Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

Wills Arts 774 - 804 properties, after both of them shall have died should reverr to

Case # 3 their respective sides of the Family. (Mariano to Locsin’s side


LOCSIN V. COURT OF APPEALS and Catalina to Jaucian’s side)
G.R. No. 89783, February 19, 1992, NARVASA, C.J.  September, 14, 1948 – Don Mariano Locsin died of cancer
and his will was probated in Special proceeding without any
Petitioners: opposition from both sides of the family.
 Mariano B. Locsin, Julian J. Locsin, Jose B. Locsin, Aurea B.  Doña Catalina was appointed executrix of his estate assisted
Locsin, Matilde L. Cordero, Salvador B. Locsin And Manuel V. by Atty. Lorayes in the probate proceedings
Del Rosario – Children of Julian Locsin, one of the children of  In the inventory of her husband’s estate, Catalina declared
Getulio Locsin and; nephews and nieces of Mariano Locsin that Items # 1 to 33 are private properties of the deceased
and Catalina Jaucian – Petition for reversal of the decision of and form part of the capital at the time of Marriage and
CA affirming the RTC Items # 34 to 42 are conjugal
 9 years after Mariano’s death – Catalina began transferring,
Respondents: by sale, donation or assignment, Don Mariano’s as well as her
 The Hon. Court of Appeals own, properties to their respective nephews and nieces.
 Jose Jaucian, Florentino Jaucian, Mercedes Jaucian  July 6, 1977 - Doña Catalina died
Arboleda, Heirs of Josefina J. Borja, Heirs of Eduardo Jaucian  October 22, 1973 – Catalina made a will affirming and
and Heirs of Vicente Jaucian – Plaintiffs in Civil case for an ratifying the transfers she had made during her lifetime in
action for recovery of real property with damages favor of her husband’s, and her own, relatives.
 After reading the Will – all relatives agreed that there was no
Facts: need to submit it to court for probate because the properties
 After the death of Getulio Locsin, the latter’s estate was devised to them under the Will already been conveyed to
divided among his three children (Magdalena, Julian and them by the deceased when she was alive, except some
Mariano legacies which the executor of her will or estate.
 1908 - Such residential and agricultural properties, inherited
by and transferred to Mariano, brought into his marriage to RTC of Legaspi City (Br VII, CV 7152)
Catalina Jaucian.  Six (6) years after Catalina’s demise – Jaucian nephews and
 Catalina for her part, brought into the marriage untitled nieces who had already received their legacies and
properties which she had inherited from her parents, Balbino hereditary shares from her estate filed an action to recover
Jaucian and Simona Anson. the properties which had conveyed to the Locsins during her
 These properties were augmented by other properties lifetime
acquired by the spouses during their marriage which they o Alleging that the conveyances were inofficious,
were not blessed with children without consideration and intended solely to
 The properties of Mariano and Catalina were brought under circumvent the laws on succession.
the Torrens System. Title: “Mariano Locsin, married to Catalina  July 8, 1985 – RTC renders judgement in favor of Respondents
Jaucian – Plaintiffs and against Defendants indeclaring:
 Mariano Locsin executed a Last Will and Testament instituting o Respondents are the rightful heirs
his wife, Catalina, as the sole and universal heir of all his o Deed of sale, donations, reconveyance and
properties. exchange and all other instruments conveying part
 The will was drawn up by his wife’s nephew and trusted legal of any estate of Catalina as Null and void
adviser, Atty. Salvador Lorayes. The latter disclosed that the o Ordering Register of Deeds to cancel all certificates
spouses being childless, the spouses had agreed that their of title and other transfers

1|Wills_774-803_case3_Locsin v Court of Appeals


o Ordering Petitioners of all properties to the upon, or unduly influenced and morally pressured by
respondents her husband’s nephews and nieces (The petitioners)
o Ordering Petitioners to pay damages and other to transfer to them the properties
expenses o Vicente Juacian is estopped from assailing the
genuineness and due execution of the sale of the
CA – the Locsins appealed portions of Lot 2020 to himself, Julian and Agaito
 March 14, 1989 – CA affirmed the RTC’s decision Locsin
o There is not the slightest suggestion in the record that
ISSUE: Whether or not the Private respondents, nephews and nieces of Doña Catalina was mentally incompetent
Doña Catalina J. Vda. De Locsin, entitled to inherit the properties o None of those transactions from 1972 to 1973 was
which she had already disposed of more than 10 years before her impugned by the private respondents
death? NO o The inventory was signed by her under oath and was
approved by the probate Court. Atty. Lorayes would
Held: NO not have prepared a false inventory that would have
 For those properties did not form part of her hereditary estate been prejudicial to his aunt’s interest and to his own,
under Art 781 of NCC since he stood to inherit from her eventually.
 The rights to a person’s succession are transmitted from the o The Lower Courts erred in not dismissing this action for
moment of his death, and do not vest in his heirs until such annulment and reconveyance on the ground of
time pursuant to Art 777 of NCC prescription which it prescribes 4 years after the
 Property which Doña Catalina had transferred or conveyed subject transactions were recorded in the Registry of
to other persons during her lifetime no longer formed part of Property
her estate at the time of her death devolved to her legal
heirs; and even of those transfers were, one and all, treated
as donations.
 the right arising under certain circumstances to impugn and
compel the reduction or revocation of a decedent's gifts inter
vivos does not inure to the respondents since neither they nor
the donees are compulsory (or forced) heirs pursuant to Art.
752, in relation to Arts. 1061
 Application of the Law:
o There is no Basis in the intention of Catalina in
transferring the properties that circumvent the law in
violation of the private respondent’s rights to her
succession.
o Respondents are not her compulsory heirs and such
have no legitimes
o All the respondents had was an expectancy that in
nowise restricted her freedom to dispose of even her
entire estate subject only to limitation set forth in Art.
750 of NCC
o The records do not support that conjecture which
Catalina being 90 year old may have been imposed

2|Wills_774-803_case3_Locsin v Court of Appeals