceeding instituted precisely for the
purpose of determining such rights.
By way of exception, the need to institute
a separate special proceeding for the
determination of heirship may be
dispensed with for the sake of practicality,
as when the parties in the civil case had
voluntarily submitted the issue to the trial
court and already presented their
evidence regarding the issue of heirship,
and the Regional Trial Court had
consequently rendered judgment thereon,
or when a special proceeding had been
instituted but had been finally closed and
terminated, and hence, cannot be reopened. But none of these is present in
the case.
- Heirs of Magdaleno Ypon vs. Ricaforte
-oo0ooAffinity denotes the relation that one
spouse has to the blood relatives of the
other spouse. It is a relationship by
marriage or a familial relation resulting from
marriage.

Indeed, there is no affinity between the

blood relatives of one spouse and the blood
relatives of the other. A husband is related
by affinity to his wifes brother, but not to
the wife of his wifes brother. There is no
affinity between the husbands brother and
the wifes sister; this is called AFFINITAS
AFFINITATIS.
- Tiggangay vs. Wacas

-oo0ooAFTER DEATH, BEFORE DISTRIBUTION

INCHOATE OR?;
TRANSMISSION/NON-TRANSMISSION
OF RIGHTS
Title or rights to a deceased persons
property are immediately passed to his
or her heirs upon death. The heirs
rights become vested without need for
them to be declared heirs. Before the
property is partitioned, the heirs are coowners of the property.
The heirs cannot alienate the shares that do
not belong to them. Article 493 of the Civil
Code provides:
Art. 493. Each co-owner shall have the full
ownership of his part and of the fruits and
benefits pertaining thereto, and he may
therefore alienate, assign or mortgage it,
and even substitute another person in its
enjoyment, except when personal rights are
involved. But the effect of the alienation or
the mortgage, with respect to the coowners, shall be limited to the portion which
may be allotted to him in the division upon
the termination of the coownership.
Since Enriques right to the property was
limited to his one-fourth share, he had no
right to sell the undivided portions that
belonged to his siblings or their respective
heirs. Any sale by one heir of the rest of the
property will not affect the rights of the
other heirs who did not consent to the sale.
Such sale is void with respect to the shares
of the other heirs.

Having established that Marietta acquired

no valid title or ownership from Enrique
over the undivided portions of the
property, the court finds that no valid
mortgage was executed over the same
property in favor of DBP. Without a valid
mortgage, there was also no valid
foreclosure sale and no transfer of
ownership of petitioners undivided
portions to DBP. In other words, DBP
acquired no right over the undivided
portions since its predecessor-in-

interest was not the owner and held

no authority to convey the property.
- Heirs of Gregorio Lopez vs. DBP
-oo0ooThe phrase Pedro Calalang, married to
Elvira Berba [Calalang] merely describes
the civil status and identifies the spouse
of the registered owner Pedro Calalang.
Evidently, this does not mean that the
property is conjugal.
Article 777 of the New Civil Code provides
that [t]he rights to the succession are
transmitted from the moment of the death
of the decedent.
Thus, the capacity of the heir is determined
as of the time the decedent died (Art.
1034);
the legitime is to be computed as of the
same moment (Art. 908), and so is the
inofficiousness of the donation inter vivos
(Art. 771).
Similarly, the legacies of credit and
remission are valid only in the amount due
and outstanding at the death of the testator
(Art. 935), and the fruits accruing after that
instant are deemed to pertain to the
legatee (Art. 948).
As the sole and exclusive owner, Pedro
Calalang had the right to convey his
property in favor of Nora B. CalalangParulan by executing a Deed of Sale on
February 17, 1984. xxx it is only upon the
death of Pedro Calalang on December 27,
1989 that his heirs acquired their respective
inheritances, entitling them to their pro
indiviso shares to his whole estate. At the
time of the sale of the disputed property,
the rights to the succession were not yet
bestowed upon the heirs of Pedro Calalang.
And absent clear and convincing evidence
that the sale was fraudulent or not duly
supported by valuable consideration (in
effect an in officious donation inter vivas),
the respondents have no right to question
the sale of the disputed property on the
ground that their father deprived them of
their respective shares.
- Calalang-Parulan v. Garcia

Article 1034. In order to judge the

capacity of the heir, devisee or legatee, his
qualification at the time of the death of the
decedent shall be the criterion.
In cases falling under Nos. 2, 3, or 5 of
article 1032, it shall be necessary to wait

until final judgment is rendered, and in the

case falling under No. 4, the expiration of
the month allowed for the report.

the testator that are subject to collation, at

the time he made them.

If the institution, devise or legacy should be

conditional, the time of the compliance with
the condition shall also be considered.

Article 771. Donations which in

accordance with the provisions of article
752, are inofficious, bearing in mind the
estimated net value of the donor's property
at the time of his death, shall be reduced
with regard to the excess; but this reduction
shall not prevent the donations from taking
effect during the life of the donor, nor shall
it bar the donee from appropriating the
fruits.

Article 1032. The following are incapable

of succeeding by reason of unworthiness:
(1) Parents who have abandoned their
children or induced their daughters to lead
a corrupt or immoral life, or attempted
against their virtue;
(2) Any person who has been convicted of
an attempt against the life of the testator,
his or her spouse, descendants, or
ascendants;
(3) Any person who has accused the
testator of a crime for which the law
prescribes imprisonment for six years or
more, if the accusation has been found
groundless;
(4) Any heir of full age who, having
knowledge of the violent death of the
testator, should fail to report it to an officer
of the law within a month, unless the
authorities have already taken action; this
prohibition shall not apply to cases wherein,
according to law, there is no obligation to
make an accusation;
(5) Any person convicted of adultery or
concubinage with the spouse of the
testator;
(6) Any person who by fraud, violence,
intimidation, or undue influence should
cause the testator to make a will or to
change one already made;
(7) Any person who by the same means
prevents another from making a will, or
from revoking one already made, or who
supplants, conceals, or alters the latter's
will;
(8) Any person who falsifies or forges a
supposed will of the decedent.
Article 908. To determine the legitime, the
value of the property left at the death of the
testator shall be considered, deducting all
debts and charges, which shall not include
those imposed in the will.
To the net value of the hereditary estate,
shall be added the value of all donations by

For the reduction of donations the

provisions of this Chapter and of articles
911 and 912 of this Code shall govern.
Article 935. The legacy of a credit against
a third person or of the remission or release
of a debt of the legatee shall be effective
only as regards that part of the credit or
debt existing at the time of the death of the
testator.
In the first case, the estate shall comply
with the legacy by assigning to the legatee
all rights of action it may have against the
debtor. In the second case, by giving the
legatee an acquittance, should he request
one.
In both cases, the legacy shall comprise all
interests on the credit or debt which may be
due the testator at the time of his death.
Article 948. If the legacy or devise is of a
specific and determinate thing pertaining to
the testator, the legatee or devisee
acquires the ownership thereof upon the
death of the testator, as well as any
growing fruits, or unborn offspring of
animals, or uncollected income; but not the
income which was due and unpaid before
the latter's death.
From the moment of the testator's death,
the thing bequeathed shall be at the risk of
the legatee or devisee, who shall, therefore,
bear its loss or deterioration, and shall be
benefited by its increase or improvement,
without prejudice to the responsibility of the
executor or administrator.

-oo0ooConjugal Partnership; Under Article 160 of

the Civil Code, all property of the marriage
is presumed to belong to the conjugal
partnership, unless it can be proven that it

pertains exclusively to the husband or to

the wife.Since Jose Sr. and Ligaya were
married prior to the effectivity of the Family
Code, their property relations were
governed by the conjugal partnership of
gains as provided under Article 119 of the
Civil Code.
Registration of a property alone in the name
of one spouse does not destroy its conjugal
nature. What is material is the time when
the property was acquired. - In order to
rebut the presumptive conjugal nature of
the property, the petitioner must present
strong, clear and convincing evidence of
exclusive ownership of one of the spouses.
Upon the death of Ligaya on January 21,
1987, the conjugal partnership was
automatically dissolved and
terminated pursuant to Article 175(1) of
the Civil Code, and the successional rights
of her heirs vest, as provided under Article
777 of the Civil Code. Consequently, the
conjugal partnership was converted
into an implied ordinary co-ownership
between the surviving spouse, on the
one hand, and the heirs of the
deceased, on the other.
Each co-owner has the full ownership of his
part or share in the co-ownership and may,
therefore, alienate, assign or mortgage it
except when personal rights are involved.
Should a co-owner alienate or mortgage the
co-owned property itself, the alienation or
mortgage shall remain valid but only
to the extent of the portion which may
be allotted to him in the division upon
the termination of the co-ownership.
Under Article 493 of the Civil Code,
even if he had the right to freely
mortgage or even sell his undivided
interest in the disputed property, he
could not dispose of or mortgage the
entire property without his childrens
consent. Jose Sr.s right in the subject
property is limited only to his share in the
conjugal partnership as well as his share as
an heir on the other half of the estate which
is his deceased spouses share. Accordingly,
the mortgage contract is void insofar as it
extends to the undivided shares of his
children (Nora, Jose Jr., Bobby and Jimmy)
because they did not give their consent to
the transaction.
- Philippine National Bank vs. Garcia

-oo0ooIn unions between a man and a woman who

are incapacitated to marry each other,

the ownership over the properties acquired

during the subsistence of that relationship
shall be based on the actual contribution
of the parties.
The phrase married to Socorro Torres is
merely descriptive of his civil status, and
does not show that Socorro co-owned the
property.
- Ventura, jr. vs. Abuda

-oo0ooSince Leon died without issue, his heirs are

his siblings, Romana and Gregoria, who thus
inherited the property in equal shares. In
turn, Romanas and Gregorias heirs the
parties herein became entitled to the
property upon the sisters passing. Under
Article 777 of the Civil Code, the rights to
the succession are transmitted from the
moment of death.
Having succeeded to the property as heirs
of Gregoria and Romana, petitioners and
respondents became co-owners
thereof. As co-owners, they may use the
property owned in common, provided they
do so in accordance with the purpose for
which it is intended and in such a way as
not to injure the interest of the coownership or prevent the other co-owners
from using it according to their rights.
Under the Family Code, family relations,
which is the primary basis for succession,
exclude relations by affinity. Art. 150.
Family relations include those:
(1) Between husband and wife;
(2) Between parents and children;
(3) Among other ascendants and
descendants; and
(4) Among brothers and sisters, whether of
the full or half blood.

-oo0ooAn heirs right of ownership over the

properties of the decedent is merely
inchoate as long as the estate has not
been fully settled and partitioned. This
means that the impending heir has yet no
absolute dominion over any specific
property in the decedents estate that could
be specifically levied upon and sold at
public auction. Any encumbrance of
attachment over the heirs interests in the
estate, therefore, remains a mere
probability, and cannot summarily be
satisfied without the final distribution of the
properties in the estate. Therefore, the
public auction sale of the property covered

by Tax Declaration No. 1107 is void because

the subject property is still covered by the
Estate of Abundio, which up to now,
remains unpartitioned.
- Medina vs. Court of Appeals

-oo0ooUnder the rules of succession, the heirs

instantaneously became co-owners of
the Marcos properties upon the death
of the President. The property rights
and obligations to the extent of the
value of the inheritance of a person
are transmitted to another through the
decedents death. In this concept,
nothing prevents the heirs from exercising
their right to transfer or dispose of the
properties that constitute their legitimes,
even absent their declaration or absent the
partition or the distribution of the estate.
-Republic vs. Marcos-Manotoc

The criterion for determining whether an

action survives the death of a petitioner:
depends on the nature of the action and the
damage sued for.
In the causes of action which SURVIVE,
the wrong complained [of] affects
primarily and principally property and
PROPERTY rights, the injuries to the
person being merely incidental;
while in the causes of action which do not
survive, the injury complained of is to the
PERSON, the property and rights of property
affected being incidental.
A petition for Declaration of Nullity of Deed
of Sale of Real Property is one relating to
property and property rights, and therefore,
survives the death of the petitioner.
If the case affects primarily and principally
property and property rights, then it
survives the death of the plaintiff or
petitioner.
- Cruz vs. Cruz

-oo0ooUntil the estate is partitioned, each

heir only has an INCHOATE right to the
properties of the estate, such that no
heir may lay claim on a particular
property.
Art. 1078 of the Civil Code provides that
where there are two or more heirs, the
whole estate of the decedent is, before
partition, owned in common by such

heirs, subject to the payment of the debts

of the deceased. Under a co-ownership,
the ownership of an undivided thing or right
belongs to different persons. Each co-owner
of property which is held pro indiviso
exercises his rights over the whole property
and may use and enjoy the same with no
other limitation than that he shall not injure
the interests of his co-owners.
Art. 493. Each co-owner shall have the
full ownership of his part and of the
fruits and benefits pertaining thereto,
and he may therefore alienate, assign or
mortgage it, and even substitute
another person in its enjoyment,
except when personal rights are
involved. But the effect of the alienation or
the mortgage, with respect to the coowners, shall be limited to the portion
which may be allotted to him in the
division upon the termination of the coownership.
- Silverio v CA

-oo0ooWhile A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC declares that a

petition for declaration of absolute nullity
of marriage may be filed solely by the
husband or the wife, it does not mean
that the compulsory or intestate heirs are
without any recourse under the law.
REMEDY: Compulsory or intestate heirs
can still question the validity of the
marriage of the spouses, not in a
proceeding for declaration of nullity but
upon the death of a spouse in a
proceeding for the settlement of the
estate of the deceased spouse filed in the
regular courts.
Only the presence of descendants,
ascendants or illegitimate children
excludes collateral relatives from
succeeding to the estate of the decedent.
The presence of legitimate, illegitimate,
or adopted child or children of the
deceased precludes succession by
collateral relatives.
Conversely, if there are no descendants,
ascendants, illegitimate children, or a
surviving spouse, the collateral relatives
shall succeed to the entire estate of the
decedent.
- Carlos vs. Sandoval

-oo0ooThus, legal heirs include both testate

and intestate heirs depending upon
whether succession is by the will of the
testator or by law. Legal heirs are not

necessarily compulsory heirs but they

may be so if the law reserves a legitime for
them. x x xx x x x x x Verily,
petitioners are legal heirs. Having been
decreed under the rules on intestacy as
entitled to succeed to the estate of the
Catain spouses due to the absence of
compulsory heirs, they now step into the
shoes of the decedents.
Respondent Ella Gagarani Asok, as
daughter-in-law of the patentees, can be
considered as among the legal heirs who
can repurchase the land in accordance with
Salenillas v. Court of Appeals, 169 SCRA 829
(1989).
- Development Bank of the Philippines vs.
Gagarani

-oo0ooSubstitution of Parties; The heirs of the

deceased may be allowed to be
substituted for the deceased, without
requiring the appointment of an executor or
administrator and the court may appoint a
guardian ad litem for the minor heirs.
(Section 16, Rule 3)
Since the questions involved in these cases
relate to property and property rights, then
we are dealing with actions that survive so
that Section 16, Rule 3 must necessarily
apply.
The legal representatives that the
provision speaks of, refer to those
authorized by lawthe administrator,
executor or guardian who, under the rule on
settlement of estate of deceased persons, is
constituted to take over the estate of the
deceased.
In applying Section 16, Rule 3, her heirs are
her surviving sisters and the children of her
deceased sister, Lourdes who should be her
legal representatives.
- Sumaljag vs. Literato

