• accdg
to
extent
of
rights
and
obligations


transmitted:



 

1) universal
–
entire
patrimony
or
an

aliquot
part

2) particular
–
devise,
legacy

accdg
to
importance:



•
1) compulsory

2) testamentary


 

3) intestate



 Parties:

• Decedent



 

o Testator

o Decedent
(intestate)

Successor


 
 •
o Heir

o Devisee
or
Legatee

Rea Bautista 

Patrick Manalo Balane:

Loraine Saguinsin • Only
transmissible
rights
and
obligations
pass
by

Naomi Quimpo succession

o Criterion:
if
the
rights
or
obligation
is

strictly
personal
(intuitu
personae),
it
is

intransmissible;
otherwise,
it
is

Succession Reviewer •
transmissible.

Pecuniary
obligations
must
be
paid
first
before

distributing
the
residue
of
the
estate
to
the
heirs.

Inside: Illustrative Problems by Mr. Patrick, Sample 

Exam Questions, Answer Key and more!!!1 Union
Bank
vs.
Santibañez
(2005)



F:
Decedent
contracted
loans
during
his
lifetime.
After

decedent
died,
creditor
filed
an
action
for
collection

against
the
heirs.



H:
The
bank
should
have
filed
its
claim
in
the
probate

court
pursuant
to
Sec.
5,
Rule
86
of
the
Rules
of
Court.
The

filing
of
a
money
claim
against
the
decedent’s
estate
in
the

probate
court
is
mandatory.



Estate
of
K.H.
Hemady
vs.
Luzon
Surety
(1956)



F:
Lower
court
ruled
that
claims
filed
by
Luzon
Surety

against
decedent’s
estate
based
on
contracts
of
suretyship

entered
into
by
the
decedent
were
not
chargeable
because

death
extinguished
liability
as
surety/guarantor.



H:
Obligations
of
a
guarantor
are
transmissible.
Contracts

“Solvitur Ambulando” take
effect
only
between
parties,
their
assigns
and
heirs,

unless
they
are
intransmissible
by
their
nature,
by

stipulation
or
by
operation
of
law.

I. General Provisions 


 Alvarez
vs.
Intermediate
Appellate
Court
(1990)



Art.
774.
Succession
is
a
mode
of
acquisition
by
virtue
of
 F:
A
judgment
ordering
decedent
to
return
the
lots
was

which
the
property,
rights
and
obligations
to
the
extent
of
 entered
during
his
lifetime
but
was
not
executed
because

the
 value
 of
 the
 inheritance,
 of
 a
 person
 are
 transmitted
 he
sold
the
lots
to
a
3rd
person.
A
suit
for
recovery
of
the

through
his
death
to
another
or
others
either
by
his
will
or
 lots
was
filed
against
the
heirs
of
seller.

by
operation
of
law.
(n)
2
 


 H:
Liability
that
arose
from
the
sale
of
decedent
in
bad

Class
Notes:
 faith
was
not
extinguished
by
his
death
and
was
passed
on

Kinds
of
Succession
 to
his
heirs.
However,
the
heirs
are
only
liable
to
the

• according
to
moment
of
transmission:
 extent
of
the
value
of
their
inheritance.

1) mortis
causa
 

2) inter
vivos
(none
in
PH
law,
only
donations)
 Art.
 775.
 In
 this
 Title,
 "decedent"
 is
 the
 general
 term

applied
 to
 the
 person
 whose
 property
 is
 transmitted





























































 through
succession,
whether
or
not
he
left
a
will.
If
he
left

1

Disclaimer:
All
photos
lifted
from
Google
images.
No
copyright
 a
will,
he
is
also
called
the
testator.
(n)


infringement
intended.

2


provisions
recited



Art.
776.
The
inheritance
includes
all
the
property,
rights
 Note:

and
obligations
of
a
person
which
are
not
extinguished
by
 • Heir
 can
 sell
 his
 aliquot
 share
 but
 not
 specific

his
death.
(659)

 property/physical
 portion
 of
 property.

Otherwise,
it
is
only
pro
tanto
valid
(to
the
extent


 of
seller’s
share)
[Lee
vs
RTC
(2007)]



Art.
777.
The
rights
to
the
succession
are
transmitted
 3. The
heirs
have
the
right
to
be
substituted
for

from
the
moment
of
the
death
of
the
decedent.
(657a)

 deceased
as
party
in
an
action
that
survives


 

Notes:
 Bonilla
vs.
Barcena
(1976)

• Infelicitous
wording.
The
rights
to
the
succession
 

are
vested;
inheritance
transmitted
 F:
 Decedent,
 during
 her
 lifetime,
 filed
 an
 action
 to
 quiet

• CONSEQUENCES:
 title.
During
the
pendency
of
the
case,
D
died
and
counsel


 asked
that
her
heirs
be
substituted.

1. The
law
at
the
time
of
the
decedent’s
death
 

will
determine
who
the
heirs
should
be.
 H:
 The
 heirs
 may
 be
 substituted
 to
 the
 deceased
 party


 because
 upon
 the
 latter’s
 death,
 her
 claim/rights
 to
 the

Uson
vs.
Del
Rosario
(1953)
 land
 were
 not
 extinguished
 but
 were
 transmitted
 to
 her


 heirs.

F:
Nebreda
died
in
1945
and
was
survived
by
his
wife
and
 

4
 illegitimate
 children.
 Wife
 brought
 action
 against
 Note:

illegitimate
children
for
the
recovery
of
the
possession
of
 • What
was
transmitted
was
the
right
to
prosecute

land
left
by
husband
on
the
theory
that
she
is
the
sole
heir.
 the
action

Defense:
while
under
the
Old
CC
spurious
children
do
not
 • If
 there
 is
 dispute
 as
 to
 who
 are
 the
 legal
 heirs,

have
 successional
 rights,
 under
 the
 New
 CC
 they
 are
 must
 first
 establish
 the
 right
 to
 succeed
 in
 a

granted
 the
 same
 status
 as
 natural
 children
 thus
 entitled
 separate
 action
 [Heirs
 of
 Yaptinchay
 vs
 Del

to
succeed
from
their
father’s
estate.
 Rosario,
304
SCRA
18]


 

H:
The
right
granted
under
the
New
CC
cannot
be
given
 Republic
vs.
Marcos
(2012)

retroactive
effect.
New
rights
have
retroactive
effect
only
 

when
they
do
not
prejudice
or
impair
vested
or
acquired
 F:
Cases
for
reversion,
reconveyance
and
restitution
of
ill‐
rights
of
the
same
origin.
The
right
of
ownership
of
Wife
 gotten
wealth
were
filed
against
persons
including
heirs
of

over
the
land
became
vested
in
1945
upon
decedent’s
 Marcos
were
sought
to
be
dismissed
against
the
latter‐
death
because
of
Article
657
of
the
Old
Civil
Code
(now
 mentioned
defendants.

777)
which
was
in
effect
at
the
time
he
died.
 


 H:
Despite
the
finding
that
their
involvement
in
the

2. Ownership
passes
to
the
heir
at
the
very
 alleged
illegal
activities
was
not
established,
they
should

moment
of
death
who
therefore,
from
that
 be
maintained
as
defendants
because
the
case
is
an
action

moment,
acquires
the
right
to
dispose
of
his
 that
survives
thus
it
is
imperative
that
the
estate
be

share.
 represented.
As
to
Imelda
and
Bongbong,
they
are
the


 executors
of
FM’s
estate,
and
as
to
Imee
and
Irene,
they

De
Borja
vs.
Vda.
De
Borja
(1972)
 possibly
possess/ed
ill‐gotten
properties.


 

F:
Decedent
died
with
a
will.
Before
probate
of
his
will
and
 Art.
778.
Succession
may
be:


to
 end
 suits
 between
 them,
 D’s
 son
 by
 his
 first
 marriage
 (1)
Testamentary;


and
 2nd
 wife
 entered
 into
 a
 compromise
 agreement
 that
 (2)
Legal
or
intestate;
or


2nd
 wife
 will
 receive
 P800,000
 as
 full
 and
 complete
 (3)
Mixed.
(n)

payment
of
her
hereditary
share.
 


