Section 4

EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS

Art. 1058. All matters relating to the appointment, powers and duties of executors and administrators
and concerning the administration of estates of deceased persons shall be governed by the Rules of
Court.

-executor of a will cannot officially act as such before his appointment is confirmed by the court.
-No executor or administrator must be appointed till there is proof of the decedent’s death.

Administrator Pendente Lite

-one who is appointed in the meantime to take charge of the estate, where there is a delay in the
appointment of the regular executor or administrator — a delay occasioned by certain causes such as an
appeal from the allowance or disallowance of a will.
-allowed to sell part of the property, upon approval by the court, but is NOT required or allowed to pay
the debts of the deceased.

Other Kinds of Special Administrators

-One appointed even after there is already a regular executor or administrator, when the latter seeks to
recover his own credit or claim against the estate.
-One known as an administrator durante minore aetate — one appointed when the person who has the
right to become executor or administrator is still a minor. The appointment continues until the end of
such minority.

Regular Administrator-surviving spouse is given first preference.

Said surviving spouse must be:
(a) capable (not minors, not non-residents)
(b) not hostile to those interested in the estate.
(c) solvent (because a bond is needed)
(d) the legal spouse

Order of Preference for Appointment of Regular Administrator

(a) To the SURVIVING HUSBAND or WIFE, as the case may be, or NEXT OF KIN or BOTH, in the discretion
of the court, or to such person as such surviving husband or wife or next of kin, requests to have
appointed, if competent and willing to serve;
(b) If such surviving husband or wife, as the case may be, or next of kin, or the person selected by them,
be incompetent or unwilling, or if the husband or widow, or next of kin, neglects for thirty (30) days
after the death (of the decedent) of the person to apply for administration or to request that
administration be granted to some other person, it may be granted to one or more of the principal
CREDITORS, if competent and willing to serve;
(c) If there is no such creditor competent and willing to serve, it may be granted to SUCH OTHER PERSON
as the court may select.

Authority as administrator ends with:

(a) the closing of the settlement, testate or intestate proceedings.
(b) death, resignation, or removal.
Principal Duty of Administrator
-The administrator has the duty of administering, settling, and closing the administration without delay.
-he should determine what properties must belong to the estate, and must bring the needed actions for
their recovery if they be in the possession of others.
-Within three months after his appointment, he must submit an inventory and appraisal of the
decedent’s real and personal property.
-Within a year from his appointment, he must render proper accounting.

It Is the Executor or Administrator Who Is Primarily Liable for Attorney’s Fees Due the Lawyer Who
Rendered Legal Services for the Executor or Administrator
-relation to the settlement of the estate, and where the executor or administrator may seek
reimbursement from the estate for the sums paid in attorney’s fees if it can be shown that the services
of the lawyer redounded to the benefit of the estate.

Art. 1059. If the assets of the estate of a decedent which can be applied to the payment of debts are
not sufficient for that purpose, the provisions of Articles 2239 to 2251 on Preference of Credits shall
be observed, provided that the expenses referred to in Article 2244, No. 8, shall be those involved in
the administration of the decedent’s estate.

Insolvency of the Estate

(a) The rules on preference and concurrence of credits are to be applied in case of insolvency of the
estate.
(b) Art. 2244 gives the ORDER OF PREFERENCE.

GENERAL RULE-probate court cannot issue a writ of execution, because its orders usually refer to the
adjudication of claims against the estate which the executor or administrator may satisfy without the
need of resorting to a writ of execution.
However, by way of exception, the probate court may issue writs of execution in the following instances:
(1) to satisfy debts of the estate out of the contributive shares of heirs, devisees and legatees in the
possession of the decedent’s estate;
(2) to enforce payment of the expenses of partition; and
(3) to satisfy the costs when a person is cited for examination proceedings.

