Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Succession Q&A Lawtech
Succession Q&A Lawtech
Mr. XT and Mrs. YT have been married for 20 years. Suppose the wife, YT, died childless, survived only by her husband, XT. What would be the
share of XT from her estate as inheritance? Why? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under the Civil Code, the widow or widower is a legal and compulsory heir of the deceased spouse. If the widow is the only surviving heir, there
being no legitimate ascendants, descendants, brothers, and sisters, nephews and nieces, she gets the entire estate.
Collation (1993)
Joaquin Reyes bought from Julio Cruz a residential lot of 300 square meters in Quezon City for which Joaquin paid Julio the amount of P300,000.00,
When the deed was about to be prepared Joaquin told Julio that it be drawn in the name of Joaquina Roxas, his acknowledged natural child. Thus,
the deed was so prepared and executed by Julio. Joaquina then built a house on the lot where she, her husband and children resided. Upon
Joaquin’s death, his legitimate children sought to recover possession and ownership of the lot, claiming that Joaquina Roxas was but a trustee of
their father.
Will the action against Joaquina Roxas prosper?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, because there is a presumed donation in favor of Joaquina under Art. 1448 of the Civil Code (Delos Santos v. Reyes, 27 January 1992, 206
SCRA 437). However, the donation should be collated to the hereditary estate and the legitime of the other heirs should be preserved.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Yes, the action against Joaquina Roxas will prosper, but only to the extent of the aliquot hereditary rights of the
legitimate children as heirs. Joaquina will be entitled to retain her own share as an illegitimate child, (Arts. 1440 and 1453. Civil Code; Art. 176,
F. C.)
Wilma————— 250,000
Elvira—————– 250,000
Ernie—————– 50,000
1,000,000
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The disinheritance of Wilma was effective because disrespect of, and raising of voice to, her father constitute maltreatment under Article
919(6) of the New Civil Code. She is, therefore, not entitled to inherit anything. Her inheritance will go to the other legal heirs. The total omission of
Elvira is not preterition because she is not a compulsory heir in the direct line. She will receive only her legitime. The legacy in favor of Rosa is void
under Article 1028 for being in consideration of her adulterous relation with the testator. She is, therefore, disqualified to receive the legacy. Ernie
will receive the legacy in his favor because it is not inofficious. The institution of Baldo, which applies only to the free portion, will be respected. In
sum, the estate of Lamberto shall be distributed as follows:
Heir Legitime Legacy Institution TOTAL
Wilma (250.000)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) B = 1/2
(b) B = 1/2 Z = 1/4 by representation of C C= 1/2
Article 982 of the Civil Code provides that grandchildren inherit by right of representation.
Article 977 of the Civil Code provides that heirs who repudiate their share cannot be represented.
Under the Theory of Exclusion the legitimes of the heirs are accorded them and the free portion will be given exclusively to the legitimate
descendants. Hence under the Exclusion Theory:
A will get P20.000.00. and P 13.333.33 (1/3 of the free portion) B will get P 20,000.00. and P13. 333.33 (1/3 of the free portion) D will get
P20.000.00. and P13. 333.33 (1/3 of the free portion) W, the widow is limited to the legitime of P20.000.00
Under the Theory of Concurrence. In addition to their legitimes, the heirs of A, B, D and W will be given equal shares in the free portions:
A: P20.000.00 plus P10.000.00 (1 /4 of the free portion)
B: P20,000.00 plus P10.000.00 (l/4 of the free portlon)
C: P20,000.00 plus P10.000.00 (1/4 of the free portion)
W: P20,000.00 plus P10,000.00 (l/4 of the free portion)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under the theory of Concurrence, the shares are as follows: A (legitimate child) = P200,000
B (legitimate child) = P200,000
C (legitimate child) = P200,000
D (legitimate child) = O (predeceased]
E (legitimate child of D) = P100,000 – by right of representation
F (legitimate child of D) = P100,000 – by right of representation
G (illegitimate child) = P100,000 – 1/2 share of the legitimate child H (illegitimate child) = P100,000 – 1/2 share of the legitimate child W (Widow) =
P200.000 – same share as legitimate child
ANOTHER ANSWER:
Under the theory of Exclusion the free portion (P300,000) is distributed only among the legitimate children and is
given to them in addition to their legitime. All other Intestate heirs are entitled only to their respective legitimes. The distribution is as follows:
Legitime (1997)
“X”, the decedent, was survived by W (his widow). A (his son), B (a granddaughter, being the daughter of A) and C and D (the two
acknowledged illegitimate children of the decedent). “X” died this year (1997) leaving a net estate of P180,000.00. All were willing
to succeed, except A who repudiated the inheritance from his father, and they seek your legal advice on how much each can expect to
receive as their respective shares in the distribution of the estate. Give your answer.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The heirs are B, W, C and D. A inherits nothing because of his renunciation. B inherits a legitime of P90.000.00 as the nearest and only legitimate
descendant, inheriting in his own right not by representation because of A’s renunciation. W gets a legitime equivalent to one-
half (1 / 2) that of B amounting to P45.000. C and D each gets a legitime equivalent to one-half (1/2) that of B amounting to
P45.000.00 each. But since the total exceeds the entire estate, their legitimes would have to be reduced corresponding to P22.500.00 each
(Art. 895. CC). The total of all of these amounts to P180.000.00.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
NTESTATE SUCCESSION
ESTATE: P180,000.00
W- (widow gets 1/2 share) P90.000.00 (Art. 998)
A- (son who repudiated his inheritance) None ( Art. 977)
B – (Granddaughter) None
C – (Acknowledged illegitimate child) P45.000.00 (Art.998)
D – (Acknowledged illegitimate child) P45,000.00 (Art. 998)
The acknowledged illegitimate child gets 1/2 of the share of each legitimate child.
