Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 4


The appellant also contends that it is not
FACTS: proven that the two parcels of land in
question have been acquired by
Marcelina Edroso was married to operation of law, and that only property
Victoriano Sablan until his death on acquired without a valuable
September 22, 1882. In this marriage consideration, which is by operation of
they had a son named Pedro, who was law, is required by law to reserved.
born on August 1, 1881, and who at his
father's death inherited the two said Appellees Contention:
parcels. Pedro also died on July 15, 1902, Argue that the appellants defense was
unmarried and without issue and by this not alleged or discussed in first instance,
decease the two parcels of land passed but only herein. Certainly, the allegation
through inheritance to his mother, in first instance was merely that "Pedro
Marcelina Edroso.. Hence the hereditary Sablan acquired the property in question
title whereupon is based the application in 1882, before the enforcement of the
for registration of her ownership. Two Civil Code, which establishes the alleged
legitimate brothers of Victoriano Sablan right required by law to be reserved, of
that is, two uncles german of Pedro which the opponents speak; hence,
Sablan appeared in the case to prescription of the right of action; and
oppose the registration, claiming one of finally, opponents' renunciation of their
two things: Either that the registration right, admitting that it existed and that
be denied, "or that if granted to her the they had it"
right reserved by law to the opponents
be recorded in the registration of each RTC Ruling:
parcel." The Court of Land Registration The trial court held that the parcels of
denied the registration and the land in question partake of the nature of
application appealed through a bill of property required by law to be reserved
exceptions. and that in such a case application could
only be presented jointly in the names of
Appellants Contention: the mother and the said two uncles of
The applicant acquired said lands from Pedro Sablan.
her descendant Pedro Sablan by
inheritance; (2) Pedro Sablan had ISSUE:
acquired them from his ascendant Whether or not the lands which are the
Victoriano Sablan, likewise by subject matter of the application are
inheritance; (3) Victoriano Sablan had required by law to be reserved
likewise acquired them by inheritance
from his ascendants, Mariano Sablan HELD
and Maria Rita Fernandez, they having YES.
been adjudicated to him in the partition
of hereditary property had between him The hereditary title is one without a
and his brothers. These are admitted valuable consideration [gratuitous title].
facts. He who acquires by inheritance gives
nothing in return for what he receives reserved, because it is what by
and a very definite conclusion of law also operation of law would fall to the
is that the uncles german are within the mother from her son's inheritance; the
third degree of blood relationship. other half at free disposal would not
have to be reserved.
Art. 811, OCC provides:
Proof of testate succession devolves
The ascendant who inherits from his upon the heir or heiress who alleges it. It
descendant property which the latter must be admitted that a half of Pedro
acquired without a valuable Sablan's inheritance was acquired by his
consideration from another ascendant, mother by operation of law. The law
or from a brother or sister, is under provides that the other half is also
obligation to reserve what he has presumed to be acquired by operation
acquired by operation of law for the of law that is, by intestate succession.
relatives who are within the third degree Otherwise, proof to offset this
and belong to the line whence the presumption must be presented by the
property proceeded. interested party, that is, that the other
half was acquired by the man's wish and
Marcelina Edroso, ascendant of Pedro not by operation of law. In this case, the
Sablan, inherited from him these two interested party has not proved that
parcels of land which he acquired either of the lots became Marcelinas
without a valuable consideration that inheritance through the free disposal of
is, by inheritance from another her son.
ascendant, his father Victoriano. Having
acquired them by operation of law, she Two kinds of property required by law to
is obligated to reserve them intact for be reserved are distinguished in the Civil
the claimants, who are uncles or Code.
relatives within the third degree and
belong to the line of Mariano Sablan and Article 968 provides:
Maria Rita Fernandez, whence the lands
proceeded. The trial court's ruling that "Besides the reservation imposed by
they partake of the nature of property article 811, the widow or widower
required by law to be reserved is contracting a second marriage shall be
therefore in accordance with the law. obliged to set apart for the children and
descendants of the first marriage the
If Pedro Sablan had instituted his mother ownership of all the property he or she
in a will as the universal heiress of his may have acquired from the deceased
property, all he left at death would not spouse by will, by intestate succession,
be required by law to be reserved, but by gift, or other transfer w/out a
only what he would have perforce left valuable consideration."
her as the legal portion of a legitimate
ascendant. [Art. 809, OCC.] In such case From principles of jurisprudence laid