 Art.
 779.
 Testamentary
 succession
 is
 that
 which
 results

H:
Agreement
is
valid.
There
is
no
legal
bar
for
the
heir
to
 from
the
designation
of
an
heir,
made
in
a
will
executed
in

dispose
 of
 her
 share
 immediately
 upon
 death
 of
 the
 the
form
prescribed
by
law.
(n)


decedent
 even
 if
 actual
 extent
 is
 not
 yet
 determined.
 The
 

agreement
 is
 a
 sale
 of
 the
 shares
 and
 not
 a
 settlement
 of
 Art.
780.
Mixed
succession
is
that
effected
partly
by
will

the
estate.
 and
partly
by
operation
of
law.
(n)



Alfonso
vs.
Sps.
Andres
(2010)
 


 Balane:

F:
Jose
inherited
subject
property
from
his
father.
This
 • Some
inaccuracies:

was
assigned
to
him
in
a
Deed
of
Extrajudicial
Settlement.
 o Did
not
mention
compulsory

Jose
sold
it
Sps
Andres.
 o Mixed
is
not
really
a
type
of
succession


 o No
definition
of
Legal/intestate

H:
The
transfer
is
valid
because
title
of
property
of
person
 • Per
Agbayani,
our
Expert
in
Succession,
the
3

who
died
intestate
passes
at
once
to
his
heirs,
subject
to
 Kinds
of
Succession
according
to
importance
are:

the
claims
of
administration
and
payments
of
debts
and
 1. Compulsory

expenses.
 2. Testamentary


 3. Intestate


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 2 of 73

 2. Free
and
intelligent

Art.
781.
The
inheritance
of
a
person
includes
not
only
 3. Solemn
and
formal

the
property
and
the
transmissible
rights
and
obligations
 4. Revocable
and
ambulatory

existing
at
the
time
of
his
death,
but
also
those
which
have
 5. Mortis
causa

accrued
thereto
since
the
opening
of
the
succession.
(n)
 6. Individual

7. Executed
with
animus
testandi


 8. Executed
with
testamentary
capacity

Balane:
 9. Unilateral

• Best
deleted!
Inheritance
does
not
include
 10. Dispositive
of
property

accruals!
 11. Statutory


 

Balus
vs.
Balus
(2010)
 Vitug
vs.
Court
of
Appeals
(1990)


 

F:
 Mortgage
 on
 decedent’s
 land
 was
 foreclosed
 by
 the
 F:
 Husband
 and
 Decedent
 Wife
 executed
 a
 Survivorship

Bank
 and
 there
 being
 to
 redemption,
 title
 was
 Agreement
with
the
Bank
that
after
the
death
of
either
of

consolidated
 to
 the
 Bank.
 D
 died
 and
 2
 of
 his
 3
 children
 them,
 the
 money
 in
 their
 joint
 savings
 account
 would

bought
 land
 from
 the
 Bank.
 3rd
 child
 demanded
 share
 in
 belong
to
the
survivor.

the
property
as
his
inheritance.
 


 H:
The
agreement
is
not
a
mortis
causa
conveyance
which

H:
 Property,
 the
 ownership
 over
 which
 has
 been
 lost
 needs
to
be
in
a
will
but
a
mere
obligation
with
a
term,
the

during
the
lifetime
of
a
decedent,
no
longer
forms
part
of
 term
being
death.

the
 estate
 which
 his
 compulsory
 heirs
 may
 lay
 a
 claim
 

over.
 Take
 note
 of
 the
 definition
 of
 a
 will
 in
 this
 case:
 “a


 personal,
 solemn,
 revocable
 and
 free
 act
 by
 which
 a

Art.
 782.
 An
 heir
 is
 a
 person
 called
 to
 the
 succession
 capacitated
person
disposes
of
his
property
and
rights
and

either
by
the
provision
of
a
will
or
by
operation
of
law.

 declares
 or
 complies
 with
 duties
 to
 take
 effect
 after
 his


 death”
(The
deposit
was
not
property
of
the
decedent
but

Devisees
and
legatees
are
persons
to
whom
gifts
of
real
 was
conjugal
property.)

and
personal
property
are
respectively
given
by
virtue
of
 

a
will.
(n)
 Seangio
vs.
Reyes
(2006)





F:
Holographic
will
contains
only
a
clause
disinheriting
an

Balane:

heir
without
express
disposition
of
property.

• Heir
=
one
who
succeeds
to
the
whole
or
an



aliquot
part
of
the
inheritance

H:
While
it
does
not
make
an
affirmative
disposition
of
the

• Devisee
=
Succeeds
to
definite,
specific,

testator’s
property,
the
disinheritance
of
the
son
is
an
act

individual
REAL
properties

of
 disposition
 of
 the
 property
 of
 the
 testator
 in
 favor
 of

• Legatee
=
Succeeds
to
definite,
specific,

those
 who
 would
 succeed
 in
 the
 absence
 of
 the
 person

individual
PERSONAL
properties

disinherited.

• Distinction
is
important
in
preterition!





II. Testamentary Succession Art.
784.
The
making
of
a
will
is
a
strictly
personal
act;
it

a. Wills cannot
 be
 left
 in
 whole
 or
 in
 part
 of
 the
 discretion
 of
 a

1.1. Wills in General third
person,
or
accomplished
through
the
instrumentality


 of
an
agent
or
attorney.
(670a)


Art.
 783.
 A
 will
 is
 an
 act
 whereby
 a
 person
 is
 permitted,
 

with
 the
 formalities
 prescribed
 by
 law,
 to
 control
 to
 a
 Notes:

certain
degree
the
disposition
of
this
estate,
to
take
effect
 • Purely
personal
character
of
wills

after
his
death.
(667a)

 • What
 is
 non‐delegable
 is
 the
 exercise
 of
 the

disposing
power,
mechanical
acts
not
included.



• In
 this
 article,
 “third
 person”
 should
 read
 as

Balane:

“another
 person”
 because
 who
 is
 the
 “second

Operative
words:

person”?
Jericho
Rosales?!

1. Act
 –
 too
 broad,
 it
 is
 suggested
 that
 it
 be



delimited
 with
 a
 more
 specific
 term
 such
 as

“instrument”
 Art.
 785.
 The
 duration
 or
 efficacy
 of
 the
 designation
 of

2. Permitted
–
purely
statutory
 heirs,
 devisees
 or
 legatees,
 or
 the
 determination
 of
 the

3. Formalities
 prescribed
 by
 law
 –
 depends
 on
 portions
 which
 they
 are
 to
 take,
 when
 referred
 to
 by

whether
attested
or
holographic
 name,
 cannot
 be
 left
 to
 the
 discretion
 of
 a
 third
 person.

4. Control
 to
 a
 certain
 degree
 –
 power
 to
 dispose
 (670a)


gratuitously
is
limited
by
rules
on
legitime
 

5. After
his
death
–
takes
place
mortis
causa
 Notes:

a. Sir
 says
 this
 should
 be
 “at
 the
 moment
 • The
ff
are
non‐delegable:
<DDD>

of/upon
death”
 1. designation
of
heirs,
devisees,
legatees


 2. duration
 or
 efficacy
 of
 such
 designation

11
Characteristics
of
Wills:
<PRIME
FEUDSS>
 (including
conditions,
terms,
substitutions)

1. Purely
personal


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 3 of 73
 3. determination
 of
 portions
 they
 are
 to
 to
 use
 them
 in
 another
 sense
 can
 be
 gathered,
 and
 that

receive
 other
can
be
ascertained.



