03 Diaz vs.

IAC
No. L-66574 (June 17, 1987)
Paras, J. / kam

Subject Matter: Legal or Intestate Succession > Order of Intestate Succession > Illegitimate Children
Summary: The estate being disputed in this case is that of Simona Pamuti Vda. de Santero. CFI initially ordered her niece,
Felisa, as her sole heir and as her administratix. However, the illegitimate children of Simona’s son Pablo (also deceased),
represented by their mothers Anselma and Felixberta (children w/ different mothers), intervened and contended that as
Simona’s grandchildren, they have the right to inherit from Simona by their right of represent their deceased father. CFI issued
an order excluding Felisa from further taking part in the intestate estate proceedings of Simona. IAC reversed the CFI ruling
and declared Felisa as the sole heir of Simona. The Supreme Court affirmed the IAC ruling, stating that Art. 992 absolutely
prohibits succession by intestacy between the illegitimate child and the legitimate children and relatives of the father or
mother of said legitimate child. The phrase “legitimate children and relatives of his father or mother” includes Simona as the
word "relative" includes all the kindred of the person spoken of. Thus, Felisa (niece) is the sole legitimate heir to the intestate
estate of the late Simona.

Doctrine: Article 992 NCC provides a barrier or iron curtain in that it prohibits absolutely an intestate succession between
the illegitimate child and the legitimate children and relatives of the father or mother of said legitimate child. They may have a
natural tie of blood, but this is not recognized by law for the purposes of Art. 992.

Parties:
Petitioners Anselma Diaz, guardian of Victor, Rodrigo, Anselmina, and Miguel Santero, and Felixberta Pacursa,
guardian of Federico Santero, et al
Respondents Intermediate Appellate Court and Felisa Pamuti Jardin

Facts:
 Being disputed: intestate estate of the late Simona Pamuti Vda. de Santero (Simona) *✝= deceased
married Pascual Santero (✝)
Simona (✝)

Felixberta Pacursa Pablo Santero (✝) Anselma Diaz

(petitioner) (petitioner)

Federico Santero Another minor child Victor Santero Rodrigo Santero Anselmina Miguel Santero
(minor) (not named in the (minor) (minor) Santero (minor) (minor)
case)

 Simona is survived by her niece (legitimate child of her sister Juliana), Felisa Pamuti Jardin (Felisa) and her
6 illegitimate grandchildren c/o Pablo. Pascual died in 1970, Pablo died in 1973, and Simona died in 1976.
 Felisa filed a petition in 1976 with CFI Cavite, praying that the letters of administration be issued in her
favor and that she be appointed as special administratix of the properties of deceased Simona.
 Judge Raval declared Felisa as the sole legitimate heir of Simona. There were 4 interrelated cases before the
trial court:
1. Petition for the Letters of Administration of the Intestate Estate of Pablo Santero
2. Petition for the Letters of Administration of the Intestate Estate of Pascual Santero
3. Petition for guardianship over the properties of an incompetent person, Simona
4. Petition for Settlement of the Intestate Estate of Simona

 Upon her motion to intervene, Felisa was allowed to intervene in nos. 1 & 2. Then, Anselma, as guardian of
her minor children, filed her opposition and motion to exclude Felisa from further taking part in the
settlement of the intestate estate of Simona, as well as those of Pascual & Pablo. Felixberta, guardian of her
minor children, filed a manifestation adopting Anselma’s motion.

 May 20, 1980 – Judge Bleza issued an order excluding Felisa from further taking part in the intestate estate
proceeding of the three and declaring her not to be an heir of Simona. MR of Simona denied.
Intermediate Appellate Court (IAC): Declared Felisa as the sole heir of Simona and ordered Anselma & Felixberta
not to interfere in the proceeding for the declaration of heirship in the estate of Simona. MR denied.

Issue: Who are the legal heirs of Simona – her niece Felisa or her grandchildren? (niece Felisa)

Ratio:
 The main issue here is whether the illegitimate children of Pablo could inherit from Simona by right of representation
of their father Pablo who is a legitimate child of Simona.

What is the applicable law here?

 Petitioners: Art. 9901 applies. They contend that this New Civil Code provision modifies Art. 941 of the Old Civil Code.
According to them, art. 941 Old CC which denied illegitimate children the right to represent their deceased parents
and inherit from their deceased grandparents was expressly changed and/or amended by Art. 990 NCC which
expressly grants the illegitimate children the right to represent their deceased father (Pablo Santero) in the estate of
their grandmother (Simona Pamuti).

SC: Petitioners' contention holds no water. The applicable law here is Article 992 NCC.

ART. 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. (943a)

 Pablo Santero is a legitimate child, he is not an illegitimate child. On the other hand, the oppositors (petitioners
herein) are the illegitimate children of Pablo Santero.
 Article 992 NCC provides a barrier or iron curtain in that it prohibits absolutely a succession ab intestato
between the illegitimate child and the legitimate children and relatives of the father or mother of said
legitimate child. They may have a natural tie of blood, but this is not recognized by law for the purposes of Art.
992.
 Between the legitimate family and the illegitimate family there is presumed to be an intervening antagonism and
incompatibility. The illegitimate child is disgracefully looked down upon by the legitimate family; the family is in turn,
hated by the illegitimate child; the latter considers the privileged condition of the former, and the resources of which
it is thereby deprived; the former, in turn, sees in the illegitimate child nothing but the product of sin, palpable
evidence of a blemish broken in life; the law does no more than recognize this truth, by avoiding further grounds of
resentment.
 Thus, petitioners herein cannot represent their father Pablo in the succession of the letter to the intestate estate of his
legitimate mother Simona, because of the barrier provided for under Art. 992 NCC.

Dispositive: Petition DISMISSED. IAC decision AFFIRMED.

Notes:
 In answer to the erroneous contention of petitioners that Article 941 of the Spanish Civil Code is changed by Article
990 NCC, the court reproduced the reflection of the illustrious Hon. Justice JBL Reyes:

o In the Spanish Civil Code of 1889, Art. 943 of prescribed that an illegitimate child cannot inherit ab intestato from
the legitimate children and relatives of his father and mother. The NCC apparently adhered to this principle since
it reproduced Art. 943 of the Spanish Code in its own Art. 992, but with fine inconsistency, in subsequent articles
(990, 995 and 998) NCC allows the hereditary portion of the illegitimate child to pass to his own
descendants, whether legitimate or illegitimate.

o So that 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.

o This difference being indefensible and unwarranted, in the future revision of the Civil Code we shall have to make
a choice and decide either that the illegitimate issue enjoys in all cases the right of representation, in which case
Art. 992 must be suppressed; or contrariwise maintain said article and modify Articles 995 and 998. The first
solution would be more in accord with an enlightened attitude vis-a-vis illegitimate children.

1
Art. 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.