only the half constituting the legal down by the Supreme Court of Spain, it
portion would be required by law to be is inferred that if from December, 1889,
to July, 1893, a case had occurred of a them to exercise it at any time, since no
right required to be reserved by article limit is set in the law. So, if the
811, the persons entitled to such right annotation of the right required by law
would have been able to institute, to be reserved in the two parcels of land
against the ascendants who must make in question must be made in the
the reservation, proceedings for the property registry of the Mortgage Law,
assurance and guaranty that articles 977 the persons entitled to it may now
and 978 grant to the children of a first institute proceedings to that end, and an
marriage against their father or mother allegation of prescription against the
who has married again. The proceedings exercise of such right of action cannot
for assurance, under article 977, are: be sustained.
Inventory of the property subject to the
right reserved, annotation in the What are the rights in the property of
property registry of such right reserved the person who holds it subject to the
in the real property and appraisal of the reservation of article 811 of the Old Civil
personal property; and the guaranty, Code?
under article 978, is the assurance by
mortgage, in the case of realty, of the The person required by article 811 to
value of what is validly alienated. reserve the right has, beyond any doubt
at all, the rights of use and usufruct. He
Article 199 of amended Mortgage Law: has, moreover, the legal title and
"The special mortgage for guaranteeing dominion, although under a condition
the right reserved by article 811 of the subsequent. Clearly he has, under an
Civil Code can only be required by the express provision of the law, the right to
relatives in whose favor the property is dispose of the property reserved, and to
to be reserved, if they are of age; if dispose of is to alienate, although under
minors, it will be required by the persons a condition. He has the right to recover
who should legally represent them. In it, because he is the one who possesses
either case the right of the persons in or should possess it and have title to it,
whose favor the property must be although a limited and revocable one. In
reserved will be secured by the same a word, the legal title and dominion,
requisites as set forth in the preceding even though under a condition, reside in
articles (relative to the right reserved by him while he lives. After the right
article 968 of the Civil Code), applying to required by law to be reserved has been
the person obligated to reserve the right assured, he can do anything that a
the provisions with respect to the genuine owner can do.
On the other hand, the relatives within
The lapse of the ninety days is not the the third degree in whose favor the right
expiration by prescription of the period is reserved cannot dispose of the
for the exercise of this right of action by property, first because it is no way,
the persons in whose favor the right either actually, constructively or
must be reserved, but really the formally, in their possession; and,
commencement thereof, and enables moreover, because they have no title of
ownership or of fee simple which they property to be reserved must be
can transmit to another, on the prohibited to him, because this alone
hypothesis that only when the person has been the object of the law: "To
who must reserve the right should die prevent persons outside a family from
before them will they acquire it, thus securing, by some special accident of
creating a fee simple, and only then will life, property that would otherwise have
they take their place in the succession of remained therein."
the descendant of whom they are
relatives within the third degree, that is Can the heir of the property required
to say, a second contingent place in said by law to be reserved himself alone
legitimate succession in the fashion of register the ownership of the property
aspirants to a possible future legacy. If he has inherited?
any of the persons in whose favor the
right is reserved should, after their right YES. When the persons in whose favor
has been assured in the registry, dare to the reservation must be made agree
dispose of even nothing more than the thereto and provided that the right
fee simple of the property to be reserved to them in the two parcels of
reserved his act would be null and void, land is recorded, as the law provides.
for it is impossible to determine the part
"that might pertain therein to the
relative at the time he exercised the
right, because in view of the nature and
scope of the right required by law to be
reserved the extent of his right cannot
be foreseen, for it may disappear by his
dying before the person required to
reserve it, just as it may even become
absolute should that person die."

No act of disposal inter vivos of the

person required by law to reserve the
right can be impugned by him in whose
favor it is reserved, because such person
has all, absolutely all, the rights inherent
in ownership, except that the legal title
is burdened with a condition that the
third party acquirer may ascertain from
the registry in order to know that he is
acquiring a title subject to a condition
subsequent. In conclusion, it seems to us
that only an act of disposal mortis causa
in favor of persons other than relatives
within the third degree of the
descendant from whom he got the