 

Art.
 786.
 The
 testator
 may
 entrust
 to
 a
 third
 person
 the
 Technical
words
in
a
will
are
to
be
taken
in
their
technical

distribution
of
specific
property
or
sums
of
money
that
he
 sense,
 unless
 the
 context
 clearly
 indicates
 a
 contrary

may
 leave
 in
 general
 to
 specified
 classes
 or
 causes,
 and
 intention,
 or
 unless
 it
 satisfactorily
 appears
 that
 he
 was

also
 the
 designation
 of
 the
 persons,
 institutions
 or
 unacquainted
with
such
technical
sense.
(675a)

establishments
to
which
such
property
or
sums
are
to
be
 

given
or
applied.
(671a)

 Preference
to
testacy


 Art.
 791.
 The
 words
 of
 a
 will
 are
 to
 receive
 an

Notes:
 interpretation
 which
 will
 give
 to
 every
 expression
 some

• Two
things
the
T
must
determine:
 effect,
 rather
 than
 one
 which
 will
 render
 any
 of
 the

1. Property
or
amount
of
money
to
be
given
 expressions
inoperative;
and
of
two
modes
of
interpreting

2. Class
or
cause
to
be
benefitted
 a
will,
that
is
to
be
preferred
which
will
prevent
intestacy.

• Two
things
he
may
delegate:
 (n)

1. Designation
 of
 persons,
 institutions
 or

establishments
within
the
class
or
cause
 

2. Manner
of
distribution
 Invalidity
of
one
of
several
dispositions


 Art.
 792.
 The
 invalidity
 of
 one
 of
 several
 dispositions

Art.
 787.
 The
 testator
 may
 not
 make
 a
 testamentary
 contained
in
a
will
does
not
result
in
the
invalidity
of
the

disposition
 in
 such
 manner
 that
 another
 person
 has
 to
 other
 dispositions,
 unless
 it
 is
 to
 be
 presumed
 that
 the

determine
whether
or
not
it
is
to
be
operative.
(n)
 testator
 would
 not
 have
 made
 such
 other
 dispositions
 if

the
first
invalid
disposition
had
not
been
made.
(n)



Notes:
 

• This
 does
 not
 prejudice
 right
 of
 heirs,
 devisee,
 • severability

legatee
to
accept
or
renounce.
 


 Property
acquired
after
will
was
made

RULES
OF
CONSTRUCTION
AND
INTERPRETATION
 Art.
 793.
 Property
 acquired
 after
 the
 making
 of
 a
 will


 shall
only
pass
thereby,
as
if
the
testator
had
possessed
it

In
case
of
doubt
as
to
different
interpretations
 at
the
time
of
making
the
will,
should
it
expressly
appear

Art.
788.
If
a
testamentary
disposition
admits
of
different
 by
the
will
that
such
was
his
intention.
(n)

interpretations,
 in
 case
 of
 doubt,
 that
 interpretation
 by
 

which
the
disposition
is
to
be
operative
shall
be
preferred.
 Devise/Legacy

(n)

Art.
794.
Every
devise
or
legacy
shall
cover
all
the
interest


 which
 the
 testator
 could
 device
 or
 bequeath
 in
 the

• The
 thing
 may
 rather
 be
 effective
 than
 be
 property
 disposed
 of,
 unless
 it
 clearly
 appears
 from
 the

without
effect
 will
that
he
intended
to
convey
a
less
interest.
(n)






Ambiguity;
Latent
or
Patent

Art.
795.
The
validity
of
a
will
as
to
its
form
depends
upon

Art.
789.
When
there
is
an
imperfect
description,
or
when

the
observance
of
the
law
in
force
at
the
time
it
is
made.

no
 person
 or
 property
 exactly
 answers
 the
 description,

mistakes
 and
 omissions
 must
 be
 corrected,
 if
 the
 error
 

appears
 from
 the
 context
 of
 the
 will
 or
 from
 extrinsic
 Notes:

evidence,
excluding
the
oral
declarations
of
the
testator
as
 • Aspects
of
Validity:

to
his
intention;
and
when
an
uncertainty
arises
upon
the
 o Extrinsic
–
Formal

face
 of
 the
 will,
 as
 to
 the
 application
 of
 any
 of
 its
 o Intrinsic
–
Substantive

provisions,
 the
 testator's
 intention
 is
 to
 be
 ascertained
 

from
 the
 words
 of
 the
 will,
 taking
 into
 consideration
 the
 1.2. Testamentary Capacity and
circumstances
 under
 which
 it
 was
 made,
 excluding
 such
 Intent
oral
declarations.
(n)
 


 Art.
796.
All
persons
who
are
not
expressly
prohibited
by

• Latent
=
not
obvious
on
the
face
of
the
will
 law
may
make
a
will.
(662)


• Patent
=
Obvious
on
the
face
of
the
will
 

• How
 to
 deal
 with
 ambiguities
 whether
 latent
 or
 Art.
 797.
 Persons
 of
 either
 sex
 under
 eighteen
 years
 of

patent:
Clear
up/resolve
in
order
to
give
effect
to
 age
cannot
make
a
will.
(n)


the
 disposition
 by
 any
 evidence
 admissible
 and
 

relevant
 excluding
 in
 either
 case,
 oral
 Art.
 798.
 In
 order
 to
 make
 a
 will
 it
 is
 essential
 that
 the

declarations
of
the
testator
(Dead
Man’s
Statute)
 testator
be
of
sound
mind
at
the
time
of
its
execution.
(n)


 

Words;
Technical
Words
 

Art.
799.
To
be
of
sound
mind,
it
is
not
necessary
that
the

Art.
 790.
 The
 words
 of
 a
 will
 are
 to
 be
 taken
 in
 their

testator
be
in
full
possession
of
all
his
reasoning
faculties,

ordinary
 and
 grammatical
 sense,
 unless
 a
 clear
 intention

or
 that
 his
 mind
 be
 wholly
 unbroken,
 unimpaired,
 or


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 4 of 73
unshattered
by
disease,
injury
or
other
cause.

 Abangan
vs.
Abangan
(1919)


 

It
shall
be
sufficient
if
the
testator
was
able
at
the
time
of
 F:
Records
do
not
show
that
the
will,
executed
in
Cebu
and

making
 the
 will
 to
 know
 the
 nature
 of
 the
 estate
 to
 be
 written
in
the
dialect
of
that
locality
where
the
testatrix
is

disposed
 of,
 the
 proper
 objects
 of
 his
 bounty,
 and
 the
 neighbor,
was
in
a
language
known
to
the
testatrix.

character
of
the
testamentary
act.
(n)

 


 H:
 Compliance
 with
 the
 language
 requirement
 is

Art.
800.
The
law
presumes
that
every
person
is
of
sound
 presumed
 if
 (but
 Sir
 says
 “proved
 by”):
 (1)
 the
 will
 is
 in

mind,
in
the
absence
of
proof
to
the
contrary.

 the
 language/dialect
 generally
 spoken
 in
 the
 place
 of


 execution
 and
 (2)
 the
 testator
 is
 a
 native
 or
 resident
 of

The
 burden
 of
 proof
 that
 the
 testator
 was
 not
 of
 sound
 said
locality.

mind
 at
 the
 time
 of
 making
 his
 dispositions
 is
 on
 the
 

person
 who
 opposes
 the
 probate
 of
 the
 will;
 but
 if
 the
 Art.
 805.
 Every
 will,
 other
 than
 a
 holographic
 will,
 must

testator,
 one
 month,
 or
 less,
 before
 making
 his
 will
 was
 be
subscribed
at
the
end
thereof
by
the
testator
himself
or

publicly
 known
 to
 be
 insane,
 the
 person
 who
 maintains
 by
 the
 testator's
 name
 written
 by
 some
 other
 person
 in

the
validity
of
the
will
must
prove
that
the
testator
made
it
 his
 presence,
 and
 by
 his
 express
 direction,
 and
 attested

during
a
lucid
interval.
(n)
 and
subscribed
by
three
or
more
credible
witnesses
in
the


 presence
of
the
testator
and
of
one
another.


Art.
 801.
 Supervening
 incapacity
 does
 not
 invalidate
 an
 

effective
 will,
 nor
 is
 the
 will
 of
 an
 incapable
 validated
 by
 The
testator
or
the
person
requested
by
him
to
write
his

the
supervening
of
capacity.
(n)
 name
and
the
instrumental
witnesses
of
the
will,
shall
also


 sign,
as
aforesaid,
each
and
every
page
thereof,
except
the

Ortega
vs.
Valmonte
(2005)
 last,
 on
 the
 left
 margin,
 and
 all
 the
 pages
 shall
 be


 numbered
correlatively
in
letters
placed
on
the
upper
part

F:
81
year
old
testator’s
will
was
opposed
on
the
ground
 of
each
page.


that
he
was
not
of
sound
mind.
 