-oo0ooA person must first institute a special

proceeding to determine his status as
an heir before he can file an ordinary
civil action to nullify certain
instruments pertaining to the property
of the decedent.The primary issue in
this case is whether or not the respondents
have to institute a special proceeding to
determine their status as heirs of Anacleto
Cabrera before they can file an ordinary
civil action to nullify the affidavits of
Anacleto Cabrera and Dionisia Reyes, the
Extra-Judicial Settlement with the Sale of

Estate of Dionisia Reyes, and the Deed of

Segregation of Real Estate and Confirmation
of Sale executed by the heirs of Dionisia
Reyes and the heirs of Anacleto Cabrera, as
well as to cancel the new transfer
certificates of title issued by virtue of the
above-questioned documents.
The trial court correctly dismissed the case
for there is a lack of cause of action when a
case is instituted by parties who are not
real parties in interest. While a declaration
of heirship was not prayed for in the
complaint, it is clear from the allegations
therein that the right the respondents
sought to protect or enforce is that of an
heir of one of the registered co-owners of
the property prior to the issuance of the
new transfer certificates of title that they
seek to cancel. Thus, there is a need to
establish their status as such heirs in the
proper forum.
A declaration of heirship is improper in an
ordinary civil action since the matter is
within the exclusive competence of the
court in a special proceeding.
- Reyes vs. Enriquez

-oo0ooThe estate of a deceased person is a

juridical entity that has a personality of its
own; Judgment in a case binds only the
parties therein and not the estate of a
deceased person which might have been
represented at one time by one of the
parties.
Property received by compulsory heirs
from the decedent under an implied
trust is subject to collation.
Art. 1449 of the Civil Code states: There, is
also an implied trust when a donation is
made to a person but it appears that
although the legal estate is transmitted to
the donee, he nevertheless is either to have
no beneficial interest or only a part thereof.
There being an implied trust, the lots in
question are therefore subject to collation in
accordance with Art. 1061 which states:
Every compulsory heir, who succeeds with
other compulsory heirs, must bring into
the mass of the estate any property or
right which he may have received from the
decedent, during the lifetime of the
latter, by way of donation, or any other
gratuitous title, in order that it may be
computed in the determination of the
legitime of each heir, and in the account of
the partition.
- Nazareno vs. Court of Appeals

-oo0ooGENERAL RULE: heirs are bound by

contracts entered into by their
predecessors-in-interest
EXCEPTION: when the rights and obligations
arising therefrom are not transmissible by
(1) their nature, (2) stipulation or (3)
provision of law.
In the case at bar, there is neither
contractual stipulation nor legal provision
making the rights and obligations under the
contract intransmissible. More importantly,
the nature of the rights and obligations
therein are, by their nature, transmissible.
Among contracts which are
intransmissible are those which are
purely personal, either by provision of law,
such as in cases of partnerships and
agency, or by the very nature of the
obligations arising therefrom, such as those
requiring special personal qualifications of
the obligor. It may also be stated that
contracts for the payment of money debts
are not transmitted to the heirs of a party,
but constitute a charge against his estate.
Thus, where the client in a contract for
professional services of a lawyer died,
leaving minor heirs, and the lawyer, instead
of presenting his claim for professional
services under the contract to the probate
court, substituted the minors as parties for
his client, it was held that the contract
could not be enforced against the minors;
the lawyer was limited to a recovery on the
basis of quantum meruit.
There is privity of interest between an heir
and his deceased predecessorhe only
succeeds to what rights his predecessor had
and what is valid and binding against the
latter is also valid and binding as against
the former.
In the case at bar, the subject matter of the
contract is likewise a lease, which is a
property right. The death of a party does
not excuse nonperformance of a
contract which involves a property right,
and the rights and obligations thereunder
pass to the personal representatives of the
deceased.
- DKC Holdings Corporation vs. Court of
Appeals

-oo0ooThe conjugal partnership terminates

upon the death of either spouse. XXX
Where a complaint is brought against the
surviving spouse for the recovery of an
indebtedness chargeable against said

conjugal property, any judgment obtained

thereby is void; The proper action should be
in the form of a claim to be filed in the
testate or intestate proceedings of the
deceased spouse.
A deceased person does not have such
legal entity as is necessary to bring action
so much so that a motion to substitute
cannot lie and should be denied by the
court. XXX An action begun by a
decedents estate cannot be said to have
been begun by a legal person, since an
estate is not a legal entity.
- Ventura vs. Militante

-oo0ooThe general rule is that a partys

contractual rights and obligations are
transmissible to the successors.
Petitioners being the heirs of the late
Rosendo Alvarez, they cannot escape
the legal consequences of their
father's transaction, which gave rise to
the present claim for damages. That
petitioners did not inherit the property
involved herein is of no moment because by
legal fiction, the monetary equivalent
thereof devolved into the mass of their
father's hereditary estate, and we have
ruled that the hereditary assets are
always liable in their totality for the
payment of the debts of the estate.
- Alvarez vs. Intermediate Appellate Court

-oo0ooUnder section 17, Rule 3 of the Rule of

Court after a party dies and the claim is
not thereby extinguished, the court shall
order, upon proper notice, the legal
representative of the deceased to appear
and be substituted for the deceased, within
such time as may be granted x x x.
The claim of the deceased plaintiff which is
an action to quiet title over the parcels
of land in litigation affects primarily and
principally property and property
rights and therefore is one that survives
even after her death.
From the moment of the death of the
decedent, the heirs become the absolute
owners of his property (Article 777),
subject to the rights and obligations of the
decedent, and they cannot be deprived of
their rights thereto except by the methods
provided for by law. The moment of death is
the determining factor when the heirs
acquire a definite right to the inheritance
whether such right be pure or contingent.

The right of the heirs to the property

of the deceased vests in them, even
before judicial declaration of their
being heirs in the testate or intestate
proceedings.
- Bonilla vs. Barcena

-oo0ooDECLARATION OF HEIRSHIP;
NATURE OF AGREEMENT OF EJS &
PARTITION;
SEC 1, RULE 73. Settlement of Estate
Sec. 1. Where estate of deceased person
settled.
If the decedent is an inhabitant of the
Philippines at the time of his death,
whether a citizen or an alien, his will shall
be proved, or letters of administration
granted, and his estate settled, in the
Court of First Instance in the province
in which he resides at the time of his
death, and
if he is an inhabitant of a foreign
country, the Court of First Instance of any
province in which he had estate.
The court first taking cognizance of the
settlement of the estate of a decedent,
shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of
all other courts. The jurisdiction assumed by
a court, so far as it depends on the place of
residence of the decedent, or of the location
of his estate, shall not be contested in a suit
or proceeding, except in an appeal from
that court, in the original case, or when the
want of jurisdiction appears on the record.
-oo0ooValentins long possessed status as a
legitimate child and thus, heir of Severo,
need no longer be the subject of a
special proceeding for declaration of
heirship. There is no need to re-declare his
status as an heir of Severo. And,
contraposed to the fact that Valentins
status as a legitimate child of Severo is
already established, Nicolas status as a
purported heir of Severo can no longer be
established, Nicolas right thereto expiring
upon his death. Glaringly, there is no
pretension from respondents end that
Nicolas was born of a valid marriage, only
that he is Severos son.
- Basbas vs. Basbas

Declaration of heirship must be made

in a special proceeding, not in an
independent civil action.

However, the Court had allowed exceptions

to the rule requiring administration
proceedings as when the parties in the civil
case already presented their evidence
regarding the issue of heirship, and the RTC
had consequently rendered judgment upon
the issues it defined during the pre-trial.
An Affidavit of Self-Adjudication is only
proper when the affiant is the sole heir of
the decedent.
- Resbusquillo vs. Gualvez
An interested party, in estate
proceedings, is one who would be
benefited in the estate, such as an heir,
or one who has a claim against the estate,
such as a creditor.
Also, in estate proceedings, the phrase
next of kin refers to those whose
relationship with the decedent is such
that they are entitled to share in the
estate as distributees.
- Garcia-Quiazon vs. Belen

The right to set up the nullity of a void or

non-existent contract is not limited to the
parties, as in the case of annullable or
voidable contractsit is extended to third
persons who are directly affected by the
contract; Where a contract is absolutely
simulated, even third persons who may be
prejudiced thereby may set up its
inexistence. - The Heirs of Alfonso are
clearly his heirs and successors-ininterest and, as such, their interests are
directly affected, thereby giving them the
right to question the legality of the
Deed of Sale.
Art. 842 of the Civil Code refers to the
principle of freedom of disposition by
will and has no application to a disposition
by Deed of Sale.
Article 842 of the Civil Code provides: One
who has no compulsory heirs may dispose
by will of all his estate or any part of it in
favor of any person having capacity to
succeed. One who has compulsory heirs
may dispose of his estate provided he does
not contravene the provisions of this Code
with regard to the legitime of said heirs.
This article refers to the principle of
freedom of disposition by will. What is
involved in the case at bench is not a
disposition by will but by Deed of Sale.
Hence, the Heirs of Alfonso need not
first prove that the disposition
substantially diminished their

successional rights or unduly

prejudiced their legitimes.
Succession; Partition; Extra-Judicial
Partition; Special Power of Attorney;
Partition among heirs is not legally
deemed a conveyance of real property
resulting in change of ownershipit is
not a transfer of property from one to the
other, but rather, it is a confirmation or
ratification of title or right of property
that an heir is renouncing in favor of
another heir who accepts and receives
the inheritance; Since a Deed of ExtraJudicial Partition cannot be considered
as an act of strict dominion, a special
power of attorney is not necessary.
In fact, as between the parties, even an oral
partition by the heirs is valid if no creditors
are affected. The requirement of a written
memorandum under the statute of frauds
does not apply to partitions effected by the
heirs where no creditors are involved
considering that such transaction is not a
conveyance of property resulting in change
of ownership but merely a designation and
segregation of that part which belongs to
each heir.
Preterition is the total omission of a
compulsory heir from the inheritanceit
consists in the silence of the testator with
regard to a compulsory heir, omitting him in
the testament, either by not mentioning
him at all, or by not giving him anything in
the hereditary property but without
expressly disinheriting him, even if he is
mentioned in the will in the latter case.
Preterition is thus a concept of
testamentary succession and requires a
will.
- Ureta v Ureta
The Declaration of Heirship can be made
only in a special proceeding and not in a
civil action.
Yaptinchay and Enriquez, plaintiffs action
for annulment of title was anchored on their
alleged status as heirs of the original owner
whereas in this case, the respondents
claim is rooted on a sale transaction.
- Limos vs. Odones

accrued thereto since the opening of

the succession.
Since Rufo lost ownership of the subject
property during his lifetime, it only follows
that at the time of his death, the disputed
parcel of land no longer formed part of his
estate to which his heirs may lay claim.
Stated differently, petitioner and
respondents never inherited the subject lot
from their father
- Balus vs. Balus

The declaration of heirship can be made

only in a special proceeding inasmuch as
it involves the establishment of a status
or right.
A civil action is defined as one by which a
party sues another for the enforcement or
protection of a right, or the prevention or
redress of a wrong while
a special proceeding is a remedy by which
a party seeks to establish a status, a right,
or a particular fact.
- Yaptinchay vs. Del Rosario
Contract of Sale and Declaration of
Heirship and Waiver of Rights,
Distinguished.
In a Contract of Sale, one of the
contracting parties obligates himself to
transfer the ownership of and to deliver a
determinate thing, and the other party to
pay a price certain in money or its
equivalent.
Upon the other hand, a declaration of
heirship and waiver of rights operates
as a public instrument when filed with the
Registry of Deeds whereby the intestate
heirs adjudicate and divide the estate
left by the decedent among themselves as
they see fit. It is in effect an extrajudicial
settlement between the heirs under
Rule 74 of the Rules of Court.

The rights to a persons succession are

transmitted from the moment of his
death.

Difference between a sale of hereditary

rights and a waiver of hereditary rights:
SALE of hereditary rights presumes the
existence of a contract or deed of sale
between the parties.
WAIVER of hereditary rights is a mode
of extinction of ownership where there is an
abdication or intentional relinquishment of a
known right with knowledge of its existence
and intention to relinquish it, in favor of
other persons who are co-heirs in the
succession.

The inheritance of a person consists of

the property and transmissible rights
and obligations existing at the time of
his death, as well as those which have

A stranger to succession cannot

conclusively claim ownership over a lot
on the sole basis of a waiver document
which does not recite the elements of

either a sale, or a donation, or any

other derivative mode of acquiring
ownership.
- Acap v CA

Succession, Death & Family Home (Articles

152, 153, 159); Co-Ownership
FAMILY HOME
Art. 152. The family home, constituted
jointly by the husband and the wife, or by
an unmarried head of a family, is the
dwelling house where they and their family
reside, and the land on which is it situated.
Art. 153. The family home is deemed
constituted on a house and lot from the
time it is occupied as a family residence.
From the time of its constitution, so long as
any of its beneficiaries actually resides
therein, the family home continues to be
such and is exempt from execution, forced
sale or attachment except as hereinafter
provided and to the extent of the value
allowed by law.
Art. 159. The family home shall continue
despite the death of one or both spouses or
of the unmarried head of the family for a
period of ten year or for as long as there is
a minor beneficiary, and the heirs cannot
partition the same unless the court finds
compelling reasons therefor. This rule shall
apply regardless of whoever owns the
property or constituted the family home.

The law simply confines the right and

duty to make funeral arrangements to
the members of the family to the
exclusion of ones common law partner.
The law gives the right and duty to make
funeral arrangements to Rosario, she being
the surviving legal wife of Atty. Adriano. The
fact that she was living separately from her
husband and was in the United States when
he died has no controlling significance. To
say that Rosario had, in effect, waived or
renounced, expressly or impliedly, her right
and duty to make arrangements for the
funeral of her deceased husband is
baseless. The right and duty to make
funeral arrangements, like any other right,
will not be considered as having been
waived or renounced, except upon clear
and satisfactory proof of conduct indicative
of a free and voluntary intent to that end.
Article 307 of the Civil Code provides:

Art. 307. The funeral shall be in

accordance with the expressed wishes of
the deceased. In the absence of such
expression, his religious beliefs or
affiliation shall determine the funeral rites.
In case of doubt, the form of the funeral
shall be decided upon by the person obliged
to make arrangements for the same, after
consulting the other members of the
family. xxx As thoroughly explained earlier,
the right and duty to make funeral
arrangements reside in the persons
specified in Article 305 in relation to
Article 199 of the Family Code.
Art. 305. The duty and the right to make
arrangements for the funeral service of a
relative shall be in accordance with the
order established for support under Art.
199 of the Family Code xxx
Art. 199 (FC). Whenever two or more
persons are obliged to give support, the
liability shall devolve upon the ff persons
in the order provided:
a. Spouse
b. Descendants in nearest degree
c. Ascendants in nearest degree
d. Brothers and sisters
Considering the ambiguity as to the true
wishes of the deceased, it is the law that
supplies the presumption as to his intent.
No presumption can be said to have been
created in Valinos (common-law spouse)
favor, solely on account of a long-time
relationship with Atty. Adriano (deceased).
Should there be any doubt as to the
true intent of the deceased, the law
favors the legitimate family.
- Valino vs. Adriano

Family Home; One significant innovation

introduced by The Family Code is the
automatic constitution of the family
home from the time of its occupation
as a family residence without need anymore
for the judicial or extrajudicial processes.
It being settled that the subject house (and
the subject lot on which it stands) is the
family home of the deceased and his heirs,
the same is shielded from immediate
partition under Article 159 of The Family
Code.
Article 159. The family home shall continue
despite the death of one or both spouses or
of the unmarried head of the family for a
period of ten years or for as long as
there is a minor beneficiary, and the
heirs cannot partition the same unless the

court finds compelling reasons therefor.

