You are on page 1of 1

JOAQUIN VS.

NAVARRO

Petitioner: Ramon Joaquin, natural child of Angela Joaquin and adopted child of Joaquin Navarro Sr. and
Angela Joaquin
Respondent: Antonio Navarro, son of Joaquin Navarro, Sr. in first marriage
Decided on: May 29, 1953

Facts:
• Feb. 6, 1945: battle of liberation of Manila, Joaquin Navarro, Sr., 70, wife Angela Joaquin, 67, daughters
Pilar (32-33), Concepcion, and Natividad (23-25), son Joaquin Navarro, Jr., 30 and his wife Adela Conde
sought refuge on the ground floor of German Club Building
• Building was set on fire and Japanese started shooting hitting the three daughters who fell.
• Sr. decided to leave building. His wife didn’t want to leave so he left with his son, his son’s wife and
neighbor Francisco Lopez
• As they came out, Jr. was hit and fell on the ground the rest lay flat on the ground to avoid bullets
• German Club collapsed trapping may people presumably including Angela Joaquin.
• Sr., Adela and Francisco sought refuge in an air raid shelter where they hid for three days.
• Feb. 10, 1945: on their way to St. Theresa Academy, they met Japanese patrols, Sr. and Adela were hit
and killed.
Procedure:
• Trial Court ruled that Angela Joaquin outlived her son
• Court of Appeals ruled that son outlived his mother
• Petition for review by certiorari
Issue: Order of death of Angela Joaquin and Joaquin Navarro, Jr.
Held: Reversed.
Rationale:
1. Rule 123, Section 69, Revised Rules of Court: When two persons perish in the same calamity, such as
wreck, battle or conflagration, and it is not (a) shown who died first and there are no (b) particular
circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is presumed from the probabilities
resulting from the strength and age of the sexes.
2. Art. 33, Civil Code 1889: Whenever a doubt arises as to which was the first to die of the two or more
persons who would inherit one from the other, the person who alleges prior death of either must prove
the allegation; in the absence of proof the presumption shall be that they died at the same time and no
transmission of rights from one to the other shall take place.
3. Both 1 & 2 will be substitute if there are no facts. But since there are facts in this case, they won’t be
applicable. Where there are facts known or knowable, from which a rational conclusion can be made,
presumption does not step in. Facts are credible because witness was found disinterested, trustworthy
and entitled to credence by courts.
4. Fair and reasonable inference would suggest that Jr. died before his mother based on Lopez’ testimony
and deduced from established facts and has strong probability. Opposite theory would be based on
surmises, speculations and conjectures.
5. Supreme Court has jurisdiction to look into case because it involves issue of correctness of the
conclusion/judgment and not the evidence/facts.