Art. 1060. A corporation or association authorized to conduct the business of a trust company in the
Philippines may be appointed as an executor, administrator, guardian of an estate, or trustee, in like
manner as an individual; but it shall not be appointed guardian of the person of a ward.

Juridical Entities Acting in a Fiduciary Capacity

-juridical persons referred to can be appointed guardian of the PROPERTY, but not the person of a ward.

Meanings of Collation
1. “Computing or adding certain values to the estate, and charging the same to the LEGITIME.’
2. “Computing or adding certain values to the estate, and charging the same to the FREE
PORTION.’
-Conversely, the phrase “not collationable’’ can mean:
1) First, it should be computed or added, but it should be charged to the free portion (and not to the
legitime).
2) Secondly, it should NOT even be computed or added to the estate, for it is not part of the same.

Art. 1061. Every compulsory heir, who succeeds with other compulsory heirs, must bring into the
mass of the estate any property or right which he may have received from the decedent, during the
lifetime of the latter, by way of donation, or any other gratuitous title, in order that it may be
computed in the determination of the legitime of each heir, and in the account of the partition.

Collation by Compulsory Heirs

-adding the values to the estate, and charging (or imputing) the same to the legitimes — the purpose
being to produce EQUALITY as among the compulsory heirs of the same class.
-Equality is produced because every donation inter vivos, for example, given to a legitimate child is
considered generally as an advance of his legitime or inheritance
-“the donee’s share of the estate shall be reduced by an amount equal to that already received by him,
and his co-heirs shall receive an equivalent, as much as possible, in property of the same nature, class
and quality’’).
-Since the purpose of collation is to preserve the legitime, and to maintain equality among the
compulsory heirs (as a rule), it follows that there is no necessity for collation if there are no compulsory
heirs.
-It does not follow, however, that only compulsory heirs must collate. As long as there are compulsory
heirs, donations to them as well as to strangers must be collated:
1) those donated to compulsory heirs must be imputed to their legitime;
2) those donated to strangers must be imputed to the free portion.

Art. 1061 speaks of “every compulsory heir.” Is the surviving spouse included here?
ANS.: While it is true that the surviving spouse is a compulsory heir, still she is not included here because
in general, donations to her during the marriage are null and void.

2 Kinds of Collation
(a) collation in VALUE
(b) collation in KIND-It is really a RETURNING in KIND in case the donation has to be totally reduced or
revoked because it is COMPLETELY INOFFICIOUS and the donee either has no money or does not desire
to reimburse in money
-The same thing donated are not to be brought to collation and partition, but only their value at the
time of the donation, even though their just value may not then have been assessed.

Two Kinds of Donations

(a) the direct or ordinary donation
(b) the indirect donation (Examples: debt which has been remitted; renunciation of another inheritance
by the deceased in favor of the compulsory heirs; sums paid by a parent in satisfaction of the debts of
his children; election expenses, fines.)
B and C are A’s legitimate children. During A’s lifetime, he gave B the sum of P100,000. In his will, A
distributed his remaining estate of P900,000 as follows: B was given P150,000; C was given P250,000;
and F, a friend, was given P500,000. When A died, B complained, stating that he had not been given his
right legitime. Is B right?
ANS.: B should not complain. Since the P100,000 is collationable, the net hereditary estate is P1 million
(P900,000 plus P100,000). B’s legitime is therefore P250,000. Inasmuch as he had previously been given
P100,000 he should be satisfied with the P150,000 he would inherit by virtue of the will, since all in all,
he would be getting P250,000.

Art. 1062. Collation shall not take place among compulsory heirs if the donor should have so expressly
provided, or if the donee should repudiate the inheritance, unless the donation should be reduced as
inofficious.

When Compulsory Heirs Will Not Collated

(a) First, if the donor expressly provides.