 The
attestation
shall
state
the
number
of
pages
used
upon

H:

Mere
old
age
does
not
mean
that
a
person
is
not
of
 which
 the
 will
 is
 written,
 and
 the
 fact
 that
 the
 testator

sound
mind.
To
be
of
sound
mind,
at
the
time
of
making
 signed
 the
 will
 and
 every
 page
 thereof,
 or
 caused
 some

the
will,
the
testator
need
only
know
(1)
the
nature
of
the
 other
 person
 to
 write
 his
 name,
 under
 his
 express

estate
to
be
disposed
of,
(2)
the
proper
objects
of
his
 direction,
 in
 the
 presence
 of
 the
 instrumental
 witnesses,

bounty,
and
(3)
the
character
of
the
testamentary
act.
 and
 that
 the
 latter
 witnessed
 and
 signed
 the
 will
 and
 all


 the
 pages
 thereof
 in
 the
 presence
 of
 the
 testator
 and
 of

Baltazar
vs.
Laxa
(2012)
 one
another.



 

F:
 78‐year‐old
 spinster’s
 will
 was
 being
 assailed
 because
 If
the
attestation
clause
is
in
a
language
not
known
to
the

she
 was
 allegedly
 not
 of
 sound
 mind
 when
 it
 was
 made
 witnesses,
it
shall
be
interpreted
to
them.
(n)



(because
she
was
“forgetful”)
 


 Art.
 806.
 Every
 will
 must
 be
 acknowledged
 before
 a

H:
 Soundness
 of
 mind
 is
 presumed.
 Forgetfulness
 is
 not
 notary
 public
 by
 the
 testator
 and
 the
 witnesses.
 The

equivalent
to
unsoundness
of
mind.
 notary
public
shall
not
be
required
to
retain
a
copy
of
the


 will,
 or
 file
 another
 with
 the
 Office
 of
 the
 Clerk
 of
 Court.

(n)


Art.
802.
A
married
woman
may
make
a
will
without
the

consent
of
her
husband,
and
without
the
authority
of
the
 

court.
(n)

 (1)
subscribed
by
the
T
or
his
agent
in
his
presence


 and
by
his
express
direction
at
the
end
thereof,
in
the

Art.
803.
A
married
woman
may
dispose
by
will
of
all
her
 presence
of
the
witnesses

separate
 property
 as
 well
 as
 her
 share
 of
 the
 conjugal
 

partnership
or
absolute
community
property.
(n)
 • signature




 Payad
vs.
Tolentino
(1936)

1.3. Forms of Wills 


 F:
 Testatrix
 thumb
 marked
 end
 and
 each
 and
 every
 page

Art.
804.
Every
will
must
be
in
writing
and
executed
in
a
 of
the
will
then
her
lawyer
wrote
her
name
to
indicate
the

language
or
dialect
known
to
the
testator.
(n)

 places
where
her
thumb
marks
were.





H:

Will
is
valid.
A
statute
requiring
a
will
to
be
“signed”
is

Suroza
vs.
Honrado
(1981)

satisfied
if
the
signature
is
made
by
the
testator’s
mark.





F:
 Will
 of
 illiterate
 testatrix
 was
 written
 in
 English,
 a

Matias
vs.
Salud
(1958)

language
she
did
not
understand.





F:
The
testatrix
placed
her
thumb
mark
in
lieu
of
her
usual

H:
Will
is
void
because
of
the
mandatory
provision
of
Art

signature
 on
 the
 will.
 Beside
 the
 thumb
 mark
 was
 the

804
 that
 every
 will
 must
 be
 executed
 in
 a
 language
 or

name
of
the
testatrix
as
purportedly
written
by
one
of
the

dialect
known
to
the
testator.

witnesses.
 The
 attestation
 clause,
 however,
 does
 not




SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 5 of 73
indicate
 that
 the
 person
 who
 wrote
 the
 name
 of
 the
 of
each
signature
must
be
such
that
they
may
see

testatrix
thereon
was
directed
by
the
latter
to
do
so.
 each
other
sign
if
they
choose
to
do
so.


 By
merely
casting
the
eyes
in
the
proper
direction
they

H:
A
thumb
mark
is
considered
a
signature.
It
is
therefore
 could
have
seen
each
other
sign

unnecessary
 to
 indicate
 in
 the
 attestation
 clause
 that
 

another
person
has
been
directed
by
the
testator
to
write
 (2)
attested
and
subscribed
by
at
least
3
witnesses
in

his
 (testator’s)
 name
 thereon,
 because
 in
 effect,
 the
 the
presence
of
the
T
and
of
one
another

testator
signed
the
will
himself.
 • Attesting:
act
of
witnessing


 • Subscribing:
act
of
signing

Garcia
vs.
Lacuesta
(1951)
 


 Q:
Must
W
sign
at
the
end
of
the
will?

F:
 Lawyer
 wrote
 the
 name
 of
 the
 testator
 followed
 by
 “a
 A:
Literally
and
ideally,
the
Ws
should
sign

ruego
 del
 testador”
 then
 the
 lawyer’s
 name
 on
 the
 at
the
end
of
the
will,
though
failure
in
this

testator’s
 will.
 Beside
 his
 name,
 the
 testator
 wrote
 an
 X.
 regard
may
be
overlooked
(Taboada
vs

Attestation
 clause
 did
 not
 state
 that
 the
 lawyer
 was
 Rosal
[1982])

expressly
directed
to
write
testator’s
name.
 


 (3)
the
T
or
his
agent
must
sign
every
page,
except
the

H:
Void
for
attestation
clause’s
failure
to
state
that
lawyer
 last,
on
the
left
margin
in
the
presence
of
the

wrote
T’s
name
under
his
express
direction.

The
cross
 witnesses

cannot
be
taken
as
a
signature
because
it
is
not
the
usual
 • Mandatory
–
signing
on
every
page
in
the

way
by
which
the
deceased
signed
his
name,
nor
is
it
one
 witnesses’
presence

of
the
usual
ways
by
which
he
signed.
A
cross
does
not
 • Directory
–
place
of
the
signature

have
the
trustworthiness
of
a
thumb
mark.
 


 Icasiano
vs.
Icasiano
(1964)

• Signing
by
an
agent
of
T
 

o Must
sign
in
T’s
presence
 F:
 Original
 of
 the
 will
 did
 not
 contain
 signature
 of
 one
 of

o By
his
express
direction
 the
witnesses
but
duplicate
copy
does.


 

Barut
vs
Cabacungan
(1912)
 H:
Inadvertent
failure
of
one
witness
to
affix
his
signature


 to
one
page,
due
to
simultaneous
lifting
of
pages,
is
not
per

F:
The
agent
(who
was
also
a
witness)
signed
the
name
of
 se
 sufficient
 denial
 of
 probate.
 Impossibility
 of

the
 testator
 in
 the
 latter's
 presence
 and
 by
 his
 express
 substitution
 of
 page
 is
 assured
 by
 the
 signature
 of
 the

direction.
 Probate
 was
 opposed
 on
 the
 ground
 that
 the
 testatrix
 and
 the
 two
 other
 witnesses,
 and
 the
 imprint
 of

handwriting
 of
 the
 person
 who
 signed
 the
 name
 of
 the
 the
seal
of
the
notary
public.

testator
was
of
another
witness.
 


 (4)
the
witnesses
must
sign
every
page,
except
the

H:
Valid.
It
is
not
essential
that
the
person
signing
for
the
 last,
on
the
left
margin
in
the
presence
of
the
T
and
of

testator
also
sign
his
name.
The
law
only
requires:
 one
another

1.
name
was
written
at
T’s
express
direction;
 

2.
in
T’s
presence;
and
 Lee
vs.
Tambago
(2008)

3.
in
the
presence
of
all
witnesses.
 


 F:
Will
was
attested
by
only
2
witnesses.

