Fausto Gan vs.

Ildelfonso Yap
FACTS:

On November 20,1951, Felicidad Esguerra died of heart failure in the University of Santo Tomas Hospital, leaving
properties in Pulilan, Bulacan in the City of Manila.

On March 17,1952 Fausto Gan initiated a petition for the probate of holographic will allegedly executed by the deceased
and established its contents and due execution by a statement that on November 5,1951 that felicidad wrote, signed and
dated a holographic will in the presence of her niece who was invited to read it and by a distant relative. The surviving
husband IIdefonso Yap asserted that the deceased had not left any will, nor executed any testament during her life time
and when the deceased found hardly breathing her husband and her personal attendant, Mrs. Bantique constantly at her
side and these two persons swore that Mrs. Felicidad Esguerra made no will, and could have made no will on that day.

ISSUE:

1. WON HOLOGRAPHIC CAN BE PROBATED UPON THE TESTIMONY OF WITNESSES WHO HAVE ALLEGEDLY
SEEN IT AND WHO DECLARED THAT IT WAS IN THE WRITING OF TESTATOR.

RULING:

NO. Since the will was not presented, the court is in the opinion that the case should be decided not on the weakness of the
opposition but on strength of the evidence of the petitioner who has the burden of proof. And that the authenticity and due
execution is the dominant requirements to be fulfilled when such will is submitted to the courts for allowance.

The court find confirmation of ideas in the decision of the Supreme Court of Spain in accordance with the provision of Civil
Code (Spanish) “The will itself, whole and unmutilated, must be presented; otherwise it shall produce no effect.’’
And the evidence submitted by herein petitioner is so tainted with improbabilities and inconsistencies that it fails to
measure up to that “clear and distinct” proof required by rule 77 sec.11.

17. Gan v. Yap

FACTS: Gan filed a petition for probate of the holographic will allegedly executed by Felicidad Yap. Opposing the
petition, her surviving husband, Ildefonso Yap asserted that the deceased had not left any will, nor executed any
testament during her lifetime. The will itself was not presented. Petitioners tried to establish its contents and due
execution by the statements of 4 witnesses who testified that Felicidad wrote, signed and dated a holographic will and
that Felicidad allowed them to read the will.

ISSUE: w/n a holographic will may be probated upon the testimony of witnesses.

HELD: NO

When the will itself is not submitted, the means of opposition, and of assessing the evidence are not available.
And then the only guaranty of authenticity—the testator’s handwriting—has disappeared.

Unlike holographic wills, ordinary wills may be proved by testimonial evidence when lost or destroyed. The
difference lies in the nature of the wills:

Holographic will Ordinary will

1. guarantee of authenticity: the handwriting 1. guarantee of authenticity: testimony of the

itself
2. if oral testimonies were admissible, only one
man could engineer the whole fraud.
3. In case of a lost holographic will, the
witnesses would testify as to their opinion of
the handwriting which they allegedly saw,
an opinion which cannot be tested in court
because the handwriting itself is not at hand.
subscribing or instrumental witnesses
2. hard to convince 3 witnesses deliberately to
lie.
3. In case of a lost will, the 3 subscribing
witnesses would be testifying to a fact which
they saw the act of the testator subscribing
the will.
Rodelas v. Aranza Digest
Rodelas v. Aranza
G.R. No. L-58509 December 7, 1982
Relova, J. (Ponente)

Facts:
1. The appellant filed a petition for the probate of the holographic will of Ricardo Bonilla in 1977. The petition
was opposed by the appellees on the ground that the deceased did not leave any will, holographic or otherwise.
2. The lower court dismissed the petition for probate and held that since the original will was lost, a
photostatic copy cannot stand in the place of the original.

Issue: Whether or not a holographic will can be proved by means of a photocopy

RULING: Yes. A photocopy of the lost or destroyed holographic will may be admitted because the authenticity
of the handwriting of the deceased can be determined by the probate court with the standard writings of the
testator.

Nuguid v. Nuguid
GR L-23445, June 23, 1966

FACTS:

Rosario died single, without descendants, legitimate or illegitimate. Surviving were her legitimateparents,
Felix and Paz, and 6 brothers and sisters. One of the siblings filed a holographic will allegedly executed by
Rosario 11 years before her death and prayed that she be admitted to the probate and be
appointed administrator. The parents opposed saying that they are the compulsory heirs of the decedent in
the direct ascending line and that the will should be void on the ground of absolute preterition.

ISSUE:

Is the will void on the ground of preterition?

RULING:

YES. The decedent left no descendants, legitimate or illegitimate. But she left forced heirs in the direct
ascending line her parents. And, the will completely omits both of them; thus receiving nothing by the
testament, depriving them of their legitime; neither were they expressly disinherited. This is a clear case of
preterition. Note that A. 854 of the NCC merely nullifies the “institution of heir”. Considering that the
will presented solely provides for the institution of the petitioner as universal heir and nothing more, the
result is the same. The will is null and void.