This rule shall apply regardless of whoever
owns the property or constituted the family
home.
To this end, it preserves the family home as
the physical symbol of family love, security
and unity by imposing the following
RESTRICTIONS ON ITS PARTITION (of FH):
first, that the heirs cannot extrajudicially partition it for a period of 10
years from the death of one or both
spouses or of the unmarried head of the
family, or for a longer period, if there is
still a minor beneficiary residing
therein; and
second, that the heirs cannot judicially
partition it during the aforesaid
periods unless the court finds
compelling reasons therefor.
Even if the family home has passed by
succession to the co-ownership of the heirs,
or has been willed to any one of them, this
fact alone cannot transform the family
home into an ordinary property.
- Arriola v Arriola

SUCCESSION;
EQUITABLE TITLE & LEGAL TITLE;
HEIRS & ESTATE;
RULES 73 91, RULES OF COURT
Upon the death of a shareholder, the
heirs do not automatically become
stockholders of the corporation and
acquire the rights and privileges of the
deceased as shareholder of the corporation
the stocks must be distributed first to
the heirs in estate proceedings, and the
transfer of the stocks must be
recorded in the books of the corporation.
During such interim period, the heirs
stand as the equitable owners of the
stocks, the executor or administrator
duly appointed by the court being vested
with the legal title to the stock.
- Puno v Puno

The transfer of title by means of succession,

though effective and valid between the
parties involved (i.e., between the
decedents estate and her heirs), does not
bind the corporation and third parties. The
transfer must be registered in the
books of the corporation to make the
transferee-heir a stockholder entitled

to recognition as such both by the

corporation and by third parties.
The probate court, and not by a special
commercial court, has the power to enforce
an accounting as a necessary means to its
authority to determine the properties
included in the inventory of the estate to be
administered, divided up, and distributed.
Beyond this, the determination of title or
ownership over the subject shares (whether
belonging to Anastacia or Oscar) may be
conclusively settled by the probate court as
a question of collation or advancement.
- Reyes vs. Regional Trial Court of Makati,
Br. 142

Forms of Wills, Et Seq.

Arts. 804 809;
Art. 838
Article 804. Every will must be in writing
and executed in a language or dialect
known to the testator.
Article 805. Every will, other than a
holographic will, must be subscribed at
the end thereof by the testator himself or
by the testator's name written by some
other person in his presence, and by his
express direction, and attested and
subscribed by three or more credible
witnesses in the presence of the testator
and of one another.
The testator or the person requested by
him to write his name and the
instrumental witnesses of the will, shall
also sign, as aforesaid, each and every
page thereof, except the last, on the left
margin, and all the pages shall be
numbered correlatively in letters placed
on the upper part of each page.
The attestation shall state the number of
pages used upon which the will is written,
and the fact that the testator signed the
will and every page thereof, or caused
some other person to write his name,
under his express direction, in the
presence of the instrumental witnesses,
and that the latter witnessed and signed
the will and all the pages thereof in the
presence of the testator and of one
another.
If the attestation clause is in a language
not known to the witnesses, it shall be
interpreted to them.

Article 806. Every will must be

acknowledged before a notary public by
the testator and the witnesses. The
notary public shall not be required to
retain a copy of the will, or file another
with the office of the Clerk of Court.
Article 807. If the testator be deaf, or a
deaf-mute, he must personally read the
will, if able to do so; otherwise, he shall
designate two persons to read it and
communicate to him, in some practicable
manner, the contents thereof.
Article 808. If the testator is blind, the
will shall be read to him twice; once, by
one of the subscribing witnesses, and
again, by the notary public before whom
the will is acknowledged.
Article 809. In the absence of bad faith,
forgery, or fraud, or undue and improper
pressure and influence, defects and
imperfections in the form of attestation or
in the language used therein shall not
render the will invalid if it is proved that
the will was in fact executed and attested
in substantial compliance with all the
requirements of article 805.
Article 839. The will shall be
disallowed in any of the following cases:
(1) If the formalities required by law
have not been complied with;
(2) If the testator was insane, or
otherwise mentally incapable of making
a will, at the time of its execution;
(3) If it was executed through force or
under duress, or the influence of fear,
or threats;
(4) If it was procured by undue and
improper pressure and influence, on
the part of the beneficiary or of some
other person;
(5) If the signature of the testator was
procured by fraud;
(6) If the testator acted by mistake or
did not intend that the instrument he
signed should be his will at the time of
affixing his signature thereto.

The statement in the Acknowledgment

portion of the subject last will and

testament that it consists of 7 pages

including the page on which the ratification
and acknowledgment are written cannot
be deemed substantial compliance. The will
actually consists of 8 pages including its
acknowledgment which discrepancy cannot
be explained by mere examination of the
will itself but through the presentation of
evidence aliunde.
- Lopez vs. Lopez

The state of being forgetful does not

necessarily make a person mentally
unsound so as to render him unfit to
execute a Will.
Article 799 of the New Civil Code states:
Art. 799. To be of sound mind, it is not
necessary that the testator be in full
possession of all his reasoning faculties, or
that his mind be wholly unbroken,
unimpaired, or unshattered by disease,
injury or other cause. It shall be sufficient if
the testator was able at the time of making
the will to know:
- the nature of the estate to be
disposed of,
- the proper objects of his bounty,
and
- the character of the
testamentary act.
The very existence of the Will is in itself
prima facie proof that the supposed
testatrix has willed that her estate be
distributed in the manner therein provided.
- Baltazar vs. Laxa

A DONATION MORTIS CAUSA must

comply with the formalities prescribed
by law for the validity of wills,
otherwise the donation is void and
would produce no effect.
The requirements of attestation and
acknowledgement (Article 805 and 806,
respectively) contemplates two distinct
acts that serve different purposes.
An ACKNOWLEDGMENT is made by one
executing a deed, declaring before a
competent officer or court that the deed or
act is his own.
On the other hand, the ATTESTATION of a
will refers to the act of the instrumental
witnesses themselves who certify to the
execution of the instrument before them
and to the manner of its execution.
- Echavez vs. Dozen Construction and
Development Corporation

While it is true that the attestation clause

is not a part of the will, the court, after
examining the totality of the will, is of the
considered opinion that error in the
number of pages of the will as stated
in the attestation clause is not
material to invalidate the subject will. xxx
It must be noted that the subject
instrument is consecutively lettered
with pages A, B, and C which is a
sufficient safeguard from the possibility
of an omission of some of the pages.
substantial compliance.
- Samaniego-Celada vs. Abena

Article 887. The following are

COMPULSORY HEIRS:
(1) Legitimate children and
descendants, with respect to their
legitimate parents and ascendants;
(2) In default of the foregoing, legitimate
parents and ascendants, with respect
to their legitimate children and
descendants;
(3) The widow or widower;
(4) Acknowledged natural children, and
natural children by legal fiction;
(5) Other illegitimate children referred
to in article 287.
Compulsory heirs mentioned in Nos. 3, 4,
and 5 are not excluded by those in Nos. 1
and 2; neither do they exclude one
another.

A WILL is an act whereby a person is

permitted, with the formalities prescribed
by law, to control to a certain degree the
disposition of his estate.
Defects in the observance of the
solemnities prescribed by law render
the entire will invalid. This carelessness
cannot be taken lightly in view of the
importance and delicate nature of a will,
considering that the testator and the
witnesses, as in this case, are no longer
alive to identify the instrument and to
confirm its contents.
- Lee vs. Tambago

A notarial will that is not acknowledged

before a notary public by the testator
and the instrumental witnesses is void and
cannot be accepted for probate.
An acknowledgment is the act of one who
has executed a deed in going before some
competent officer and declaring it to be his
act or deed, and in the case of a notarial
will, that competent officer is the notary
public.
An acknowledgment taken outside the
territorial limits of the officers (notary
public) jurisdiction is void as if the person
taking it were wholly without official
character. Thus:
The compulsory language of Article 806 of
the Civil Code was not complied with and
the interdiction of Article 240 of the Notarial
Law was breached. Ineluctably, the acts of
the testatrix, her witnesses and Atty.
Directo were all completely void.
- Guerrero vs. Bihis

A failure by the attestation clause to state

that the testator signed every page
can be liberally construed, since that fact
can be checked by a visual examination,
while a failure by the attestation clause to
state that the witnesses signed in one
anothers presence should be considered
a fatal flaw since the attestation is the
only textual guarantee of compliance.
The failure of the attestation clause to
state the number of pages on which
the will was written remains a fatal
flaw, despite Article 809. The purpose of
the law in requiring the clause to state the
number of pages on which the will is written
is to safeguard against possible
interpolation or omission of one or some
of its pages and to prevent any increase or
decrease in the pages. There is
substantial compliance with this
requirement if the will states elsewhere
in it how many pages it is comprised
of.
(witnesses signing of each page of the
will is distinct from the signing of the
attestation clause)
Article 805 particularly segregates the
requirement that the instrumental
witnesses sign each page of the will, from
the requisite that the will be attested and
subscribed by [the instrumental
witnesses]the respective intents behind
these two classes of signature are distinct

from each other. Even if instrumental

witnesses signed the left-hand margin of
the page containing the unsigned clause,
such signatures cannot demonstrate these
witnesses undertakings in the clause, since
the signatures that do appear on the page
were directed towards a wholly different
avowal.
The signatures on the left-hand corner
of every page signify, among others, that
the witnesses are aware that the page
they are signing forms part of the will.
On the other hand, the signatures to the
attestation clause establish that the
witnesses are referring to the
statements contained in the
attestation clause itself. Indeed, the
attestation clause is separate and apart
from the disposition of the will.
It is the witnesses, and not the testator,
who are required under Article 805 to
state the number of pages used upon
which the will was written; the fact that the
testator had signed the will and every
page thereof; and that they witnessed and
signed the will and all the pages thereof in
the presence of the testator and of one
another.
In lieu of an acknowledgment, the notary
public, Petronio Y. Bautista, wrote
Nilagdaan ko at ninotario ko ngayong 10
ng Hunyo 10 (sic), 1981 dito sa Lungsod ng
Maynila. By no manner of
contemplation can those words be
construed as an acknowledgment. An
acknowledgment is the act of one who has
executed a deed in going before some
competent officer or court and declaring it
to be his act or deed. It involves an extra
step undertaken whereby the signor
actually declares to the notary that the
executor of a document has attested
to the notary that the same is his/her
own free act and deed.
A JURAT is that part of an affidavit whereby
the notary certifies that before him/her, the
document was subscribed and sworn to by
the executor.
Even if we consider what was affixed
by the notary public as a jurat, the will
would nonetheless remain invalid, as the
express requirement of Article 806 is that
the will be acknowledged, and not
merely subscribed and sworn to.
A notarial will that is not acknowledged
before a notary public by the testator and
the witnesses is fatally defective, even if it

is subscribed and sworn to before a notary

public.
- Azuela v. CA

Article 808 applies not only to blind

testators but also, to those who, for one
reason or another, are incapable of
reading their wills.
Since Brigido Alvarado was incapable of
reading the final drafts of his will and codicil
on the separate occasions of their execution
due to his poor, defective, or blurred
vision, there can be no other course for us
but to conclude that Brigido Alvarado
comes within the scope of the term blind
as it is used in Art. 808.
Although there should be strict compliance
with the substantial requirements of the
law in order to insure the authenticity of the
will, the formal imperfections should be
brushed aside when they do not affect its
purpose and which, when taken into
account, may only defeat the testators
will.

In the case of an ordinary or attested will,

its attestation clause need not be
written in a language or dialect known
to the testator since it does not form part
of the testamentary disposition.
Furthermore, the language used in the
attestation clause likewise need not even
be known to the attesting witnesses.
The last paragraph of Article 805 merely
requires that, in such a case, the
attestation clause shall be interpreted to
said witnesses.
Article 805 requires that the witnesses
should both attest and subscribe to the will
in the presence of the testator and of one
another.
Attestation
act of the senses
mental
to attest a will is to
know that it was
published as
such, and to
certify the facts
required to
constitute an
actual and legal
publication

Subscription
act of the hand
mechanical
to subscribe a
paper published as
a will is only to
write on the
same paper the
names of the
witnesses, for the
sole purpose of
identification

Attestation clause which does not state

that testament was signed by the
witnesses in the presence of one
another and of the testator renders the
will null and void.
Omission which can be supplied by an
examination of the will itself, without the
need of resorting to extrinsic evidence, will
not be fatal and, correspondingly, would not
obstruct the allowance to probate of the will
being assailed.
The defects and imperfection must only be
with respect to the form of the attestation
or the language employed therein. Such
defects or imperfection would not render a
will invalid should it be proved that the will
was really executed and attested in
compliance with Article 805. These
considerations do not apply where the
attestation clause totally omits the fact
that the attesting witnesses signed
each and every page of the will in the
presence of the testator and of each
other. In such a situation, the defect is
not only in the form or language of the
attestation clause but the total
absence of a specific element required
by Article 805 to be specifically stated in
the attestation clause of a will. That is
precisely the defect complained of in the
present case since there is no plausible way
by which it can be read into the questioned
attestation clause statement, or an
implication thereof, that the attesting
witness did actually bear witness to the
signing by the testator of the will and all of
its pages and that said instrumental
witnesses also signed the will and every
page thereof in the presence of the testator
and of one another.
- Caneda vs. Court of Appeals

Inasmuch as the will written in English says

that it was in a language understood and
known to the testatrix, but also states that
it was translated into the Filipino
language, the probate judge should have
readily perceived that the testatrix is
illiterate and the will is void. That could
only mean that the will was written in a
language not known to the illiterate
testatrix and, therefore, it is void because
of the mandatory provision of article 804
of the Civil Code that every will must be
executed in a language or dialect known to
the testator.
- Suroza vs. Honrado

The subsequent signing and sealing by

the notary of his certification that the
testament was duly acknowledged by the
participants therein is not part of the
acknowledgment itself nor of the
testamentary act. Hence their separate
execution out of the presence of the
testatrix and her witnesses does not
violate the rule that testaments should be
completed without interruption. ("uno
eodem die ac tempore in eodem loco").
- Javellana vs. Ledesma
The notary public before whom the will
was acknowledged cannot be
considered as the third instrumental
witness since he cannot acknowledge
before himself his having signed the
will. To acknowledge before means to
avow; to own as genuine, to assent, to
admit, and before means in front or
preceding in space or ahead of.
Consequently, if the third witness were the
notary public himself, he would have to
avow, assent or admit his having signed the
will in front of himself. This cannot be done
because he cannot split his personality into
two so that one will appear before the other
to acknowledge his participation in the
making of the will.
- Cruz vs. Villasor
In a will consisting of two sheets the
first of which contains all the testamentary
dispositions and is signed at the bottom by
the testator and three witnesses and the
second contains only the attestation
clause and is signed also at the bottom
by the three witnesses, it is not
necessary that both sheets be further
signed on their margins by the
testator and the witnesses, or be
paged.
The testator's signature is not
necessary in the attestation clause
because this, as its name implies,
appertains only to the witnesses and not to
the testator.
- Abangan vs. Abangan

Where the testator is blind, the will must be

read to him twice as required by Article 808
of the Civil Code. The reason for this is to
make the provisions thereof known to him,
so that he may be able to object if they are
not in accordance with his wishes. Failure to
comply with this requirement makes the will
invalid.