• Signing
at
the
end
 

‐ If
there
are
non‐dispositive
portions,
there
are
2
 H:
Void!

ends:
 

o Physical
end:
where
the
writing
stops
 (5)
all
numbers
must
be
numbered
correlatively
in

o Logical
end:
where
the
testamentary
 letters
on
the
upper
part
of
each
page

disposition
ends
 • Mandatory
–
pagination
by
means
of
a

‐ T
may
sign
at
either
end
as
the
non‐dispositive
 conventional
system

portions
are
not
essential
parts
of
the
will.
 • Directory
–
pagination
in
letters
on
the
upper

‐ If
T
signs
before
the
end,
the
ENTIRE
will
is
 part
of
each
page

invalid!
 


 (6)
attestation
clause

• Signing
in
the
presence
of
witnesses
 • Stating
the
number
of
pages
of
the
will;


 • The
fact
that
the
T/his
agent
signed
the
will
and

Nera
vs.
Rimando
(1911)
 every
page
thereof
in
the
presence
of
the
Ws


 • The
fact
that
the
W
witnessed
and
signed
the
will

Doctrine:
 Test
 of
 presence
 –
 not
 whether
 they
 actually
 and
every
page
thereof
in
the
presence
of
the
T

saw
 each
 other
 sign
 but
 whether
 they
 might
 have
 seen
 and
of
one
another

each
other
sign
had
they
chosen
to
do
so,
considering
their
 ‐ The
attestation
clause
is
the
affair
of
the

mental
 and
 physical
 condition
 and
 position
 with
 relation
 witnesses,
therefore,
it
need
not
be
signed
by
the

to
 each
 other
 at
 the
 moment
 of
 inscription
 of
 each
 T

signature.
 

• Such
that
the
position
of
the
parties
with
relation
 Cagro
vs.
Cagro
(1953)

to
each
other
at
the
moment
of
the
subscription
 


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 6 of 73
F:
The
signatures
of
the
instrumental
witnesses
were
not
 he
notarized
the
document,
he
lacked
the
authority
to
take

at
the
bottom
of
the
attestation
clause
but
on
the
left‐hand
 the
acknowledgment
of
the
testatrix
and
the
witnesses.

margin
of
the
page
containing
the
AC.
 


 Ortega
vs.
Valmonte
(2005)

H:
Fatally
defective.
Signatures
at
the
left‐hand
side
were
 

in
compliance
with
the
mandate
that
the
will
be
signed
on
 F:
 Valmonte’s
 will
 is
 being
 contested
 because
 the
 date
 of

the
left‐hand
margin
of
all
its
pages
 execution
and
the
date
of
acknowledgment
are
different.


 

Azuela
vs.
CA
(2006)
 H:
Will
is
valid.
Conflict
between
the
dates
does
not


 invalidate
the
will
because
the
law
does
even
require
that

F:
Witnesses
did
not
sign
at
the
bottom
of
the
attestation
 a
notarial
will
be
executed
and
acknowledged
on
the
same

clause
 but
 they
 signed
 the
 left‐hand
 margin
 of
 the
 page
 occassion.
 

where
the
AC
is
found.
 


 Q:
Must
an
attested
will
be
dated?

H:
Will
void.
Signatures
on
the
left‐hand
margin
comply
 A:
 No.
 Consequently,
 variance
 between
 the

with
the
requirement
that
witnesses
sign
each
page
of
the
 indicated
dates
does
not
in
itself
invalidate
a

will.
The
signatures
to
the
attestation
clause
establish
that
 will
(Ortega
vs.
Valmonte
[2005])

the
witnesses
are
referring
to
the
statements
contained
in
 

the
attestation
clause
itself.
The
attestation
clause
is
 

separate
and
apart
from
the
disposition
of
the
will.
An
 Art.
 807.
 If
 the
 testator
 be
 deaf,
 or
 a
 deaf‐mute,
 he
 must

unsigned
attestation
clause
results
in
an
unattested
will.
 personally
 read
 the
 will,
 if
 able
 to
 do
 so;
 otherwise,
 he


 shall
designate
two
persons
to
read
it
and
communicate
to

(7)
acknowledgement
before
a
notary
public
 him,
in
some
practicable
manner,
the
contents
thereof.
(n)


 

Javellana
vs.
Ledesma
(1955)
 


 Art.
 808.
 If
 the
 testator
 is
 blind,
 the
 will
 shall
 be
 read
 to

F:
 The
 notary
 public
 signed
 the
 certificate
 of
 him
twice;
once,
by
one
of
the
subscribing
witnesses,
and

acknowledgement
in
his
office
and
not
in
the
presence
of
T
 again,
 by
 the
 notary
 public
 before
 whom
 the
 will
 is

and
witnesses.
 acknowledged.
(n)




H:
VALID.
The
Civil
Code,
while
requiring
that
a
will
must
 

be
signed
by
the
T
and
the
witnesses
in
the
presence
of
 • Arts
807
and
808
are
mandatory

each
other,
does
not
require
that
the
acknowledgement
by
 

the
notary
happen
in
the
presence
of
the
parties.
 Garcia
vs.
Vasquez
(1970)


 

Obiter:
It
is
not
required
that
the
T
and
the
Ws
 F:
The
will
and
the
AC
were
crammed
together
on
a
single

acknowledge
on
the
same
day
it
was
executed.
 page
 and
 had
 typographical
 errors.
 It
 was
 alleged
 by

Logical
inference:
Neither
does
Art
806
require
that
T
and
 proponents
that
T
read
the
will
silently
before
she
signed

Ws
acknowledge
in
each
other’s
presence.
 it
BUT
there
was
evidence
that
T’s
vision
was
for
counting


 fingers
at
5
ft
and
for
distant
objects
only.

Cruz
vs.
Villasor
(1973)
 


 H:
VOID.
T
could
not
have
read
the
will
silently
as
she
was

F:
There
were
only
three
witnesses
to
the
will
and
it
was
 not
 unlike
 a
 blind
 testator
 and
 execution
 of
 the
 will

acknowledged
before
a
notary
public
who
was
one
of
the
 requires
observance
of
Art.
808.

witnesses.
 


 Alvarado
vs.
Gaviola,
Jr
(1993)

H:
VOID
for
failing
to
meet
the
3‐witness
requirement.
The
 

notary
 public
 cannot
 acknowledge
 before
 himself
 his
 F:
 Testator
 had
 glaucoma.
 When
 the
 will
 was
 executed,

having
signed
the
will.
 each
witness
and
the
notary
were
given
their
own
copies


 of
the
will.
It
was
read
aloud
by
the
lawyer
to
the
testator.

Balane
 asks:
 If
 one
 of
 the
 witnesses
 is
 a
 duly
 The
court
held
there
was
substantial
compliance.

commissioned
notary
public
and
he
notarizes
the
 

will,
the
will
is
void.
TRUE
OR
FALSE?
 H:
 T
 was
 blind
 for
 purposes
 of
 Art
 808
 but
 there
 was

A:
FALSE
(If
there
are
more
than
3
witnesses,
the
 substantial
compliance
in
this
case.
The
purpose
of
the
law

will
meets
the
3‐witness
requirement
hence
still
 was
satisfied
(to
make
known
to
the
T
the
contents
of
the

valid)
 will
and
confirm
his
desires)


 

Guerrero
vs.
Bihis
(2007)
 Art.
809.
In
the
absence
of
bad
faith,
forgery,
or
fraud,
or


 undue
 and
 improper
 pressure
 and
 influence,
 defects
 and

F:
 Notary
 public
 who
 acknowledged
 the
 will
 was
 acting
 imperfections
in
the
form
of
attestation
or
in
the
language

outside
the
place
of
his
commission.
 used
therein
shall
not
render
the
will
invalid
if
it
is
proved


 that
 the
 will
 was
 in
 fact
 executed
 and
 attested
 in

H:
VOID.
No
notary
shall
possess
authority
to
do
any
 substantial
 compliance
 with
 all
 the
 requirements
 of

notarial
act
beyond
the
limits
of
his
jurisdiction.
Since
 Article
805.
(n)

