Austria v.

Reyes
Basilia Austra
widow
petition for probate, ante mortem, of her last will and testament, 1956
last will and testament
bulk of estate was destined to pass onto the legally adopted children of Basilia
died, 1959
one of legally adopted childredn, Perfecto Cruz, was appointed executor
Ruben Austria, et.al (oppositors)
nephews and nieces of Basilia
nearest surviving blood relatives of Basilia
filed petition for opposition
also, filed petition in intervention for partition
grounds:
(1) they are nearest kin
(2) adopted children, were not in fact been adopted in accordance with law; thus,
they are mere strangers and without any right to succeed as heirs
as per Art 850
"The statement of a false cause for the institution of an heir shall be
considered as not written, unless it appears from the will that the testator
would not have made such institution if he had known the falsity of such
cause."
that as per the tenor of the will, sapilitang tagamagmana" and "sapilitang
mana"
gives rise to inference that Basilia was deceived into believing that she was
legally bound to bequeath 1/2 of her estate to respondents Perfecto Cruz
had Basilia known the adoption to be spurious, she would have not instituted
the childred at all
LC
delimited the petition of the nephews and nieces (oppositors) to the properties not disposed
of in the will
and to that extent, intestate succssion can take place
further, held that validity of adoption is not an issue; for nevertheless, the adopted children
were instituted as testamentary heirs
as per Art 842

"One who has no compulsory heirs may dispose of by will 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.
Issue
legality of the tie of the decedent with the instituted heirs (adopted children)
the instituted would still have ecacy, when there existed proof that the adoption was false
SC
(a) as per Art 850, the institution of an heir may be annuled under Art 850:
(i) the cause for the institution of heirs must be stated in the will
(ii) the cause must be shown to be false;
(iii) it must appear from the face of the will that the testator would not have made such
institution if he had known the falsity of the cause.
(b) SC:
(i) the oppositor's own proposition, is highly speculative of what was in the mind of the
testatrix when she executed her will.
even if we supposedly accept the oppositors' theory that the decedent instituted the
the adopted children, solely because she believed that the law commanded her to do
so, on the false assumption that her adoption of these respondents was valid,
still such institution must stand.
(ii) The decedent's will was vague and uncertain.
Actually, the phrases in question were borrowed from the language of the law on
succession
Further, the oppositors offer no absolute indication that the decedent would have
willed her estate other than the way she did if she had known that she was not
bound by law to make allowance for legitimes
Actually, referring to the will, it seems that there is a perceptible inclination on
the decedents part to give the respondents more than what she thought the
law enjoined her to give them.
(ii) Further,
Whatever doubts one entertains in his mind should be swept away by these explicit
injunctions in the Civil Code:
"The words of a will are to receive an interpretation which will give to every
expression some effect, rather than one which will render any of the expressions
inoperative; and of two modes of interpreting a will, that is to be preferred which will
prevent intestacy.
(iii) Lastly,
Even the probate court has found, by final judgment, that Basilia Austria was
possessed of testamentary capacity and her last will executed free from falsification,
fraud, trickery or undue influence.

(iv) More importantly,

the legality of the adoption by the decedent can be assailed only in a separate action
brought for that purpose, and cannot be the subject of a collateral attack.