- Garcia vs. Vasquez

Arts. 810 814; (HOLOGRAPHIC

WILL)
Arts. 838, 916
Article 810. A person may execute a
holographic will which must be
entirely written, dated, and signed
by the hand of the testator himself. It
is subject to no other form, and may be
made in or out of the Philippines, and
need not be witnessed.
Article 811. In the probate of a
holographic will, it shall be necessary
that at least one witness who knows
the handwriting and signature of the
testator explicitly declare that the will
and the signature are in the handwriting
of the testator.
If the will is contested, at least three
of such witnesses shall be required.
In the absence of any competent
witness referred to in the preceding
paragraph, and if the court deem it
necessary, expert testimony may be
resorted to.
Article 812. In holographic wills, the
dispositions of the testator written
below his signature must be dated
and signed by him in order to make
them valid as testamentary dispositions.
Article 813. When a number of
dispositions appearing in a holographic
will are signed without being dated, and
the last disposition has a signature
and a date, such date validates the
dispositions preceding it, whatever be
the time of prior dispositions.
Article 814. In case of any insertion,
cancellation, erasure or alteration in
a holographic will, the testator must
authenticate the same by his full
signature.

Article 838. No will shall pass either

real or personal property unless it is
proved and allowed in accordance
with the Rules of Court.

The testator himself may, during his

lifetime, petition the court having
jurisdiction for the allowance of his will.
In such case, the pertinent provisions of
the Rules of Court for the allowance of
wills after the testator's a death shall
govern.
xxx
Subject to the right of appeal, the
allowance of the will, either during the
lifetime of the testator or after his death,
shall be conclusive as to its due
execution.

Article 916. Disinheritance can be

effected only through a will wherein the
legal cause therefor shall be specified.

For disinheritance to be valid, Article

916 of the Civil Code requires that the
same must be effected through a will
wherein the legal cause therefor shall
be specified. Maltreatment of a parent
by a child presents a sufficient cause for
the disinheritance of the latter.
Segundos document, although it may
initially come across as a mere
disinheritance instrument, conforms to
the formalities of a holographic will
prescribed by law. It is written, dated and
signed by the hand of Segundo himself. An
intent to dispose mortis causa can be
clearly deduced from the terms of the
instrument, and while it does not make an
affirmative disposition of the latters
property, the disinheritance of Alfredo,
nonetheless, is an act of disposition in
itself. In other words, the disinheritance
results in the disposition of the property of
the testator Segundo in favor of those who
would succeed in the absence of Alfredo.
Unless the will is probated, the
disinheritance cannot be given effect.
Considering that the questioned document
is Segundos holographic will, and that the
law favors testacy over intestacy, the
probate of the will cannot be dispensed
with. Article 838 of the Civil Code provides
that no will shall pass either real or personal
property unless it is proved and allowed in
accordance with the Rules of Court. Thus,
unless the will is probated, the right of a

person to dispose of his property may be

rendered nugatory.
- Seangio vs. Reyes, 508 SCRA 177

Article 811 of the Civil Code is mandatory.

The possibility of a false document being
adjudged as the will of the testator cannot
be eliminated, which is why if the
holographic will is contested, the law
requires three witnesses to declare that the
will was in the handwriting of the deceased.
- Codoy vs. Calugay

Sec. 9. RULE 76. GROUNDS FOR

DISALLOWING WILL. (EXCLUSIVE LIST)
(a) If not executed and attested as
required by law;
(b) If the testator was insane, or otherwise
mentally incapable to make a will, at the
time of its execution;
(c) If it was executed under duress, or the
influence of fear, or threats;
(d) If it was procured by undue and
improper pressure and influence, on
the part of the beneficiary, or of some
other person for his benefit;
(e) If the signature of the testator was
procured by fraud or trick, and he did not
intend that the instrument should be his
will at the time of fixing his signature
thereto.
In a petition to admit a holographic will to
probate, the only issues to be resolved are:
(1) whether the instrument submitted is,
indeed, the decedents last will and
testament;
(2) whether said will was executed in
accordance with the formalities prescribed
by law;
(3) whether the decedent had the
necessary testamentary capacity at the
time the will was executed; and,
(4) whether the execution of the will and its
signing were the voluntary acts of the
decedent.
Article 813 of the New Civil Code shows
that its requirement affects the validity
of the dispositions contained in the
holographic will, but not its probate. If the
testator fails to sign and date some of the

dispositions, the result is that these

dispositions cannot be effectuated.
Such failure, however, does not render the
whole testament void.
While courts in probate proceedings are
generally limited to pass only upon the
extrinsic validity of the will sought to be
probated, in exceptional cases, courts are
not powerless to do what the situation
constrains them to do, and pass upon
certain provisions of the will.
XXX In the case at bench, decedent herself
indubitably stated in her holographic will
that the Cabadbaran property is in the
name of her late father, John H. Sand.
Thus, as correctly held by respondent court,
she cannot validly dispose of the whole
property, which she shares with her
fathers other heirs.
- Ajero vs. Court of Appeals

The law does not specify a particular

location where the date should be
placed in the will. The only requirements
are that the date be in the will itself and
executed in the hand of the testator.
- Labrador vs. Court of Appeals

If a Will has been executed in substantial

compliance with the formalities of the law,
and the possibility of bad faith and fraud
in the exercise thereof is obviated, said
Will should be admitted to probate.
General rule that the date in a holographic
will should include the day, month and
year of execution; Exception, is the
absence of appearance of fraud, bad
faith, undue influence and pressure
and the authenticity of the will; Date
Feb./61 appearing in a holographic will,
valid, under the principle of substantial
compliance.
- Roxas v De Jesus

Ordinarily erasures or alterations in a

holographic will does not invalidate the
will as a whole, but at most only as
respects the particular words erased,
corrected or interlined.
Where a holographic will has designate
only one heir to the entire estate and
the designation was cancelled and another
sole heir designated, without the
cancellation being authenticated by

full signature of testator, entire will is

void.
The original unaltered will naming Rosa as
sole heir cannot, however, be given effect
in view of the trial courts factual finding
that the testatrix had by her own
handwriting substituted Gregorio for
Rosa, so that there is no longer any will
naming Rosa as sole heir. The net result is
that the testatrix left no valid will and
both Rosa and Gregorio as her next of kin
succeed to her intestate estate.
- Kalaw vs. Relova
If the holographic will has been lost or
destroyed and no other copy is
available, the will cannot be probated
because the best and only evidence is
the handwriting of the testator in said
will. It is necessary that there be a
comparison between sample handwritten
statements of the testator and the
handwritten will.
Evidently, the photostatic or xerox copy
of the lost or destroyed holographic
will may be admitted because then the
authenticity of the handwriting of the
deceased can be determined by the
probate court.
Rodelas vs. Aranza

Art. 816,
Rules 76 & 77, Rules of Court;
Arts. 815 819, NCC

Article 816. The will of an alien who is

abroad produces effect in the Philippines
if made with the formalities prescribed by
the law of the place in which he resides,
or according to the formalities observed
in his country, or in conformity with
those which this Code prescribes.
(domicile,national,Phils)

Article 815. When a Filipino is in a

foreign country, he is authorized to
make a will in any of the forms
established by the law of the country in
which he may be. Such will may be
probated in the Philippines. (domicile,
Phils)
Article 817. A will made in the
Philippines by a citizen or subject of

another country (alien), which is

executed in accordance with the law of
the country of which he is a citizen or
subject, and which might be proved and
allowed by the law of his own country,
shall have the same effect as if executed
according to the laws of the Philippines.
(national, Phils)
Article 818. Two or more persons cannot
make a will jointly, or in the same
instrument, either for their reciprocal
benefit or for the benefit of a third person.
Article 819. Wills, prohibited by the
preceding article, executed by Filipinos in
a foreign country shall not be valid in the
Philippines, even though authorized by
the laws of the country where they may
have been executed.

Our laws allow the probate of wills

executed by foreigners abroad although
the same have not as yet been probated
and allowed in the countries of their
execution.
The rules do not require proof that the
foreign will has already been allowed
and probated in the country of its
execution.
Our rules require merely that the petition
for the allowance of a will must show, so far
as known to the petitioner: (a) the
jurisdictional facts; (b) the names, ages,
and residences of the heirs, legatees, and
devisees of the testator or decedent; (c) the
probable value and character of the
property of the estate; (d) the name of the
person for whom letters are prayed; and (e)
if the will has not been delivered to the
court, the name of the person having
custody of it. Jurisdictional facts refer to the
fact of death of the decedent, his residence
at the time of his death in the province
where the probate court is sitting, or if he is
an inhabitant of a foreign country, the
estate he left in such province.
- Palaganas vs. Palaganas

Conflict of Laws; Proof that wills

executed abroad conform with the
formalities prescribed by laws in the
foreign jurisdiction or by Philippine
laws is imperative. The respective wills of
the Cunanan spouses, who were American

citizens, will only be effective in this

country upon compliance with the following
provision of the Civil Code of the
Philippines: Art. 816. The will of an alien
who is abroad produces effect in the
Philippines if made with the formalities
prescribed by the law of the place in which
he resides, or according to the formalities
observed in his country, or in conformity
with those which this Code prescribes.
Thus, proof that both wills conform
with the formalities prescribed by New
York laws or by Philippine laws is
imperative.
The evidence necessary for the
reprobate or allowance of wills which
have been probated outside of the
Philippines are:
(1) the due execution of the will in
accordance with the foreign laws;
(2) the testator has his domicile in the
foreign country and not in the Philippines;
(3) the will has been admitted to probate in
such country;
(4) the fact that the foreign tribunal is a
probate court, and
(5) the laws of a foreign country on
procedure and allowance of wills
What the law expressly prohibits is the
making of joint wills, not the joint
probate of separate wills containing
essentially the same provisions and
pertaining to property which in all
probability are conjugal in nature. Since the
two wills contain essentially the same
provisions and pertain to property which in
all probability are conjugal in nature,
practical considerations dictate their
joint probate.
With regard to notices, the will probated
abroad should be treated as if it were an
original will or a will that is presented for
probate for the first time. Accordingly,
compliance with Sections 3 and 4 of Rule
76, which require publication and notice by
mail or personally to the known heirs,
legatees, and devisees of the testator
resident in the Philippines and to the
executor, if he is not the petitioner, are
required.
- Vda. de Perez vs. Tolete

Revocation Of Wills;
Art. 830;
Art. 875 Disposicion Captatoria
GROUNDS FOR REVOCATION:
Article 830. No will shall be revoked
except in the following cases:

(1) By implication of law; or

(2) By some will, codicil, or other
writing executed as provided in case of
wills; or
(3) By burning, tearing, cancelling, or
obliterating the will with the intention
of revoking it, by the testator himself,
or by some other person in his presence,
and by his express direction. If burned,
torn, cancelled, or obliterated by some
other person, without the express
direction of the testator, the will may still
be established, and the estate distributed
in accordance therewith, if its contents,
and due execution, and the fact of its
unauthorized destruction, cancellation, or
obliteration are established according to
the Rules of Court.
DISPOSICION CAPTATORIA: "Any
disposition made upon the condition that
the heir shall make some provision in
his will in favor of the testator or any
other person shall be void." (Art. 875)

To constitute an effective revocation,

the physical act of burning, tearing,
obliterating or cancelling the will must be
coupled with animus revocandi (intention
to revoke) on the part of the testator. It may
be performed by another person but under
the express direction and in the
presence of the testator; that the
document destroyed must be the will
itself.
There is paucity of evidence to show
compliance with these requirements. One,
the document or papers burned by
Adriana's maid, Guadalupe, was not
satisfactorily established to be a will at all,
much less the will of Adriana Maloto. For
another, the burning was not proven to
have been done under the express direction
of Adriana, and the burning was not in her
presence. Both witnesses, Guadalupe and
Eladio, were one in stating that they were
the only ones present at the place where
the stove (presumably in the kitchen) was
located in which the papers proferred as a
will were burned.
No final judgment rendered insofar as the
probate of Adriana Maloto's will is
concerned. The decision of the trial court in
Special Proceeding No. 1736, although final,
involved only the intestate Settlement of

the estate of Adria iana. As such, that

judgment could not in any manner be
construed to be final with respect to the
probate of the subsequently discovered will
of the decedent. xxx Trial court, in the
intestate proceeding, was without
jurisdiction to rule on the probate of
the contested will.
- Testate Estate of Adriana Maloto vs. Court
of Appeals
PRESUMPTION OF REVOCATION
Where a will which cannot be found is
shown to have been in the possession of
the testator, when last seen, the
presumption is, in the absence of other
competent evidence, that the same was
cancelled or destroyed. The same
presumption arises where it is shown that
the testator had ready access to the
will and it cannot be found after his
death. It will not be presumed that such
will has been destroyed by any other person
without the knowledge or authority of the
testator.
- Gago vs. Mamuyac

REVOCATION BY SUBSEQUENT WILL;

EFFECT OF VOID REVOCATORY CLAUSE
A subsequent will containing a clause
revoking a previous will, having been
disallowed for the reason that it was not
executed in conformity with the provisions
as to the making of wills, cannot produce
the effect of annulling the previous
will, inasmuch as said revocatory clause is
void.
DEPENDENT RELATIVE REVOCATION
Destruction cannot have the effect of
defeating the prior will where it is founded
on the mistaken belief that the later will has
been validly executed and would be given
due effect. The earlier will can still be
admitted to probate under the principle
of "dependent relative revocation". The
theory on which this principle is predicated
is that the testator did not intend to die
intestate.
- Molo v Molo

According to the statute governing the

subject in this jurisdiction the destruction
animo revocandi of a will constitutes,
in itself, a sufficient revocation. The
original will (which was not completely
destroyed) herein presented for probate
having been destroyed animo revocandi,

cannot be declared the will and last

testament of the testator.
- Diaz vs. De Leon

Probate.
Extrinsic vs. Intrinsic Elements;
Voluntary Institution & Succession;
Arts. 102, 130 FC
Intrinsic Validity includes:
- order of succession
- amount of successional rights and
- intrinsic validity of the provisions of
the wills
Extrinsic Validity refers to:
a. whether the will submitted is indeed,
the decedents last will and
testament;
b. compliance with the prescribed
formalities for the execution of wills;
c. the testamentary capacity of the
testator; and
d. the due execution of the last will and
testament.

Art. 102. Upon DISSOLUTION OF THE

ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY REGIME, the
following procedure shall apply:
(1) An inventory shall be prepared, listing
separately all the properties of the absolute
community and the exclusive properties of
each spouse.
(2) The debts and obligations of the
absolute community shall be paid out of
its assets. In case of insufficiency of said
assets, the spouses shall be solidarily
liable for the unpaid balance with their
separate properties in accordance with the
provisions of the second paragraph of
Article 94.
(3) Whatever remains of the exclusive
properties of the spouses shall thereafter be
delivered to each of them.
(4) The net remainder of the properties of
the absolute community shall constitute its
net assets, which shall be divided
equally between husband and wife,
unless a different proportion or division was
agreed upon in the marriage settlements, or
unless there has been a voluntary waiver of
such share provided in this Code. For
purpose of computing the net profits
subject to forfeiture in accordance with
Articles 43, No. (2) and 63, No. (2), the said
profits shall be the increase in value

between the market value of the

community property at the time of the
celebration of the marriage and the market
value at the time of its dissolution.
(5) The presumptive legitimes of the
common children shall be delivered
upon partition, in accordance with Article
51.
(6) Unless otherwise agreed upon by the
parties, in the partition of the properties,
the conjugal dwelling and the lot on
which it is situated shall be adjudicated to
the spouse with whom the majority of
the common children choose to
remain. Children below the age of seven
years are deemed to have chosen the
mother, unless the court has decided
otherwise. In case there in no such majority,
the court shall decide, taking into
consideration the best interests of said
children.