Atty.
in
this
case
was
not
commissioned
in
the
place
where



Note:


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 7 of 73
 • This
 is
 criticized
 as
 “liberalization
 running
 riot”.
 XPN:
Substantial
compliance
is
considered
valid
if
there
is

JBL’s
suggested
rewording:
 no
appearance
of
fraud,
BF,
undue
influence
and
pressure

“In
 the
 absence
 of
 bad
 faith,
 forgery,
 or
 fraud,
 or
 undue
 and
the
authenticity
of
the
will
is
established.

and
 improper
 pressure
 and
 influence,
 defects
 and
 

imperfections
 in
 the
 form
 of
 the
 attestation
 or
 in
 the
 Labrador
vs.
Court
of
Appeals
(1990)

language
 used
 therein
 shall
 not
 render
 the
 will
 invalid
 if
 

such
 defects
 and
 imperfections
 can
 be
 supplied
 by
 an
 F:
 Date
 was
 stated
 in
 the
 first
 paragraph
 of
 the
 second

examination
of
the
will
itself
and
it
is
proved
that
the
will
 page
of
the
will.

was
 in
 fact
 executed
 and
 attested
 in
 substantial
 

compliance
with
all
the
requirements
of
Article
805.”
 H:
 VALID.
 The
 law
 does
 not
 specify
 a
 particular
 location


 where
the
date
should
be
placed
in
a
will.

Caneda
vs.
Court
of
Appeals
(1993)
 


 (3)
Signed
by
the
T

F:
The
attestation
clause
failed

to
specifically
state
the
fact
 

that
 the
 attesting
 witnesses
 and
 the
 testator
 signed
 
 the
 SUMMARY:
FORMAL
REQUIREMENTS
OF
WILLS

will
 and
 all
 its
 pages
 in
 their
 presence
 and
 that
 they,
 the
 Testamentary
Capacity

witnesses,
likewise
signed
the
will
and
every
page
thereof
 1. There
is
a
general
grant
of
testamentary
capacity

in
the
presence
of
the
testator
and
of
each
other.
 to
natural
persons


 2. Exceptions:

H:
 AC
 not
 valid.
 Art
 809
 does
 not
 apply.
 It
 cannot
 be
 a. Under
18

conclusively
 inferred
 from
 the
 signatures
 that
 they
 were
 b. Unsound
mind

made
 in
 the
 presence
 of
 each
 other.
 Furthermore,
 the
 • A
legal
question,
not
medical

defects
were
not
in
the
“form...or
language.”
 • Soundness
of
mind
was
defined

Rule:
Omissions
which
can
be
supplied
by
an
examination
 Negatively

of
the
will
itself,
without
the
need
of
resorting
to
extrinsic
 ‐ Not
necessary
that
testator
be
in
full
possession

evidence,
 will
 not
 be
 fatal...However,
 those
 omissions
 of
reasoning
faculties

which
 cannot
 be
 supplied
 except
 by
 evidence
 aliunde
 ‐ Not
 necessary
 that
 testator’s
 mind
 be
 wholly

would
 result
 in
 the
 invalidation
 of
 the
 attestation
 clause
 unbroken,
 unimpaired,
 or
 unshattered
 by

and
ultimately,
of
the
will
itself.
 disease,
injury
or
other
cause


 Positively

Azuela
vs.
Court
of
Appeals
(2006)
 Ability
to
know:


 ‐ Nature
of
estate
to
be
disposed
of

F:
Attestation
clause
failed
to
state
the
number
of
pages.
 ‐ Proper
objects
of
one’s
bounty


 ‐ Character
of
testamentary
act

H:
 VOID.
 Art
 809
 was
 not
 applied
 because
 there
 was
 no
 3. There
 is
 a
 presumption
 of
 soundness
 of
 mind,

indication
in
any
part
of
the
will
that
it
was
composed
of
 but
a
presumption
of
insanity
exists
when:

such
a
number
of
pages.
 (1)
 one
 month
 or
 less
 before
 making
 his
 will,
 T


 was
publicly
known
to
be
insane

Lopez
vs.
Lopez
(2012)
 (2)
 executed
 after
 being
 placed
 under


 guardianship
 or
 ordered
 committed
 because
 of

F:
 The
 will
 stated
 that
 it
 contained
 7
 pages
 but
 the
 insanity
and
before
said
order
was
lifted

acknowledgement
 stated
 that
 there
 were
 8.
 AC
 did
 not
 

state
the
number
of
pages.
 Common
Requirements
(Attested
and
Holographic)


 1.
in
writing

H:
 Art
 809
 does
 not
 apply.
 The
 discrepancy
 cannot
 be
 2.
language
and
dialect
known
to
the
testator

explained
 by
 mere
 examination
 of
 the
 will
 itself
 but
 • There
 is
 no
 presumption
 that
 language
 is

through
the
presentation
of
evidence
aliunde.
 known
to
the
T


 • BUT
 the
 will
 need
 not
 state
 that
 it
 is
 a

Art.
810.
A
person
may
execute
a
holographic
will
which
 language
 known
 to
 the
 T.
 It
 may
 be
 proven

must
be
entirely
written,
dated,
and
signed
by
the
hand
of
 by
extrinsic
evidence

the
 testator
 himself.
 It
 is
 subject
 to
 no
 other
 form,
 and
 

may
be
made
in
or
out
of
the
Philippines,
and
need
not
be
 Special
Requirements;
Attested
Wills

witnessed.
(678,
688a)

 1.
That
the
testator
sign

‐
in
the
presence
of
the
witnesses


 • Remember
the
test
of
presence!

(1)
Entirely
written
by
the
hand
of
the
T
 ‐
at
the
end

(2)
Dated
by
the
T
 ­
 on
 each
 and
 every
 page,
 except
 the
 last,
 on
 the
 left­

 hand
margin


Roxas
vs.
De
Jesus
(1985)
 ‐
if
signing
through
an
agent


 • In
the
T’s
presence

F:
The
holographic
will
was
dated
FEB./61
 • Under
his
express
direction


 • Write
 in
 his
 own
 hand
 the
 T’s
 name
 in
 the

H:
 VALID.
 GR:
 Date
 in
 a
 holographic
 will
 should
 include
 proper
places

the
day,
month
and
year
of
its
execution
as
this
is
relevant
 • There
 is
 no
 need
 to
 sign
 the
 agent’s
 name

to
provide
for
contingencies
of
ascertaining
soundness
of
 (Barut)

mind,
or
when
there
are
two
competing
wills.


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 8 of 73
 • It
is
disputed
whether
the
agent
may
be
one
 handwriting
and
signature
of
the
testator
explicitly

of
the
3
witnesses
 declare
that
the
will
and
the
signature
are
in
the


 handwriting
of
the
testator.
If
the
will
is
contested,
at

2.
 Attested
 and
 subscribed
 by
 3
 or
 more
 credible
 least
three
of
such
witnesses
shall
be
required.

witnesses
 

‐
 on
 each
 and
 every
 page,
 except
 the
 last,
 on
 the
 left­ In
the
absence
of
any
competent
witness
referred
to
in

hand
margin
 the
preceding
paragraph,
and
if
the
court
deem
it

­
in
the
T’s
presence
and
in
the
presence
of
each
other
 necessary,
expert
testimony
may
be
resorted
to.