Preterition (2001)
Because her eldest son Juan had been pestering her for capital to start a business, Josefa gave him P100,000. Five years later, Josefa died, leaving a
last will and testament in which she instituted only her four younger children as her sole heirs. At the time of her death, her only properly left was
P900,000.00 in a bank. Juan opposed the will on the ground of preterition. How should Josefa’s estate be divided among her heirs? State briefly the
reason(s) for your answer.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
There was no preterition of the oldest son because the testatrix donated 100,000 pesos to him. This donation is considered an advance on the
son’s inheritance. There being no preterition, the institutions in the will shall be respected but the legitime of the oldest son has to be completed if
he received less.
After collating the donation of P100.000 to the remaining property of P900,000, the estate of the testatrix is P1,000,000. Of this amount,
one-half or P500,000, is the legitime of the legitimate children and it follows that the legitime of one legitimate child is P100,000. The legitime,
therefore, of the oldest son is P100,000. However, since the donation given him was P100,000, he has already received in full his legitime and he
will not receive anything anymore from the decedent. The remaining P900,000, therefore, shall go to the four younger children by institution in the
will, to be divided equally among them. Each will receive P225,000.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Criminal Law
Amendment
1040ez
Cnn news world
20 Year
Assuming that the donation is valid as to form and substance, Juan cannot invoke preterition because he actually had received a
donation inter vivos from the testatrix (III Tolentino 188,1992 ed.). He would only have a right to a completion of his legitime under Art. 906 of
the Civil Code. The estate should be divided equally among the five children who will each receive P225,000.00 because the total hereditary estate,
after collating the donation to Juan (Art. 1061, CC), would be P1 million. In the actual distribution of the net estate, Juan gets nothing while his
siblings will get P225,000.00 each.
Preterition; Compulsory Heir (1999)
(a) Mr, Cruz, widower, has three legitimate children, A, B and C. He executed a Will instituting as his heirs to his
estate of One Million (P1,000,000.00) Pesos his two children A and B, and his friend F. Upon his death, how should Mr. Cruz’s estate be divided?
Explain.
(b) In the preceding question, suppose Mr. Cruz instituted his two children A and B as his heirs in his Will, but gave a legacy of P 100,000.00
to his friend F. How should the estate of Mr, Cruz be divided upon his death? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Assuming that the institution of A, B and F were to the entire estate, there was preterition of C since C is a compulsory heir in the direct line.
The preterition will result in the total annulment of the institution of heirs. Therefore, the institution of A, B and F will be set aside and Mr. Cuz’s
estate will be divided, as in intestacy, equally among A, B and C as follows: A – P333,333.33; B – P333.333.33; and C – P333,333.33.
(b) On the same assumption as letter (a), there was preterition of C. Therefore, the institution of A and B is annulled but the legacy of P100.000.00
to F shall be respected for not being inofficious. Therefore, the remainder of P900.000.00 will be divided equally among A, B and C.
(1) Was Don’s testamentary disposition of his estate in accordance with the laws on succession? Whether you agree or not, explain your answer.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Don’s testamentary disposition of his estate is in accordance with the law on succession. Don has no compulsory heirs not having
ascendants, descendants nor a spouse [Art. 887, New Civil Code]. Brothers and sisters are not compulsory heirs. Thus, he can bequeath
his entire estate to anyone who is not otherwise incapacitated to inherit from him. A common-law wife is not incapacitated under the
law, as Don is not married to anyone.
(2) If Don failed to execute a will during his lifetime, as his lawyer, how will you distribute his estate? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
After paying the legal obligations of the estate, I will give Ronie, as full-blood brother of Don, 2/3 of the net estate, twice the share of
Michelle, the half- sister who shall receive 1/3. Roshelle will not receive anything as she is not a legal heir [Art. 1006 New Civil Code].
(3) Assuming he died intestate, survived by his brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, and his legitimate son Jayson, how will you distribute his
estate? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Jayson will be entitled to the entire P12 Million as the brother and sister will be excluded by a legitimate son of the decedent. This follows
the principle of proximity, where “the nearer excludes the farther.”
(4) Assuming further he died intestate, survived by his father Juan, his brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, and his legitimate son Jayson, how
will you distribute his estate? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Jayson will still be entitled to the entire P12 Million as the father, brother and sister will be excluded by a legitimate son of the decedent
[Art. 887, New Civil Code]. This follows the principle that the descendants exclude the ascendants from inheritance.
From the ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS in CIVIL LAW by the UP LAW COMPLEX and PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF LAW SCHOOLS.