Art. 130. Upon the TERMINATION OF THE

MARRIAGE BY DEATH, the conjugal
partnership property shall be liquidated
in the same proceeding for the
settlement of the estate of the
deceased.
If no judicial settlement proceeding is
instituted, the surviving spouse shall
liquidate the conjugal partnership property
either judicially or extra-judicially within
six months from the death of the
deceased spouse. If upon the lapse of the
six-month period no liquidation is made,
any disposition or encumbrance
involving the conjugal partnership property
of the terminated marriage shall be void.
Should the surviving spouse contract a
subsequent marriage without
compliance with the foregoing
requirements, a mandatory regime of
complete separation of property shall
govern the property relations of the
subsequent marriage.

-oo0ooThe general rule is that the jurisdiction of

the trial court, either as a probate or an
intestate court, relates only to matters
having to do with the probate of the
will and/or settlement of the estate of
deceased persons, but does not extend
to the determination of questions of

ownership that arise during the

proceedings.
All that the said court could do as regards
said properties is to determine whether or
not they should be included in the
inventory of properties to be
administered by the administrator. In
case of dispute, the parties, the
administrator, and the opposing parties
have to resort to an ordinary action
before a court exercising general
jurisdiction for a final determination of the
conflicting claims of title.
This general rule is subject to exceptions as
justified by expediency and convenience.
First, the probate court may
provisionally pass upon in an intestate
or a testate proceeding the question of
inclusion in, or exclusion from, the
inventory of a piece of property
without prejudice to the final
determination of ownership in a
separate action.
Second, if the interested parties are all
heirs to the estate, or the question is
one of collation or advancement, or
the parties consent to the assumption
of jurisdiction by the probate court and
the rights of third parties are not
impaired, then the probate court is
competent to resolve issues on
ownership.
The jurisdiction of a probate court
extends to matters incidental or collateral
to the settlement and distribution of the
estate, such as the determination of the
status of each heir and whether the
property in the inventory is conjugal or
exclusive property of the deceased
spouse.
When the marriage is dissolved by the
death of the husband or the wife, the
community property shall be
inventoried, administered, and
liquidated, and the debts thereof paid; in
the testate or intestate proceedings of
the deceased spouse, and if both spouses
have died, the conjugal partnership shall be
liquidated in the testate or intestate
proceedings of either.
The fact that the properties were registered
in the name of Joaquin Agtarap, married to
Caridad Garcia, is not sufficient proof that
the properties were acquired during the
spouses coverture. The phrase married
to Caridad Garcia in the TCTs is
merely descriptive of the civil status of
Joaquin as the registered owner, and does

not necessarily prove that the realties

are their conjugal properties.
If there is a controversy before the court as
to who are the lawful heirs of the
deceased person or as to the
distributive share to which each person is
entitled under the law, the controversy shall
be heard and decided as in ordinary
cases.
An estate is settled and distributed
among the heirs only after the
payment of the debts of the estate,
funeral charges, expenses of
administration, allowance to the
widow, and inheritance tax.
- Agtarap vs. Agtarap

Court approval is required in any

disposition of the decedents estate,
but reference to judicial approval, cannot
adversely affect the substantive rights
of heirs to dispose of their own pro
indiviso shares in the co-heirship or coownership. xxx It merely implies that the
property may be taken out of custodia legis,
but only with the courts permission.
Where other heirs did not consent to the
sale of their ideal shares in the inherited
property, the sale will only be limited to the
pro indiviso share of the selling heir.
Probate jurisdiction covers all matters
relating to the settlement of estates and the
probate of wills of deceased persons,
including the appointment and the removal
of administrators and executors, and
extends as well to matters incidental and
collateral to the exercise of a probate
courts recognized powers such as selling,
mortgaging or otherwise encumbering
realty belonging to the estate.
The spouses share as an heir should be
based only on the remaining half, after
deducting the conjugal share.
Succession laws and jurisprudence require
that when a marriage is dissolved by
the death of the husband or the wife, the
decedents entire estateunder the
concept of conjugal properties of gains
must be divided equally, with one half
going to the surviving spouse and the
other half to the heirs of the deceased.
The only instance where a party interested
in a probate proceeding may have a final
liquidation set aside is when he is left out
by reason of circumstances beyond his

control or through mistake or inadvertence

not imputable to negligence, which
circumstances do not concur herein.
Probate proceedings deals generally with
the extrinsic validity of the will sought
to be probated, particularly on three
aspects: whether the will submitted is
indeed, the decedents last will and
testament; compliance with the
prescribed formalities for the
execution of wills; the testamentary
capacity of the testator; and the due
execution of the last will and
testament.
Due execution includes a determination of
whether the testator was of sound and
disposing mind at the time of its
execution, that he had freely executed
the will and was not acting under duress,
fraud, menace or undue influence and that
the will is genuine and not a forgery, that
he was of the proper testamentary age and
that he is a person not expressly
prohibited by law from making a will.
- Heirs of Spouses Remedios R. Sandejas
and Eliodoro P. Sandejas, Sr. vs. Lina

A final and executory decision or order can

no longer be disturbed or reopened no
matter how erroneous it may be. It has
been ruled that a final judgment on
probated will, albeit erroneous, is
binding on the whole world.
The trial court declared in the January 30,
1986 Order that petitioner is not the
legal wife of Alejandro, whose only
heirs are his three legitimate children
(petitioners herein), and at the same time it
nullified the will. But it should be noted that
in the same Order, the trial court also said
that the estate of the late spouses be
distributed according to the laws of
intestacy. Accordingly, it has no option but
to implement that order of intestate
distribution and not to reopen and again reexamine the intrinsic provisions of the same
will.
It can be clearly inferred from Article 960 of
the Civil Code, on the law of successional
rights that testacy is preferred to
intestacy. But before there could be
testate distribution, the will must pass the
scrutinizing test and safeguards provided by
law considering that the deceased testator
is no longer available to prove the
voluntariness of his actions, aside from the
fact that the transfer of the estate is usually

onerous in nature and that no one is

presumed to give Nemo praesumitur
donare. No intestate distribution of
the estate can be done until and
unless the will had failed to pass both
its extrinsic and intrinsic validity.
If the will is extrinsically void, the rules
of intestacy apply regardless of the
intrinsic validity thereof. If it is extrinsically
valid, the next test is to determine its
intrinsic validity that is whether the
provisions of the will are valid according
to the laws of succession. In this case, the
court had ruled that the will of Alejandro
was extrinsically valid but the intrinsic
provisions thereof were void. Thus, the
rules of intestacy apply as correctly held
by the trial court.
- Dorotheo vs. Court of Appeals

In order to be capacitated to inherit, the

heir, devisee or legatee must be living at
the moment the succession opens, except
in case of representation, when it is proper.
Inasmuch as the testator was not survived
by any nephew who became a priest, the
unavoidable conclusion is that the bequest
in question was ineffectual or inoperative.
Therefore, the administration of the
ricelands by the parish priest of Victoria, as
envisaged in the will, was likewise
inoperative.
Where a bequest is inoperative the same
shall be merged, as a rule, to the
testators estate, except in cases of
substitution and those in which the right of
accretion exists.
- Parish Priest of Victoria vs. Rigor

Article 948 of the New Civil Code provides

that a devise of a specific thing
includes its fruits and income accruing
after the testator's death. And Article
951 of the same Code provides that these
fruits and income shall be delivered with
the thing devised. Furthermore, fruits or
rents being, strictly speaking, accessions
(Arts. 441 and 442, New Civil Code), Article
1166 of the Code, which provides that the
"obligation give a determinate thing
includes that of delivering all its accessions
and accessories, even though they may not
have been mentioned," applies.

Legitimes (886)
Institution,
Preterition (Arts. 854);
Art. 51 FC.
Article 854. The PRETERITION or
omission of one, some, or all of the
compulsory heirs in the direct line,
whether living at the time of the
execution of the will or born after the
death of the testator, shall annul the
institution of heir; but the devises and
legacies shall be valid insofar as they are
not inofficious.
If the omitted compulsory heirs should die
before the testator, the institution shall
be effectual, without prejudice to the right
of representation.

Article 886. LEGITIME is that part of the

testator's property which he cannot
dispose of because the law has reserved
it for certain heirs who are, therefore,
called compulsory heirs.
(STUDY THE ENTIRE LEGITIME SECTION)

To be valid and effective, a waiver must

be couched in clear and unequivocal
terms which leave no doubt as to the
intention of a party to give up a right
or benefit which legally pertains to him. A
waiver may not be attributed to a person
when its terms do not explicitly and clearly
evince an intent to abandon a right. In this
case, we find that there was no waiver of
hereditary rights. The Release and Waiver
of Claim does not state with clarity the
purpose of its execution. It merely states
that Remedios received P300,000.00 and an
educational plan for her minor daughters
by way of financial assistance and in full
settlement of any and all claims of
whatsoever nature and kind x x x against
the estate of the late Rufino Guy Susim.
Parents and guardians may not
therefore repudiate the inheritance of
their wards without judicial approval.
This is because repudiation amounts to
an alienation of property which must pass
the courts scrutiny in order to protect the
interest of the ward. Not having been
judicially authorized, the Release and

Waiver of Claim in the instant case is void

and will not bar private respondents from
asserting their rights as heirs of the
deceased.

having been provided in the will the whole

property of the deceased has been left by
universal title to petitioner and his brothers
and sisters.

In the present case, private respondents

could not have possibly waived their
successional rights because they are yet to
prove their status as acknowledged
illegitimate children of the deceased.
Petitioner himself has consistently denied
that private respondents are his coheirs.

The effect of annulling the institution

of heirs will be, necessarily, the opening
of a total intestacy, except that proper
legacies and devises are valid and
must be respected insofar as they are
not inofficious.

Illegitimate children who were still

minors at the time the Family Code took
effect and whose putative parent died
during their minority are given the right to
seek recognition for a period of up to
four years from attaining majority age.
(Bernabe v. Alejo)
The court before which a petition for letters
of administration is not precluded from
receiving evidence on a persons filiation
its jurisdiction extends to matters incidental
and collateral to the exercise of its
recognized powers in handling the
settlement of the estate, including the
determination of the status of each heir.
- Guy vs. Court of Appeals

Preterition, Article 854 of the Civil Code,

not applicable to the surviving spouse.
Insofar as the widow is concerned, Article
854 of the Civil Code may not apply as she
does not ascend or descend from the
testator, although she is a compulsory
heir.
However, the same thing cannot be said of
the other respondent Virginia A. Fernandez,
whose legal adoption by the testator has
not been questioned by petitioner.
Adoption makes the adopted the legal
heir of the adopter.
Preterition annuls the institution of an
heir and creates intestate succession
but legacies and devises are valid and
respected insofar as they are not
inofficious.
The universal institution of petitioner
together with his brothers and sisters to
the entire inheritance of the testator
results in totally abrogating the will
because the nullification of such institution
of universal heirswithout any other
testamentary disposition in the will
amounts to a declaration that nothing at all
was written. Plus, no legacies nor devises

In order that a person may be allowed to

intervene in a probate proceeding he
must have an interest in the estate, or in
the will, or in the property to be affected
by it either as executor or as a claimant of
the estate and an interested party is one
who would be benefited by the estate
such as an heir or one who has a claim
against the estate like a creditor.
At the outset, he appears to have an
interest in the will as an heir, defined
under Article 782 of the Civil Code as a
person called to the succession either
by the provision of a will or by
operation of law. However, intestacy
having resulted from the preterition of
respondent adopted child and the universal
institution of heirs, petitioner
(brother/sister) is in effect not an heir of the
testator.
Rule that probate Courts authority is
limited only to the extrinsic validity of the
will, not inflexible and absolute; Court may
pass upon the intrinsic validity of the will
under exceptional circumstances. -- In
Nuguid v. Nuguid the oppositors to the
probate moved to dismiss on the ground of
absolute preterition. The probate court
acting on the motion held that the will in
question was a complete nullity and
dismissed the petition without costs. This
was upheld by the SC, induced by
practical considerations.
Trial Court could have denied outright
the probate of the will or have passed
upon its intrinsic validity where on its face
it appears to be intrinsically void.
- Acain vs. Intermediate Appellate Court

The testator gave a legacy to a person,

whom he characterized in the testamentary
provision as not related to him, but later
this person was judicially declared to
be his acknowledged natural child, the
case is not a case of preterition but a
case of completion of legitime. The

institution in the will would not be annulled.

There would be no intestacy.
As successional rights are vested as of the
moment of death, the forced heir is entitled
to the fruits and increments of his legitime
from the testators death.
No substitution on legitime.The legitime
must descend to the forced heir in fee
simple, since the testator cannot impose on
it any burden, encumbrance, condition or
substitution.
- Aznar vs. Duncan
In a proceeding for the probate of a will,
the courts area of inquiry is limited to an
examination of, and resolution on, the
extrinsic validity of the will, the due
execution thereof, the testatrixs
testamentary capacity and the compliance
with the requisites or solemnities
prescribed by law. The intrinsic validity of
the will normally comes only after the
court has declared that the will has
been duly authenticated. However,
where practical considerations demand that
the intrinsic validity of the will be passed
upon, even before it is probated, the Court
should meet that issue.
Where the deceased left no
descendants, legitimate or illegitimate,
but she left forced heirs in the direct
ascending lineher parents, and her
holographic will does not explicitly disinherit
them but simply omits their names
altogether, the case is one of
preterition of the parents, not a case of
ineffective disinheritance.
Preterition
consists in the
omission in the
testators will of the
forced heirs or
anyone of them,
either because they
are not mentioned
therein, or, though
mentioned, they
are neither
instituted as heirs
nor are expressly
disinherited.
is presumed to be
involuntary
Effect:
shall annul the
institution of heir

Disinheritance
is a testamentary
disposition
depriving any
compulsory heir of
his share in the
legitime for a cause
authorized by law.

always voluntary;
annul the
institution of heirs,
but only insofar as
it may prejudice the
person

disinherited
(nullity is limited to
that portion of the
estate of which the
disinherited heirs
have been illegally
deprived)

Freedom of Disposition/Art. 842;

Deed of Sale; Agency
Article 842. One who has no compulsory
heirs may dispose by will of all his
estate or any part of it in favor of any
person having capacity to succeed.
One who has compulsory heirs may
dispose of his estate provided he does
not contravene the provisions of this
Code with regard to the legitime of said
heirs.

Voluntary Succession And Legitime

(Arts. 859, 863, 904); Real Usufruct
in favor of Aliens; Forms of
Substitution; Conflict of Laws
SUBSTITUTION
(predecease,renounce,incap)
Article 859. The testator may designate
one or more persons to substitute the
heir or heirs instituted in case such heir or
heirs should die before him, or should
not wish, or should be incapacitated to
accept the inheritance.
A simple substitution, without a
statement of the cases to which it refers,
shall comprise the three mentioned in the
preceding paragraph, unless the testator
has otherwise provided.

Article 863. A FIDEICOMMISSARY

SUBSTITUTION by virtue of which the
fiduciary or first heir instituted is
entrusted with the obligation to
preserve and to transmit to a second
heir the whole or part of the inheritance,
shall be valid and shall take effect,
provided such substitution does not go
beyond one degree from the heir
originally instituted, and provided

further, that the fiduciary or first heir

and the second heir are living at the
time of the death of the testator.

Article 904. The testator cannot deprive

his compulsory heirs of their legitime,
except in cases expressly specified by
law.
Neither can he impose upon the same
any burden, encumbrance, condition, or
substitution of any kind whatsoever.