D has two sons, A and B. He gave A a donation of P100,000 and expressly stated in the deed of donation
that the same was NOT collationable. If D dies intestate leaving P900,000 how should the same be
divided?
ANS.: Equally, that is, A and B will each get P450,000. Thus, A receives a total of P550,000 (because of
the donation), or a preference of P100,000

D has two sons, A and B. He gave A a donation of P800,000 and expressly stated in the deed of donation
that the amount “should not be collated.” If at D’s death without a will, his estate is worth P200,000,
how much would be the share of each?
ANS.: B will get the whole P200,000 plus P50,000 more to be taken from the donation to A. While it is
true that according to the deed of donation, the same should not be collated, still we must add its value
to find out if the legitime has been impaired or not. Since the net hereditary estate is therefore P1
million, B’s legitime is P250,000.

(b) Secondly, the donation should be charged not to the legitime but to the free portion if the donee
should REPUDIATE the inheritance.

D has three legitimate children A, B, and C. D donated to A P600,000. When D died intestate, the
remaining estate was P300,000.
(a) If all the children including A will accept, should the donation to A be reduced? Why?
ANS.: (a) Since all accepted, including A, the donation to him will not be reduced. Reason: The total
estate would be P900,000, and there being THREE children, the legitime of each is P150,000. Since this is
what B and C can each get from the remaining P300,000, their legitimes have not been impaired.

(b) If B and C accept, but A repudiates, should the donation to A be reduced? Why? If so, by how much?
If B and C accept but A repudiates, there will be only TWO compulsory heirs. The total estate would still
be P900,000 and B and C are entitled to a combined legitime of P450,000. Inasmuch as the free portion
is only P450,000, it follows that the donation to A will be reduced by P150,000
Art. 1063. Property left by will is not deemed subject to collation, if the testator has not otherwise
provided, but the legitime shall in any case remain unimpaired.

T has two legitimate children, A and B. T made a will, giving A a legacy of P100,000. There was no other
provision to the will. The estate was P1 million. Inasmuch as P100,000 has been disposed of as a legacy,
how will the remaining P900,000 be divided?
ANS.: The P900,000 will be divided equally between A and B, and each will therefore get P450,000. The
P100,000 given as legacy to A is NOT considered an advance of his legitime, but as an advance of the
free portion. It is clear that by giving A the legacy, the testator intended to give him a preference.
- the general rule is EQUALITY and the exception is PREFERENCE.

T has two legitimate children, A and B. T made a will giving A a legacy of P800,000. The total estate was
however P1 million. If no other provision is found in the will, how will the P200,000 be divided?
ANS.: The P200,000 will go to B. However, the legacy will be reduced by P50,000 and this amount will
also go to B, otherwise his legitime (P250,000) would be impaired.

Art. 1064. When grandchildren, who survive with their uncles, aunts, or cousins, inherit from their
grandparents in representation of their father or mother, they shall bring to collation all that their
parents, if alive, would have been obliged to bring, even though such grandchildren have not inherited
the property.
They shall also bring to collation all that they may have received from the decedent during his
lifetime, unless the testator has provided otherwise, in which case his wishes must be respected, if the
legitime of the co-heirs is not prejudiced.

Example of 1st par.:

During A’s lifetime, A gave B a house. That house was later on donated by B to L, a friend. If B
predeceases A, then E will represent B, and together with C and D will inherit from A. E will be obliged to
collate the value of the house, even if E himself has not inherited said property. This is so because, had B
been alive, he would have been obliged to bring to collation the value of said house. Since E merely
takes his (B’s) place, it naturally follows that collation by him (E) is in order.

Example of 2nd par.:

In the example given in (a), if A had given E a house during A’s lifetime, the value of said house should
also be collated (considered an advance of his inheritance) unless of course the testator has provided
otherwise. However, even if there is such a contrary provision, the legitime of the co-heirs must not be
prejudiced. Hence, even if the testator has stated that the house should not be considered as an
advance of the legitime of E (meaning that aside from the legitime, E would get also the house), still this
will not be the case if by such means, the legitime of the co-heirs is impaired.