Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Renvoi Bellis vs. Bellis G.R. No. L-23678 June 6, 1967 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Jhenjhen Ganda
    4 views1 page
    Amos Bellis was a citizen of Texas who had both legitimate and illegitimate children. He made two wills that did not provide any inheritance for his illegitimate children. The illegitimate children contested the wills, arguing that Philippine law should apply and entitle them to a legitimate share of the inheritance. The Supreme Court ruled that Texas law, as the national law of the deceased, must determine succession rights. Under Texas law, there are no forced heirs or legitimes. Therefore, the Philippine law on legitimes did not apply, and the illegitimate children were not entitled to inherit under the will.

    Original Description:

    34

    Original Title

    34

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Amos Bellis was a citizen of Texas who had both legitimate and illegitimate children. He made two wills that did not provide any inheritance for his illegitimate children. The illegitimate children contested the wills, arguing that Philippine law should apply and entitle them to a legitimate share of the inheritance. The Supreme Court ruled that Texas law, as the national law of the deceased, must determine succession rights. Under Texas law, there are no forced heirs or legitimes. Therefore, the Philippine law on legitimes did not apply, and the illegitimate children were not entitled to inherit under the will.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views1 page

    Renvoi Bellis vs. Bellis G.R. No. L-23678 June 6, 1967 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Jhenjhen Ganda
    Amos Bellis was a citizen of Texas who had both legitimate and illegitimate children. He made two wills that did not provide any inheritance for his illegitimate children. The illegitimate children contested the wills, arguing that Philippine law should apply and entitle them to a legitimate share of the inheritance. The Supreme Court ruled that Texas law, as the national law of the deceased, must determine succession rights. Under Texas law, there are no forced heirs or legitimes. Therefore, the Philippine law on legitimes did not apply, and the illegitimate children were not entitled to inherit under the will.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    RENVOI

    G.R. No. L-23678

    BELLIS vs. BELLIS

    June 6, 1967

    Facts:
    Amos Bellis was a citizen of the State of Texas, and of the United States. By his
    first wife whom he divorced he had five legitimate children, by his second wife, who
    survived him, he had three legitimate children, and three illegitimate children. Before he
    died, he made two wills, one disposing of his Texas properties and the other disposing
    his Philippine properties. In both wills, his illegitimate children were not given anything.
    The illegitimate children opposed the will on the ground that they have been deprived of
    their legitimates to which they should be entitled, if Philippine law were to be applied.
    Issue:
    Whether or not the national law of the deceased should determine the
    successional rights of the illegitimate children.
    Ruling:
    The Supreme Court held that the said children are not entitled to their legitimes
    under the Texas Law, being the national law of the deceased, there are no legitimes.The
    parties admit that the decedent, Amos G. Bellis, was a citizen of the State of Texas,
    U.S.A., and that under the laws of Texas, there are no forced heirs or legitimes.
    Accordingly, since the intrinsic validity of the provision of the will and the amount of
    successional rights are to be determined under Texas law, the Philippine law on
    legitimes cannot be applied to the testacy of Amos G. Bellis.
    Article 16, par. 2, and Art. 1039 of the Civil Code, render applicable the national
    law of the decedent, in intestate or testamentary successions, with regard to four items:
    (a) the order of succession; (b) the amount of successional rights; (e) the intrinsic
    validity of the provisions of the will; and (d) the capacity to succeed.
    Intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to the order of
    succession and to the amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of
    testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose
    succession is under consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property and
    regardless of the country wherein said property may be found.

    You might also like