MODAL INSTITUTION (institucion sub

modo)
Article 882. The statement of the object
of the institution, or the application of the
property left by the testator, or the
charge imposed by him, shall not be
considered as a condition unless it
appears that such was his intention.
That which has been left in this manner
may be claimed at once provided that the
instituted heir or his heirs give security
for compliance with the wishes of the
testator and for the return of anything he
or they may receive, together with its
fruits and interests, if he or they should
disregard this obligation.
Successional rights are transmitted
from the moment of death of the
decedent and compulsory heirs are
called to succeed by operation of law.
The legitimate children and descendants, in
relation to their legitimate parents, and the
widow or widower, are compulsory heirs.
Under Article 776 of the New Civil Code,
INHERITANCE includes all the property,
rights and obligations of a person, not
extinguished by his death. Conformably,
whatever rights Dr. Jorge Rabadilla had by
virtue of subject Codicil were transmitted to
his forced heirs, at the time of his death.
And since obligations not extinguished by
death also form part of the estate of the
decedent; corollarily, the obligations
imposed by the Codicil on the deceased Dr.
Jorge Rabadilla, were likewise transmitted
to his compulsory heirs upon his death.
It is a general rule under the law on
succession that successional rights are
transmitted from the moment of death of
the decedent and compulsory heirs are
called to succeed by operation of law. The
legitimate children and descendants, in

relation to their legitimate parents, and the

widow or widower, are compulsory heirs.
Thus, the petitioner, his mother and sisters,
as compulsory heirs of the instituted heir,
Dr. Jorge Rabadilla, succeeded the latter by
operation of law, without need of further
proceedings, and the successional rights
were transmitted to them from the moment
of death of the decedent, Dr. Jorge
Rabadilla.
SUBSTITUTION is the designation by the
testator of a person or persons to take the
place of the heir or heirs first instituted.
Under substitutions in general, the testator
may either:
(1) provide for the designation of
another heir to whom the property shall
pass in case the original heir should die
before him/her, renounce the inheritance
or be incapacitated to inherit, as in a
simple substitution, or
(2) leave his/her property to one
person with the express charge that it be
transmitted subsequently to another or
others, as in a fideicommissary
substitution.
In SIMPLE SUBSTITUTIONS, the second
heir takes the inheritance in default of the
first heir by reason of incapacity,
predecease or renunciation.
In a FIDEICOMMISSARY SUBSTITUTION,
the first heir is strictly mandated to
preserve the property and to transmit
the same later to the second heir; Without
the obligation to preserve clearly imposed
by the testator in his will, there is no
fideicommissary substitution. Also,
substitution must not go beyond one
degree from the heir originally instituted.

In the case under consideration, the

instituted heir is in fact allowed under the
Codicil to alienate the property provided
the negotiation is with the near
descendants or the sister of the testatrix.
Thus, a very important element of a
fideicommissary substitution is lacking (to
preserve the property and to transmit to
second heir). Moreover, In the case under
scrutiny, the near descendants are not at
all related to the instituted heir, Dr. Jorge
Rabadilla (required that first heir is
related by first degree to the second
heir).
Distinction between MODAL INSTITUTION
and CONDITIONAL TESTAMENTARY
DISPOSITION.
MODAL
CONDITIONAL
INSTITUTION
TESTAMENTARY

the testator states

(1) the, object of
the institution, the
purpose or
application of the
property left by the
testator, or the
charge imposed by
the testator upon
the heir
A mode imposes
an obligation upon
the heir or legatee
but it does not
affect the efficacy
of his rights to the
succession
the mode
OBLIGATES but
does not suspend.

the condition must

happen or be
fulfilled in order for
the heir to be
entitled to succeed
the testator.

presented in the probate court. The

Supreme Court however emphasized that
Texas law at the time of
Linnies death is the law applicable
(and not said law at any other time).
NOTE: Dynamics of law.
- PCIB v Escolin

Legitime and
Simulated Contracts;
Spousal/Marital Estrangement
The condition
SUSPENDS but does
not obligate

Since testamentary dispositions are

generally acts of liberality, an obligation
imposed upon the heir should not be
considered a condition unless it clearly
appears from the Will itself that such
was the intention of the testator. In case of
doubt, the institution should be
considered as modal and not conditional.
- Rabadilla vs. Court of Appeals

The testator cannot impose any lien,

substitution, or condition on his
widows legitime.
Art. 900 of the Civil Code If the only
survivor is the widow or widower, she or he
shall be entitled to one-half of the
hereditary estate. And since Marcelle alone
survived the deceased, she is entitled to
one-half of his estate over which he could
impose no burden, encumbrance, condition
or substitution of any kind whatsoever. (Art.
904, par. 2, Civil Code.)
Constitutional provision which allows
aliens to acquire lands by succession
does not apply to testamentary
succession.
-Ramirez vs. Vda. de Ramirez

The Supreme Court remanded the case

back to the lower court. Both parties
failed to adduce proof as to the law of
Texas. The Supreme Court held that for
what the Texas law is on the matter, is
a question of fact to be resolved by
the evidence that would be

As a general rule, any modification in the

marriage settlements must be made
before the celebration of marriage. An
exception to this rule is allowed provided
that the modification is judicially approved
and refers only to the instances provided in
Articles 66, 67, 128, 135 and 136 of the
Family Code:
- separation of property due to legal
separation (66)
- agreement of revival of property
regime referred to in 66
- spouse without just cause abandons
the other or fails to comply with his
or her obligation to the family (128)
- judicial separation of property
- voluntary dissolution of the
absolute community or the
conjugal partnership (136)
Having established that Leticia and David
had actually separated for at least one
year, the petition for judicial separation of
absolute community of property should be
granted. The grant of the judicial
separation of the absolute community
property automatically dissolves the
absolute community regime, as stated in
the 4th paragraph of Article 99 of the
Family Code, thus:
Art. 99. The absolute community
terminates:
(1) Upon the death of either spouse;
(2) When there is a decree of legal
separation;
(3) When the marriage is annulled or
declared void; or (4) In case of judicial
separation of property during the marriage
under Articles 134 to 138.
Liquidation of Absolute Community Regime.

Under Article 102 of the same Code,

liquidation follows the dissolution of
the absolute community regime xxx
Conflict of Laws; Lex Situs; Article 16 of
the Civil Code clearly states that real
property as well as personal property is
subject to the law of the country where
it is situated. Philippine courts did not
acquire jurisdiction over the California
properties of David and Leticia. Thus,
liquidation shall only be limited to the
Philippine properties.
- Noveras vs. Noveras

Although estranged from Olar, respondent

Fortunata remained his wife and legal heir,
mere estrangement not being a legal
ground for the disqualification of a
surviving spouse as an heir of the
deceased spouse.
- Capitle vs. Elbambuena

SIMULATED CONTRACTS
Where there was no cause or consideration
for the sale, the same was a simulation and
hence, null and void.
A compulsory heir of the decedent
cannot be deprived of his or her share in
the estate EXCEPT by disinheritance as
prescribed by law.
By law, she is entitled to half of the estate
of her father as his only legitimate child.
The legal heirs of the late Gregorio
Francisco must be determined in proper
testate or intestate proceedings for
settlement of the estate.
- Francisco vs. Francisco-Alfonso

Reserva Troncal Art. 891

Article 891. The ascendant who inherits
from his descendant any property
which the latter may have acquired by
gratuitous title from another
ascendant, or a brother or sister, is
obliged to reserve such property as he
may have acquired by operation of law for
the benefit of relatives who are
within the third degree and who
belong to the line from which said
property came.

There are three (3) lines of transmission in

RESERVA TRONCAL.
The first transmission is by gratuitous
title, whether by inheritance or donation,
from an ascendant/brother/sister to a
descendant called the prepositus.
The second transmission is by operation
of law from the prepositus to the other
ascendant or reservor, also called the
reservista.
The third and last transmission is from the
reservista to the reservees or reservatarios
who must be relatives within the third
degree from which the property came.
The persons involved in reserva troncal are:
(1) The ascendant or brother or sister
from whom the property was received by
the descendant by lucrative or gratuitous
title;
(2) The descendant or prepositus
(propositus) who received the property;
(3) The reservor (reservista), the other
ascendant who obtained the property from
the prepositus by operation of law; and
(4) The reservee (reservatario) who is
within the third degree from the
prepositus and who belongs to the (linea o
tronco) from which the property came and
for whom the property should be reserved
by the reservor.
The person from whom the degree should
be reckoned is the descendant/prepositus
the one at the end of the line from which
the property came and upon whom the
property last revolved by descent.
Relatives of the fourth and the
succeeding degrees can never be
considered as reservatarios, since the
law does not recognize them as such.
They cannot even claim representation of
their predecessors Antonio and Valentin as
Article 891 grants a personal right of
reservation only to the relatives up to the
third degree from whom the reservable
properties came. The only recognized
exemption is in the case of nephews and
nieces of the prepositus, who have the
right to represent their ascendants
(fathers and mothers) who are the
brothers/sisters of the prepositus and
relatives within the third degree.
When there are relatives of the descendant
within the third degree, the right of the
nearest relative, called reservatario, over
the property which the reservista (person
holding it subject to reservation) should

return to him, excludes that of the one more

remote.
What the RTC should have done, assuming
for arguments sake that reserva troncal is
applicable, is have the reservable nature
of the property registered on
respondents titles (not to order
reconveyance). In fact, respondent, as
reservista, has the duty to reserve and
to annotate the reservable character
of the property on the title. In reserva
troncal, the reservista who inherits from a
prepositus, whether by the latters wish or
by operation of law, acquires the
inheritance by virtue of a title perfectly
transferring absolute ownership. All the
attributes of ownership belong to him
exclusively. The reservor has the legal
title and dominion to the reservable
property but subject to the resolutory
condition that such title is
extinguished if the reservor
predeceased the reservee. The reservor
is a usufructuary of the reservable property.
He may alienate it subject to the
reservation. The transferee gets the
revocable and conditional ownership of the
reservor. The transferees rights are
revoked upon the survival of the reservees
at the time of the death of the reservor but
become indefeasible when the reservees
predecease the reservor. (Citations omitted)
It is when the reservation takes place or is
extinguished, that a reservatario becomes,
by operation of law, the owner of the
reservable property.
- Mendoza vs. Delos Santos

Collation is the act by virtue of which

descendants or other forced heirs who
intervene in the division of the
inheritance of an ascendant bring into
the common mass, the property which
they received from him, so that the
division may be made according to law
and the will of the testator.
The purpose is to attain equality
among the compulsory heirs in so far
as possible for it is presumed that the
intention of the testator or
predecessor in interest in making a
donation or gratuitous transfer to a
forced heir is to give him something in
advance on account of his share in the
estate, and that the predecessors will
is to treat all his heirs equally, in the
absence of any expression to the
contrary.

What is brought to collation is not the

property donated itself, but rather the
value of such property at the time it
was donated, xxx, hence any increase in
value or any deterioration or loss
thereof is for the account of the heir or
donee.
The probate court went beyond the
scope of its jurisdiction when it proceeded
to determine the validity of the sale of
the Valenzuela property between Rafael and
Estrellita and ruled that the transfer of the
subject property between the concerned
parties was gratuitous. The interpretation of
the deed and the true intent of the
contracting parties, as well as the presence
or absence of consideration, are matters
outside the probate courts
jurisdiction. These issues should be
ventilated in an appropriate action.
- Vizconde vs. Court of Appeals

REQUISITES TO VEST TITLE FROM THE

RESERVISTA TO THE RESERVEE:
(1) the death of the reservista; and
(2) the fact that the reservatario has
survived the reservista.
The reservetario is not the reservista's
successor mortis causa nor is the
reservable property part of the
reservista's estate; the reservatario
receives the property as a conditional heir
of the descendant (prepositus), the property
merely reverting to the line of origin from
which it had temporarily and accidentally
strayed during the reservista's lifetime.
Upon the death of the reservista,
reservatario nearest to the prepositus
becomes, automatically and by operation of
law, the owner of the reservable property.
The reservable property cannot be
transmitted by a reservista to her or
his own successors mortis causa so long
as a reservatario is existing, within the
third degree from the prepositus and
belonging to the line whence the property
came, when the reservista dies.
- Cano vs. Director of Lands
IN RESERVA TRONCAL:
(1) a descendant (PREPOSITUS) inherited
or acquired by gratuitous title property
from an ascendant or from a brother or
sister;

(2) the same property is inherited by

another ascendant (RESERVISTA) or is
acquired by him by operation of law
from the said descendant, and
(3) the said ascendant should reserve
the said property for the benefit of
relatives (RESERVATARIO) who are within
the third degree from the deceased
descendant (prepositus) and who belong to
the line from which the said property came.
The persons involved in reserva troncal
are
(1) the ascendant or brother or sister from
whom the property was received by the
descendant by lucrative or gratuitous title,
(2) the descendant or prepositus
(prepositus) who received the property,
(3) the reservor (reservista), the other
ascendant who obtained the property from
the prepositus by operation of law and
(4) the reservee (reservatario) who is
within the third degree from the prepositus
and who belongs to the line (linea o tronco)
from which the property came and for
whom the property should be reserved by
the reservor.
The Reservista has the legal title and
dominion to the reservable property but
subject to the resolutory condition that
such title is extinguished if the reservista
predeceased the reservatario.
The reservista is a usufructuary of the
reservable property. He may alienate it
subject to the reservation. The
transferee gets the revocable and
conditional ownership of the reservista. The
transferees rights are revoked upon
the survival of the reservatario at the
time of the death of the reservor but
become indefeasible when the
reservatario predecease the
reservista.
(pag namatay si Reservista, at may
Reservatario pang buhay, sa latter
mapupunta yung property)
(pag nauna lahat ng Reservatario bago si
Reservista, kay latter na yung property)

DUTY OF ASCENDANT WHO INHERITS

THROUGH A DECENDANT: TO RESERVE
THE PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH
LAW; ARTICLE 811, CIVIL CODE
RIGHT OF ASCENDANT TO DISPOSE OF
OR REGISTER THE PROPERTY IN His OWN
NAME, provided that, in accordance with
the law, the reservable character of such
property in favor of reservatarios be
entered in the record.
- Edroso vs. Sablan

When reservatario becomes exclusive

owner.-Upon the death of the
reservista, there being a surviving
reservatario, the reservable property
passes in exclusive ownership to the
latter.
- Sienes vs. Esparcia

Legitime;
Proximity & Representation;
Art. 962;
Adoption; Filiation
Article 962. In every inheritance, the
relative nearest in degree excludes
the more distant ones, saving the
right of representation when it
properly takes place.
Relatives in the same degree shall
inherit in equal shares, subject to the
provisions of article 1006 with respect to
relatives of the full and half blood, and of
article 987, paragraph 2, concerning
division between the paternal and
maternal lines.

On the other hand, the reservatario has

only an inchoate, expectant or
contingent right. His expectant right
would disappear if he predeceased the
reservor. It would become absolute
should the reservista predecease the
reservatario.

Article 1006. Should brother and sisters

of the full blood survive together with
brothers and sisters of the half blood,
the former shall be entitled to a share
double that of the latter.

All reservatario are equally entitled to

share in reserva troncal.
- Gonzales vs. Court of First Instance of
Manila

Article 987. (par.2) Should there be more

than one of equal degree belonging to the
same line they shall divide the

inheritance per capita; should they be

of different lines but of equal degree, onehalf shall go to the paternal and the other
half to the maternal ascendants. In each
line the division shall be made per
capita.