 

3.
All
pages
must
be
numbered
correlatively
in
letters
 Notes:

on
the
upper
part
of
each
page
 ‐ this
article
prescribes
the
statutory
requisites
for


 the
probate
of
a
holographic
will;
testimonial

4.
Attestation
clause
 evidence
(rule
of
evidence)

‐
 stating
 the
 number
 of
 pages
 upon
 which
 the
 will
 is
 ‐ jurisprudential
requirement
(in
addition
to
the

written
 statutory
requirements):

­
the
fact
that
the
T
signed
the
will
and
each
and
every
 o the
will
itself
must
be
presented
(Gan

page
thereof
(or
caused
an
agent
to
write
his
name,
in
 v.
Yap
[1958],
infra)

his
 presence
 and
 under
 his
 express
 direction)in
 the
  the
will
itself
is
the
only

presence
of
the
witnesses
 material
proof
(Scaevola)

­
that
the
witnesses
witnessed
and
signed
the
will
and
 

the
pages
thereof
in
the
presence
of
T
and
of
each
other
 Art.
811
applies
only
to
post
mortem
(not
ante


 mortem)
probates

5.
Acknowledged
before
a
notary
public
 


 How
to
prove
genuineness
of
a
handwriting
(Sec.
22,

Special
 Requirements;
 Attested
 Wills;
 Handicapped
 Rule
132,
Rules
of
Court)

Testators
 ‐ a
witness
who
actually
saw
the
person
writing

1. Deaf/deaf‐mute
 the
instrument

• If
able
to
read
–
must
read
personally
 ‐ a
witness
familiar
with
such
handwriting
and

• If
unable
to
read
–
designate
2
persons
to:
 who
can
give
his
opinion
thereon,
such
opinion

(1) Read
it
 being
an
exception
to
the
opinion
rule

(2) Communicate
to
him
the
contents
 ‐ a
comparison
by
the
court
of
the
questioned

‐
 in
 some
 practicable
 manner
 (sign
 handwriting
and
admitted
genuine
specimen

language,
lip
reading,
pictures,
etc)
 thereof;
and

2. Blind,
Illiterate,
Unable
to
read
 ‐ expert
evidence

• The
will
shall
be
read
to
him
twice
 

(1) One
of
the
subscribing
witnesses
 The
three­witness
provision
in
case
of
contested

(2) Notary
 public
 before
 whom
 the
 will
 is
 holographic
wills
is
directory,
not
mandatory

acknowledged
 


 Azaola
v.
Singson
(1960)

The
burden
of
proof
is
upon
the
proponent
of
the
will
 

that
 the
 special
 requirement
 of
 the
 article
 was
 Facts:
In
probate
of
testatrix’s
holographic
will,
only
one

complied
with.
 witness
was
presented
by
proponent.
Opposition:
that
the

There
 is
 also
 no
 requirement
 that
 compliance
 be
 will
was
procured
by
undue
and
improper
influence;
that

stated
in
the
attestation
clause.
 testatrix
did
not
intend
the
instrument
to
be
her
last
will.


 

Special
Requirements;
Holographic
wills
 Held:
That
since
the
authenticity
of
the
holographic
will

1.
Entirely
written
 was
not
contested,
production
of
more
than
one
witness


 not
required.
That
even
if
the
will
was
contested,
ART.

Balane
asks:
What
if
the
will
was
partly
written?
 811
does
not
require
presentation
of
three
witnesses
to

A:
 If
 with
 knowledge/consent
 of
 T,
 VOID
 AS
 A
 identify
handwriting
of
testator
since
no
witness
may
have

WHOLE;
 been
present
at
execution.

If
 without,
 the
 part
 written
 by
 another
 is
 void
 

(the
 validity
 of
 a
 will
 cannot
 be
 placed
 in
 the
 Balane
Notes:

hands
of
another;
it
may
be
sabotaged)
 ‐ to
“contest”
means
to
attack
the
authenticity
of


 the
will
(i.e.
that
the
will
is
forged)

2.
Dated
 ‐ the
Latin
maxim
testis
unus,
testis
nullus
(one

• Test
 is
 if
 designated
 date
 can
 be
 witness
is
not
witness)
is
too
archaic
a
rule

independently
checked
and
ascertained
 (quoting
J.B.L.
Reyes)

• Examples:
 Christmas
 Day
 2012,
 71st
 o quality
of
testimony
over
number
of

anniversary
 of
 Pearl
 Harbor,
 At
 the
 witnesses

beginning
of
Ramadan
2013
 


 Codoy
v.
Calugay
(1999)

3.
Signed
 


 Facts:
Holographic
will
of
the
testatrix
presented
for

ART.
811.
In
the
probate
of
a
holographic
will,
it
shall
 probate.
Proponents
presented
six
witnesses.
Opposition:

be
necessary
that
at
least
one
witness
who
knows
the


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 9 of 73
that
the
will
was
forged
and
that
the
same
is
illegible.
 made
with
the
standard
writings
of
the
testator.
That
this

Probate
allowed,
lower
court
citing
Azaola
v.
Singson.
 exception
to
the
general
rule
was
stated
in
a
footnote
in


 Gan
v,
Yap
(1958).

Held:
That
the
provisions
of
Article
811
are
mandatory
 

because
of
the
word
“shall.”
That
not
all
of
the
witnesses
 ART.
812.
In
holographic
wills,
the
dispositions
of
the

presented
by
the
proponents
were
familiar
with
the
 testator
written
below
his
signature
must
be
dated
and

testatrix’s
handwriting.
That
a
visual
examination
of
the
 signed
by
him
in
order
to
make
them
valid
as

will
reveals
that
the
strokes
are
different
compared
with
 testamentary
dispositions.

other
documents
written
by
the
testatrix.
That
case
must
 

be
remanded
to
allow
contestants
to
adduce
evidence
in
 ART.
813.
When
a
number
of
dispositions
appearing
in

support
of
their
opposition.
 a
holographic
will
are
signed
without
being
dated,
and


 the
last
disposition
has
a
signature
and
date,
such
date

Balane
Asks:
Did
Codoy
reverse
Azaola?

 validates
the
dispositions
preceding
it,
whatever
be
the


 time
of
prior
dispositions.

Balane
Thinks:
No,
for
the
following
reasons:
 

‐ Codoy
ruling
not
based
on
there
being
less
than
 Formal
requirement
for
additional
dispositions
in
a

three
witnesses
(there
were
in
fact
six)
 holographic
will

‐ Codoy
ruling
did
not
state
that
since
there
were
 ‐ signature,
and

less
than
three
witnesses,
even
if
their
 ‐ date

testimonies
were
convincing,
probate
must
be
 

denied
(testimonies
were
indecisive)
 When
there
are
several
additional
dispositions

‐ Codoy
ruling
said
that
visual
examination
of
the
 ‐ signature
and
date,
or

will
reveals
that
strokes
are
different
compared
 ‐ each
additional
disposition
signed
and
undated,

with
standard
documents
 but
the
last
disposition
signed
and
dated

‐ basis
of
Codoy
ruling:
evidence
for
authenticity,
 

inadequate,
not
failure
on
the
part
of
proponents
 If
(in
case
of
several
additional
dispositions)
the

to
present
three
witnesses
 additional
ones
before
the
last
are
dated
but
not


 signed—

Balane
Notes:
 ‐ only
the
last
will
be
valid,
provided
the
last
is

‐ Codoy
is
consistent
with
Azaola
(quality
of
 signed
and
dated

testimony
over
quantity
of
witnesses)
 

‐ Codoy,
rather
than
reversing
Azaola,
may
have
 If
there
are
several
additional
dispositions
and
the

affirmed
it
 additional
ones
before
the
last
are
neither
signed
nor

‐ the
statement
of
the
Court
in
Codoy
to
the
effect
 dated,
but
the
last
is
both
signed
and
dated—

that
the
use
of
the
word
“shall”
in
Article
811
 ‐ intermediate
dispositions:

denotes
that
it
is
mandatory,
is
too
shallow

 o VALID
if
all
dispositions
made
on
one


 occasion
(signature
and
date
under
last

In
the
probate
of
a
holographic
will,
the
document
 additional
disposition
validate
all)

itself
must
be
produced;
a
lost
holographic
will
cannot
 o INVALID
or
VOID
if
dispositions
made

be
probated
 on
different
occasions


 

Gan
v.
Yap
(1958)
 ART.
814.
In
case
of
any
insertion,
cancellation,
erasure


 or
alteration
in
a
holographic
will,
the
testator
must

Facts:
Petition
for
probate
of
testatrix’s
will.
Opposition:
 authenticate
the
same
by
his
full
signature.

that
testatrix
left
no
will.
Proponent
did
not
present
will
 

and
instead
tried
to
establish
contents
and
due
execution
 “Full
signature,”
meaning

thru
testimonies.
 ‐ not
necessarily
full
name
of
testator


 ‐ it
means
his
usual
and
customary
(habitual)