Legitimate children from the first and

second marriages are entitled to
inherit (in equal shares) pursuant to
Articles 979 and 980 of the Civil Code.
ART. 979. Legitimate children and their
descendants succeed the parents and other
ascendants, without distinction as to sex or
age, and even if they should come from
different marriages. xxx
ART. 980. The children of the deceased
shall always inherit from him in their own
right, dividing the inheritance in equal
shares.
No extrajudicial settlement shall be binding
upon any person who has not participated
therein or had no notice thereof. xxx
Considering that Eutropia and Victoria were
admittedly excluded and that then minors
Rosa and Douglas were not properly
represented therein, the settlement was not
valid and binding upon them and
consequently, a total nullity.
A father or mother, as the natural guardian
of the minor under parental authority, does
not have the power to dispose or encumber
the property of the latter. Such power is
granted by law only to a judicial guardian of
the wards property and even then only with
courts prior approval secured in
accordance with the proceedings set forth
by the Rules of Court. xxx Any act of
disposition or alienation, or any reduction in
the substance of the patrimony of child,
exceeds the limits of administration.
- Neri vs. Heirs of Hadji Yusop Uy

The RULE ON PROXIMITY is a concept

that favors the relatives nearest in
degree to the decedent and excludes the
more distant ones except when and to the
extent that the right of representation
can apply.
By RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION, a more
distant blood relative of a decedent is, by
operation of law, raised to the same place
and degree of relationship as that of a
closer blood relative of the same decedent.

The representative thereby steps into the

shoes of the person he represents and
succeeds, not from the latter, but from
the person to whose estate the person
represented would have succeeded.
In the direct line, right of representation
is proper only in the descending, never
in the ascending, line.
In the collateral line, the right of
representation may only take place in
favor of the children of brothers or
sisters (nephews and nieces) of the
decedent when such children survive
with their uncles or aunts.
[nephews and nieces of the decedent
concur with their uncles or aunts]
- Bagunu vs. Piedad

Challenge to the validity of the adoption

cannot be made collaterally, as in their
action for partition, but in a direct
proceeding frontally addressing the issue.
While it is true that the adopted child shall
be deemed to be a legitimate child and
have the same rights as the latter, these
rights do not include the right of
representation. xxx The relationship
created by the adoption is between
only the adopting parents and the
adopted child and does not extend to the
blood relatives of either party.
- Sayson vs. Court of Appeals

Right of representation; An alleged

grandchild born outside wedlock cannot, by
right of representation, claim a share of an
estate left by an alleged deceased great
grandparent.
At most, petitioner would be an
illegitimate child who has no right to
inherit an intestato from the legitimate
children and relatives of his father, like
the deceased Francisca Reyes. (Article 992,
Civil Code of the Philippines.)
- Leonardo vs. Court of Appeals

Article 992. Iron Curtain;

Arts. 902, 982, 989 & 990
IRON CURTAIN RULE
Article 992. An illegitimate child has no
right to inherit ab intestato from the

legitimate children and relatives of his

father or mother; nor shall such children
or relatives inherit in the same manner
from the illegitimate child.
Article 902. The rights of illegitimate
children set forth in the preceding articles
are transmitted upon their death to their
descendants, whether legitimate or
illegitimate.
Article 982. The grandchildren and other
descendants shall inherit by right of
representation, and if any one of them
should have died, leaving several heirs,
the portion pertaining to him shall be
divided among the latter in equal
portions.
Article 989. If, together with illegitimate
children, there should survive
descendants of another illegitimate child
who is dead, the former shall succeed in
their own right and the latter by right of
representation.
Article 990. The hereditary rights granted
by the two preceding articles to
illegitimate children shall be transmitted
upon their death to their descendants,
who shall inherit by right of
representation from their deceased
grandparent.

Article 992 of the Civil Code or the curtain

bar rule is inapplicable in resolving the
issue of who is better qualified to
administer the estate of the decedent.
The order of preference set out in Section 6,
Rule 78 of the Rules of Court in the
appointment of an administrator of an
estate is not absolute for it depends on the
attendant facts and circumstances of each
casejurisprudence has long held that the
selection of an administrator lies in the
sound discretion of the trial court.
SEC. 6. RULE 78. When and to whom
letters of administration granted.If no
executor is named in the will, or the
executor or executors are incompetent,
refuse the trust, or fail to give bond, or a
person dies intestate, administration shall
be granted:
(a) To the surviving husband or wife, as
the case may be, or next of kin, or both, in
the discretion of the court, or to such
person as such surviving husband or wife,
or next of kin, requests to have appointed,
if competent and willing to serve;

(b) If such surviving husband or wife, as the

case may be, or next of kin, or the person
selected by them, be incompetent or
unwilling, or if the husband or widow, or
next of kin, neglects for thirty (30) days
after the death of the person to apply for
administration or to request that
administration be granted to some other
person, it may be granted to one or more of
the principal creditors, if competent and
willing to serve;
(c) If there is no such creditor competent
and willing to serve, it may be granted to
such other person as the court may
select.
Our Code allows the hereditary portion of
the illegitimate child to pass to his own
descendants, whether legitimate or
illegitimate.
While Art. 992 prevents the
illegitimate issue of a legitimate child
from representing him in the intestate
succession of the grandparent, the
illegitimates of an illegitimate child
can now do so.
- Suntay III vs. Cojuangco-Suntay

Right of representation is not available

to illegitimate descendants of
legitimate children in the inheritance
of a legitimate grandparent.
Article 982 is the general rule and Article
992 the exception.

GENERAL RULE:
Article 982. The grandchildren and
other descendants shall inherit by right
of representation XXX
EXCEPTION: IRON CURTAIN
Article 992. An illegitimate child has no
right to inherit ab intestato from the
legitimate children and relatives of his
father or mother; nor shall such
children or relatives inherit in the same
manner from the illegitimate child.
The term relatives as used in Art. 992
embraces not only collateral relatives but
all the kindred of the person spoken
of.
- Diaz vs. Intermediate Appellate Court

Since Teodoro R. Yangco was an

acknowledged natural child or was
illegitimate and since Juanita Corpus was
the legitimate child of Jose Corpus, himself
a legitimate child XXX Juanita Corpus was
not a legal heir of Yangco because
there is no reciprocal succession
between legitimate and illegitimate
relatives.
- Corpus vs. Corpus

Arts. 995, 1001; 996; 1003; 962, 963966, 1006, 987

Article 995. In the absence of legitimate
descendants and ascendants, and
illegitimate children and their
descendants, whether legitimate or
illegitimate, the surviving spouse shall
inherit the entire estate, without prejudice
to the rights of brothers and sisters,
nephews and nieces, should there be any,
under article 1001.
Article 1001. Should brothers and sisters
or their children survive with the widow or
widower, the latter shall be entitled to
one-half of the inheritance and the
brothers and sisters or their children to
the other half.

Article 996. If a widow or widower and

legitimate children or descendants are
left, the surviving spouse has in the
succession the same share as that of
each of the children.
Article 1003. If there are no descendants,
ascendants, illegitimate children, or a
surviving spouse, the collateral relatives
shall succeed to the entire estate of the
deceased in accordance with the
following articles.
Article 962. In every inheritance, the
relative nearest in degree excludes the
more distant ones, saving the right of
representation when it properly takes
place.
Relatives in the same degree shall inherit
in equal shares, subject to the provisions

of article 1006 with respect to relatives of

the full and half blood, and of article 987,
paragraph 2, concerning division between
the paternal and maternal lines.

SUBSECTION 1. Relationship
Article 963. Proximity of relationship is
determined by the number of
generations. Each generation forms a
degree.
Article 964. A series of degrees forms a
line, which may be either direct or
collateral.
A direct line is that constituted by the
series of degrees among ascendants and
descendants.
A collateral line is that constituted by the
series of degrees among persons who are
not ascendants and descendants, but who
come from a common ancestor.
Article 965. The direct line is either
descending or ascending.
The former unites the head of the family
with those who descend from him.
The latter binds a person with those from
whom he descends.
Article 966. In the line, as many degrees
are counted as there are generations or
persons, excluding the progenitor.
In the direct line, ascent is made to the
common ancestor. Thus, the child is one
degree removed from the parent, two
from the grandfather, and three from the
great-grandparent.
In the collateral line, ascent is made to
the common ancestor and then descent is
made to the person with whom the
computation is to be made. Thus, a
person is two degrees removed from his
brother, three from his uncle, who is the
brother of his father, four from his first
cousin, and so forth.
Article 1006. Should brother and sisters of
the full blood survive together with
brothers and sisters of the half blood, the
former shall be entitled to a share double
that of the latter.

Article 987. In default of the father and

mother, the ascendants nearest in degree
shall inherit.
Should there be more than one of equal
degree belonging to the same line they
shall divide the inheritance per capita;
should they be of different lines but of
equal degree, one-half shall go to the
paternal and the other half to the
maternal ascendants. In each line the
division shall be made per capita.

Application:
Seven (7) heirs inherited equally on subject
property. Petitioner Rito and Alberto,
petitioner Nelsons father, inherited in their
own rights and with equal shares as the
others. But before partition of subject land
was effected, Alberto died. By operation of
law, his rights and obligations to oneseventh of subject land were transferred to
his legal heirshis wife and his son
petitioner Nelson.
Cabales vs. Court of Appeals

The presence of illegitimate children of the

deceased precludes succession by collateral
relatives to his estate. The applicable
provisions are: Art. 988. In the absence of
legitimate descendants or ascendants, the
illegitimate children shall succeed to the
entire estate of the deceased. Art. 1003. If
there are no . . . illegitimate children, or a
surviving spouse, the collateral relatives
shall succeed to the entire estate of the
deceased in accordance with the following
articles. - Gonzales vs. Court of Appeals

A nephew is considered a collateral relative

who may inherit if no descendant,
ascendant, or spouse survive the decedent.
That private respondent is only a half-blood
relative is immaterial. The determination of
whether the relationship is of the full or half
blood is important only to determine the
extent of the share of the survivors. - Heirs
of Pascasio Uriarte vs. Court of Appeals

The Wife, even if a mere relative by affinity,

has a right to the property in her capacity
as a legal heir of her husband, part of
whose estate is a share in his mothers
inheritance.
David Rosales, incontrovertibly, survived his
mothers death. When Macaria died on 08
March 1956 her estate passed on to her
surviving children, among them David
Rosales, who thereupon became co-owners
of the property. When David Rosales himself
later died, his own estate which included his
undivided interest over the property
inherited from Macaria, passed on to his
widow Socorro and her co-heirs pursuant to
the law on succession.
Arts. 995 and 1001 of the Civil Code.ART.
995. In the absence of legitimate
descendants and ascendants, and
illegitimate children and their descendants,
whether legitimate or illegitimate, the
surviving spouse shall inherit the entire
estate, without prejudice to the rights of
brothers and sisters, nephews and nieces,
should there be any, under article 1001. x
x x x x x x x x ART. 1001. Should brothers
and sisters or their children survive with the
widow or widower, the latter shall be
entitled to one-half of the inheritance and
the brothers and sisters or their children to
the other half. Socorro and herein private
respondents, along with the co-heirs of
David Rosales, thereupon became coowners of the property that originally
descended from Macaria.
- Verdad vs. Court of Appeals

Escheat
Escheat is a proceeding, unlike that of
succession or assignment, whereby the
state, by virtue of its sovereignty, steps in
and claims the real or personal property of
a person who dies intestate leaving no heir.
In the absence of a lawful owner, a property
is claimed by the state to forestall an open
invitation to self-service by the first
comers.
A claimant to an escheated property
must file his claim within five (5) years
from the date of such judgment.
A judgment in escheat proceedings when
rendered by a court of competent
jurisdiction is conclusive against all persons
with actual or constructive notice, but not

against those who are not parties or privies

thereto.

the testator Segundo in favor of those who

would succeed in the absence of Alfredo.

A claimant to an escheated property must

file his claim within five (5) years from the
date of such judgment, such person shall
have possession of and title to the same, or
if sold, the municipality or city shall be
accountable to him for the proceeds, after
deducting the estate.

Unless the will is probated, the

disinheritance cannot be given effect.

A judgment in escheat proceedings when

rendered by a court of competent
jurisdiction is conclusive against all persons
with actual or constructive notice, but not
against those who are not parties or privies
thereto.
- Republic vs. Court of Appeals, 375 SCRA
484

Art. 916; Art. 810

Article 916. Disinheritance can be
effected only through a will wherein the
legal cause therefor shall be specified.
Article 810. A person may execute a
holographic will which must be entirely
written, dated, and signed by the hand of
the testator himself. It is subject to no
other form, and may be made in or out of
the Philippines, and need not be
witnessed.

For disinheritance to be valid, Article

916 of the Civil Code requires that the
same must be effected through a will
wherein the legal cause therefor shall
be specified. Maltreatment of a parent
by a child presents a sufficient cause for
the disinheritance of the latter.
Segundos document, although it may
initially come across as a mere
disinheritance instrument, conforms to
the formalities of a holographic will
prescribed by law. It is written, dated and
signed by the hand of Segundo himself. An
intent to dispose mortis causa can be
clearly deduced from the terms of the
instrument, and while it does not make an
affirmative disposition of the latters
property, the disinheritance of Alfredo,
nonetheless, is an act of disposition in
itself. In other words, the disinheritance
results in the disposition of the property of

Considering that the questioned document

is Segundos holographic will, and that the
law favors testacy over intestacy, the
probate of the will cannot be dispensed
with. Article 838 of the Civil Code provides
that no will shall pass either real or personal
property unless it is proved and allowed in
accordance with the Rules of Court. Thus,
unless the will is probated, the right of a
person to dispose of his property may be
rendered nugatory.
- Seangio vs. Reyes, 508 SCRA 177

Article 1003, 1004;

Collation; Donation
Article 1003. If there are no descendants,
ascendants, illegitimate children, or a
surviving spouse, the collateral relatives
shall succeed to the entire estate of the
deceased in accordance with the
following articles.
Article 1004. Should the only survivors be
brothers and sisters of the full blood, they
shall inherit in equal shares.

COLLATION:
2 Concepts:
FIRST. It is a mere mathematical operation
by the addition of the value of
donations made by the testator to the
value of the hereditary estate;
SECOND. It is the return to the
hereditary estate of property disposed of
by lucrative title by the testator during his
lifetime.
PURPOSE of collation:
- to SAFEGUARD LEGITIMES OF
COMPULSORY HEIRS, and
- to determine the free portion, after
finding the legitime, so that
inofficious donations may be
reduced.
(no compulsory heirs, no collation)

The records do not show that the decedent

left any primary, secondary, or concurring
compulsory heirs. He was only survived by
his siblings, who are his collateral relatives
and, therefore, are not entitled to any
legitime.
Legitime is that part of the testators
property which he cannot dispose of
because the law has reserved it for
compulsory heirs.
The COMPULSORY HEIRS may be
classified into (1) primary, (2) secondary,
and (3) concurring.
The PRIMARY compulsory heirs are those
who have precedence over and exclude
other compulsory heirs; legitimate children
and descendants are primary compulsory
heirs.
The SECONDARY compulsory heirs are
those who succeed only in the absence of
the primary heirs; the legitimate parents
and ascendants are secondary compulsory
heirs.
The CONCURRING compulsory heirs are
those who succeed together with the
primary or the secondary compulsory heirs;
the illegitimate children, and the surviving
spouse are concurring compulsory heirs.
The decedent not having left any
compulsory heir who is entitled to any
legitime, he was at liberty to donate
all his properties, even if nothing was
left for his siblings-collateral relatives
to inherit. His donation to petitioner,
assuming that it was valid, is deemed as
donation made to a stranger, chargeable
against the free portion of the estate. There
being no compulsory heir, however, the
donated property is not subject to collation.
- Arellano vs. Pascual

Collation is only required of

compulsory heirs succeeding with
other compulsory heirs and involves
property or rights received by
donation or gratuitous title during the
lifetime of the decedent. xxx Collation
does not impose any lien on the
property or the subject matter of
collationable donation. What is
brought to collation is not the property
donated itself, but rather the value of
such property at the time it was
donated, the rationale being that the
donation is a real alienation which
conveys ownership upon its

acceptance, hence any increase in

value or any deterioration or loss
thereof is for the account of the heir or
donee.
Petitioner, a son-in-law of Rafael, is
not one of Rafaels compulsory heirs.
He has not even shown to be a
creditor. He may not be permitted or
allowed to intervene as he has no
personality or interest in the said
proceeding, which petitioner correctly
argued in his manifestation.

Partition; art. 1080; Arts. 867, 870,

1013; See Co-ownership cases
Article 1080. Should a person make
partition of his estate by an act inter
vivos, or by will, such partition shall be
respected, insofar as it does not prejudice
the legitime of the compulsory heirs.
A parent who, in the interest of his or her
family, desires to keep any agricultural,
industrial, or manufacturing enterprise
intact, may avail himself of the right
granted him in this article, by ordering
that the legitime of the other children to
whom the property is not assigned, be
paid in cash.

Article 867. The following shall not take

effect:
(1) Fideicommissary substitutions which
are not made in an express manner,
either by giving them this name, or
imposing upon the fiduciary the absolute
obligation to deliver the property to a
second heir;
(2) Provisions which contain a perpetual
prohibition to alienate, and even a
temporary one, beyond the limit fixed in
article 863;
(3) Those which impose upon the heir the
charge of paying to various persons
successively, beyond the limit prescribed
in article 863, a certain income or
pension;
(4) Those which leave to a person the
whole or part of the hereditary property in
order that he may apply or invest the
same according to secret instructions
communicated to him by the testator.

Article 870. The dispositions of the

testator declaring all or part of the estate
inalienable for more than twenty years
are void.
Article 1013. After the payment of debts
and charges, the personal property shall
be assigned to the municipality or city
where the deceased last resided in the
Philippines, and the real estate to the
municipalities or cities, respectively, in
which the same is situated.
If the deceased never resided in the
Philippines, the whole estate shall be
assigned to the respective municipalities
or cities where the same is located.
Such estate shall be for the benefit of
public schools, and public charitable
institutions and centers, in such
municipalities or cities. The court shall
distribute the estate as the respective
needs of each beneficiary may warrant.
The court, at the instance of an interested
party, or on its own motion, may order
the establishment of a permanent trust,
so that only the income from the property
shall be used.

Settlement of Estate (Rules of Court)

All the coheirs and persons having an

interest in the property are
indispensable parties; as such, an
action for partition will not lie without
the joinder of the said parties.
Santiagos contention that he had
already bought the interests of the
majority of the heirs and, thus, they
should no longer be regarded as
indispensable parties deserves no
merit. The court must initially settle the
issue of ownership, which is the first stage
in an action for partition, otherwise,
partition is premature.
The non-joinder of indispensable parties is
not a ground for the dismissal of an action;
The remedy is to implead the nonparty
claimed to be indispensable.
- Divinagracia vs. Parilla

Partition; Rule 90 of the Rules of Court

provides for the Distribution and Partition of
the Estate.
SECTION 1. When order for distribution of
residue made.x x x No distribution shall
be allowed until payment of the
obligations above mentioned has been
made or provided for, unless the
distributees, or any of them, give a bond,
in a sum to be fixed by the court,
conditioned for the payment of said
obligations within such time as the court
directs. x x x x
SEC. 3. By whom expenses of partition
paid. If at the time of the distribution the
executor or administrator has retained
sufficient effects in his hands which may
lawfully be applied for the expenses of
partition of the properties distributed, such
expenses of partition may be paid by such
executor or administrator when it
appears equitable to the court and not
inconsistent with the intention of the
testator; otherwise, they shall be paid by
the parties in proportion to their
respective shares or interest in the
premises, and the apportionment shall be
settled and allowed by the court, and, if any
person interested in the partition does not
pay his proportion or share, the court may
issue an execution in the name of the
executor or administrator against the party
not paying for the sum assessed.
The inheritance tax is an obligation of the
estate, indirectly the heirs.
- Marcelo Investment and Management
Corporation vs. Marcelo, Jr.

PARTITION is the separation, division and

assignment of a thing held in common
among those to whom it may belong. Every
act which is intended to put an end to
indivision among coheirs and legatees or
devisees is deemed to be a partition.
Partition may be inferred from
circumstances sufficiently strong to support
the presumption. Thus, after a long
possession in severalty, a deed of partition
may be presumed.
- Marcos vs. Heirs of Isidro Bangi

RE: EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT OF

ESTATE
The title of the property owned by a
person who dies intestate passes at
once to his heirs; Such transmission is
subject to the claims of administration
and the property may be taken from the
heirs for the purpose of paying debts
and expenses, but this does not prevent
an immediate passage of the title, upon the
death of the intestate, from himself to his
heirs. The deed of Extrajudicial
Settlement executed evidences their
intention to partition the inherited
property. It delineated what portion of the
inherited property would belong to whom.
The sale to respondents was made after the
execution of the deed of extrajudicial
settlement of the estate; The extrajudicial
settlement of estate, even though not
published, being deemed a partition of the
inherited property, Jose could validly
transfer ownership over the specific portion
of the property that was assigned to him. Alfonso vs. Andres

The perpetual prohibition for partition

was valid only for twenty (20) years.
The Court refrained from forthwith declaring
the decedents testamentary disposition as
void and the properties enumerated in
Clause 10 of the will as subject to intestate
succession. It was held that, in the interim,
since the twenty-year period was then still
upon us, the wishes of the testatrix ought to
be respected. Thus, at present, there
appears to be no more argument that the
trust created over the properties of the
decedent should be dissolved as the
twenty-year period has, quite palpably,
lapsed.
In this case, however, we reach a different
conclusion as the testatrix specifically
prohibited the alienation or mortgage of her
properties which were definitely more than
the two (2) properties in the aforecited
case. The herein testatrixs large
landholdings cannot be subjected
indefinitely to a trust because the
ownership thereof would then effectively
remain with her even in the afterlife. (kung
forever issubject sa trust yung property,
ang effect niya, ang ownership will be
forever retained by the dead 6 feet below
the ground)
- Orendain vs. Trusteeship of the Estate of
Rodriguez

The 1978 private deed of sale, insofar as it

disposed of Bernabes share in the
conjugal partnership prior to his death,
is void for being a conveyance of the
Deliarte siblings future inheritance.
GENERAL RULE: Article 1347, paragraph
2 of the Civil Code characterizes a contract
entered into upon future inheritance as
void. The law applies when the following
requisites concur:
(1) the succession has not yet been opened;
(2) the object of the contract forms part of
the inheritance; and
(3) the promissor has, with respect to the
object, an expectancy of a right which is
purely hereditary in nature.

EXCEPTION: The prohibition on contracts

respecting future inheritance admits of
exceptions as when a person partitions
his estate by an act inter vivos under
Article 1080 of the Civil Code.
Article 1080. Should a person make
partition of his estate by an act inter
vivos, or by will, such partition shall be
respected, insofar as it does not
prejudice the legitime of the
compulsory heirs.
However, the private deed of sale does not
purport to be a partition of Bernabes estate
as would exempt it from the application of
Article 1347. Nowhere in the said document
does Bernabe separate, divide, and
assign to his children his share in the
subject lot effective only upon his
death. Indeed, the document does not
even bear the signature of Bernabe.
Absent a showing of an overt act by
Bernabe indicative of an unequivocal intent
to partition his estate among his children,
his knowledge and ostensible acquiescence
to the private deed of sale does not equate
to an oral partition by an act inter vivos.
Besides, partition of property representing
future inheritance cannot be made effective
during the lifetime of its owner. - Arrogante
vs. Deliarte

A party is not indispensable to the suit if

his interest in the controversy or subject
matter is distinct and divisible from the
interest of the other parties and will not

necessarily be prejudiced by a
judgment which does complete justice to
the parties in court. Private respondent is
not claiming the entire area of Lot 1121 but
only a portion thereof which was
adjudicated to her based on the August 17,
1981 extrajudicial settlement and which
was denominated in the survey plan as Lot
C of Lot 1121; thus there was no need to
implead the occupants of Lot 8.
In this case the source of co-ownership
among the heirs was intestate succession.
Where there are two or more heirs, the
whole estate of the decedent is, before
its partition, owned in common by such
heirs subject to the payment of debts of the
deceased.
The purpose of PARTITION is to put an
end to co-ownership. It seeks a
severance of the individual interest of
each co-owner, vesting in each a sole
estate in specific property and giving to
each one a right to enjoy his estate
without supervision or interference
from the other. One way of effecting a
partition of the decedents estate is by the
heirs themselves extrajudicially. - Noceda
vs. Court of Appeals

There is no coownership where portion

owned is concretely determined and
identifiable, though not technically
described, or that said portions are
still embraced in one and the same
certificate of title does not make said
portions less determinable or
identifiable, or distinguishable, one
from the other, nor that dominion over
each portion less exclusive, in their
respective owners.
Petitioner Noceda occupied not only the
portion donated to him by private
respondent Aurora Arbizo-Directo but he
also fenced the whole area of Lot C which
belongs to private respondent Directo, thus
petitioners act of occupying the portion
pertaining to private respondent Directo
without the latters knowledge and consent
is an act of usurpation which is an
offense against the property of the
donor and considered as an act of
ingratitude of a donee against the donor.
The action to revoke donation by reason of
ingratitude prescribes within one (1) year to
be counted from the time (a) the donor had
knowledge of the fact; (b) provided that it
was possible for him to bring the action.
- Noceda vs. Court of Appeals

GENERAL RULE: When a person dies

intestate, or, if testate, failed to name
an executor in his will or the executor so
named is incompetent, or refuses the
trust, or fails to furnish the bond
required by the Rules of Court, then the
decedents estate shall be judicially
administered and the competent court
shall appoint a qualified administrator
in the order established in Section 6 of Rule
78.
EXCEPTIONS to the Rule Requiring
Appointment of Administrator.The
exceptions to this rule are found in Sections
1 and 2 of Rule 74:
SECTION 1. Extrajudicial settlement by
agreement between heirs.
SECTION 2. Summary settlement of estates
of small value.
SECTION 1. EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT
by agreement between heirs.
a. decedent left no will and no debts
b. the heirs are all of age or the
minors are represented by their
judicial or legal representatives duly
authorized for the purpose,
c. the parties may, without securing
letters of administration, divide the
estate among themselves as they
see fit by means of a public
instrument filed in the office of
the register of deeds, and should
they disagree, they may do so in an
ordinary action of partition . . .
SEC. 2. Summary settlement of estates of
small value.Whenever the gross value of
the estate of a deceased person, whether
he died testate or intestate, does not
exceed ten thousand pesos xxx
The Court stated that the order of the
trial court converting an action for
letters of administration to one for
judicial partition has basis in the Rules of
Court. The basis for the trial courts order is
Section 1, Rule 74 of the Rules of Court. It
provides that in cases where the heirs
disagree as to the partition of the estate
and no extrajudicial settlement is possible,
then an ordinary action for partition
may be resorted to, as in this case. We
have held that where the more expeditious
remedy of partition is available to the heirs,
then the heirs or the majority of them may

not be compelled to submit to

administration proceedings.
Moreover, a complete inventory of the
estate may be done during the partition
proceedings, especially since the estate has
no debts.
- Avelino vs. Court of Appeals

Partition inter vivos may be done for as long

as legitimes are not prejudiced. Basis: Art.
1080 of the Civil Code. The legitime of
compulsory heirs is determined after
collation, as provided for in Article 1061:
Every compulsory heir, who succeeds with
other compulsory heirs, must bring into the
mass of the estate any property or right
which he may have received from the
decedent, during the lifetime of the latter,
by way of donation, or any other gratuitous
title xxx.
Collation cannot be done where the
original petition for delivery of
inheritance share only impleaded one
of the compulsory heirs The petition
must therefore be dismissed without
prejudice to the institution of a new
proceeding where all the indispensable
parties are present for the rightful
determination of their respective
legitime and if the legitimes were
prejudiced by the partitioning inter
vivos.
- Zaragoza vs. Court of Appeals,
PRETERITION; ANNULMENT OF INSTITUTION
OF HEIR
A provision of the Old Civil Code, which
provides that a partition made with the
inclusion of a person believed to be an heir,
but who is not, shall be void, does not
apply to a case where the partition was
made between two persons instituted as
heirs in a will but it was found out later that
one of them was not the testators child.
The reason is that testator was at liberty
to assign the free portion of his estate
to whomsover he chose.
Where the testator allotted in his will to his
legitimate daughter a share less than her
legitime, such circumstance would not
invalidate the institution of a stranger as an
heir, since there was no preterition or
total omission of a forced heir.

A project of partition is merely a

proposal for the distribution of the
hereditary estate which the court may
accept or reject. It is the court alone that
makes the distribution of the estate and
determines the persons entitled thereto.
Where the court has validly issued a
decree of distribution and the same
has become final, the validity or invalidity
of the project of partition becomes
irrelevant.
A partition agreement that was ratified
by the courts decree of distribution
and was actually consummated by
delivery of the shares to the
distributees cannot be set aside after
a long lapse of time.
The proceeding for the settlement of a
decedents estate is a proceeding in
rem. It is binding on the distributee
who was represented by her mother as
guardian. - Reyes vs. Barretto-Datu

Trusts & Succession

If the person to whom the title is
conveyed is the child, legitimate or
illegitimate, of the one paying the
price of the sale, NO TRUST IS IMPLIED
BY LAW, it being disputably presumed
that there is a gift in favor of the child.
The estate of a deceased person is a
juridical entity that has a personality
of its own; Judgment in a case binds only
the parties therein and not the estate of a
deceased person which might have been
represented at one time by one of the
parties.
Maximino, Sr. intended to give the six
Quezon City lots to Natividad. As Romeo
testified, their parents executed the Deed of
Sale in favor of Natividad because the latter
was the only female and the only
unmarried member of the family. She was
thus entrusted with the real properties
in behalf of her siblings. As she herself
admitted, she intended to convey Lots 10
and 11 to Jose in the event the latter
returned from abroad. There was thus an
implied trust constituted in her favor.
Art. 1449 of the Civil Code states: There
is also an implied trust when a
donation is made to a person but it

appears that although the legal estate

is transmitted to the donee, he
nevertheless is either to have no
beneficial interest or only a part
thereof.
There being an implied trust, the lots in
question are therefore subject to
collation in accordance with Art. 1061
which states: Every compulsory heir, who
succeeds with other compulsory heirs, must
bring into the mass of the estate any
property or right which he may have
received from the decedent, during the
lifetime of the latter, by way of
donation, or any other gratuitous title, in
order that it may be computed in the

determination of the legitime of each heir,

and in the account of the partition.
EXCEPTION TO THIS CASE:
The sale of Lots 13 and 14 to RosAlva
Marketing, Corp. on April 20, 1979 will have
to be upheld for RosAlva Marketing is an
innocent purchaser for value which
relied on the title of Natividad. RATIO:
every person dealing with registered land
may safely rely on the correctness of the
certificate of title issued therefor and the
law will in no way oblige him to go behind
the certificate to determine the condition of
the property.
- Nazareno vs. Court of Appeals