Held:
That
holographic
will
must
be
presented
to
court
for
 signature

probate,
the
document
itself
being
material
proof
of
 

authenticity.
That
if
holographic
will
not
presented,
 Effect
of
noncompliance
with
article

opportunity
to
oppose
and
assess
the
handwriting
of
the
 ‐ change
(insertion,
cancellation,
etc.)
is
simply

testator,
foreclosed.
That
lost
or
destroyed
holographic
 considered
as
not
made

will
may
be
proved
by
a
photographic
or
photostatic
copy
 ‐ will
is
not
invalidated
as
a
whole,
but
at
most,

or
by
other
similar
means.
 only
as
regards
the
particular
words
erased,


 corrected,
or
inserted
(Kalaw
v.
Relova
[1984])

Exception
to
the
Gan
ruling:
 o unless
the
portion
involved
is
an


 essential
part
of
the
will,
such
as
the

Rodelas
v.
Aranza
(1982)
 date


 

Facts:
A
photostatic
copy
of
testator’s
holographic
will
 Illustration—

was
presented
for
probate.
Opposition:
that
the
original
 

must
be
presented.
 Kalaw
v.
Relova
(1984)


 

Held:
That
a
photostatic
copy
or
photocopy
of
the
 Facts:
Proponent
Gregorio
filed
a
petition
for
probate
of

holographic
will,
allowed
because
comparison
can
be
 testatrix’s
will.
Opposition
by
Rosa:
that
she
was
named
as


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 10 of 73
sole
heir
and
sole
executrix.
There
were
two
alterations:
 

first,
Rosa’s
name
crossed
out
as
sole
heir
and
Gregorio’s
 Illustration

name
written
above
it
(no
initial);
second,
Rosa’s
name
 ‐ An
engineer
(German
citizen),
with
permanent

crossed
out
as
sole
executrix
and
Gregorio’s
name
written
 residence
in
Paris
(where
he
and
his
wife
reside),

above
it
(with
initial).
 was
contracted
by
the
Brazilian
government
to


 construct
a
dam
in
Brasilia.
He
resided
in
Brazil

Held:
That
ordinarily,
erasures
without
proper
signature
 for
five
years.
One
summer
on
a
holiday,
he
goes

do
not
invalidate
the
will
as
a
whole,
but
at
most
only
as
 to
Tokyo
for
a
tour.
He
also
has
investments
in

respects
the
particular
words
erased.
That
that
general
 the
Philippines.
The
German
engineer,
while
in

rule
does
not
apply
in
this
case
because
the
holographic
 Tokyo,
made
a
will.

will
had
only
one
substantial
provision
which
was
altered
 o the
following
laws
may
govern
the
form

without
proper
authentication.
That
the
entire
will
is
void
 of
the
engineer’s
will:

because
nothing
remains
in
the
will
that
could
remain
  law
of
Germany
–
German

valid.
That
not
even
the
original
unaltered
text
can
be
 citizen

given
effect
because
of
the
seeming
change
of
mind
of
  law
of
France
–
domiciled
in

testatrix.
 France


  law
of
Brazil
–
resident
of

Balane
Comments:
 Brazil

‐ it
is
beyond
cavil
that
the
insertion
of
Gregorio’s
  law
of
Japan
–
place
of

name
cannot
be
given
effect
because
of
lack
of
 execution

proper
authentication
  law
of
the
Philippines

‐ but
why
was
the
cancellation
given
effect
when
it
 

was
not
properly
done?
 ART.
818.
Two
or
more
persons
cannot
make
a
will

‐ to
say
that
giving
effect
to
the
will
as
first
written
 jointly,
or
in
the
same
instrument,
either
for
their

would
disregard
the
seeming
change
of
mind
of
 reciprocal
benefit
or
for
the
benefit
of
a
third
person.


the
testatrix
is
no
argument
at
all
 

o it
is
not
enough
that
the
testator
 Joint
will,
meaning

manifest
his
intent—he
must
manifest
 ‐ one
document
which
constitutes
the
wills
of
two

it
in
a
manner
required
by
law
 or
more
individuals


 

ART.
815.
When
a
Filipino
is
in
a
foreign
country,
he
is
 The
following
is
a
joint
will—

authorized
to
make
a
will
in
any
of
the
forms
 ‐ “We,
the
testators,
of
legal
age
and
of
sound
and

established
by
the
law
of
the
country
in
which
he
may
 disposing
mind...”

be.
Such
will
may
be
probated
in
the
Philippines.
 


 The
following
is
NOT
a
joint
will—

ART.
816.
The
will
of
an
alien
who
is
abroad
produces
 ‐ if
there
are
separate
documents,
each
serving
as

effect
in
the
Philippines
if
made
with
the
formalities
 one
independent
will
(even
if
written
on
the

prescribed
by
the
law
of
the
place
in
which
he
resides,
 same
sheet)

or
according
to
the
formalities
observed
in
his
country,
 o e.g.
will
of
testator
A
on
front
part
of

or
in
conformity
with
those
which
this
Code
prescribes.
 sheet;
will
of
testator
B
on
the
back
of


 the
same
sheet

ART.
817.
A
will
made
in
the
Philippines
by
a
citizen
or
 o e.g.
will
of
testator
A
on
upper
part
of

subject
of
another
country,
which
is
executed
in
 sheet;
will
of
testator
B
on
lower
part
of

accordance
with
the
law
of
the
country
of
which
he
is
a
 the
same
sheet

citizen
or
subject,
and
which
might
be
proved
and
 

allowed
by
the
law
of
his
own
country,
shall
have
the
 Joint
wills
are
VOID,
but
reciprocal
wills
are
VALID

same
effect
as
if
executed
according
to
the
laws
of
the
 ‐ reciprocal
wills:
two
wills
instituting
each
of
the

Philippines.
 respective
testators
as
heirs


 o e.g.
will
of
testator
A
designated
B
as

ART.
815
to
817
govern
rules
of
formal
validity
in
the
 heir;
will
of
testator
B
designated
A
as

following
instances
(not
covered:
a
Filipino
executing
 heir

a
will
in
the
Philippines)
 

‐ a
Filipino
abroad
(ART.
815)
 Reasons
for
the
prohibition
against
joint
wills

‐ an
alien
abroad
(ART.
816)
 ‐ limitation
on
modes
of
revocation

‐ an
alien
in
the
Philippines
(ART.
817)
 ‐ diminution
of
testamentary
secrecy


 ‐ increased
danger
of
undue
influence

The
rule
(combining
these
three
articles,
ART.
15
and
 ‐ increased
danger
of
one
testator
killing
the
other

17):
 

‐ every
testator,
whether
Filipino
or
alien,
 ART.
819.
Wills,
prohibited
by
the
preceding
article,

wherever
he
may
be,
has
five
choices
as
to
what
 executed
by
Filipinos
in
a
foreign
country
shall
not
be

law
to
follow
for
the
form
of
his
will,
viz.:
 valid
in
the
Philippines,
even
though
authorized
by
the

o law
of
citizenship
 laws
of
the
country
where
they
may
have
been

o law
of
place
of
execution
 executed.

o law
of
domicile
 

o law
of
residence
 Outline
on
joint
wills

o law
of
the
Philippines
 ‐ executed
by
Filipinos
in
the
Philippines


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 11 of 73
 o VOID
 

‐ executed
by
Filipinos
abroad
 Facts:
Testatrix’s
will
submitted
for
probate.
Opposition:

o VOID,
even
if
authorized
by
law
of
place
 that
the
will
was
not
attested
to
by
three
credible

of
execution
 witnesses.
Witnesses
were
driver
of
the
testatrix,
driver’s

‐ executed
by
aliens
abroad
 wife,
and
piano
teacher
of
testatrix’s
grandchild.

o see
ART.
816
 Contestant
argued
that
witnesses
must
initially
testify
as

‐ executed
by
aliens
in
the
Philippines
 to
their
good
standing
in
the
community,
their
reputation

o one
view:
VOID
(public
policy)
 for
trustworthiness
and
reliability,
their
honesty
and

o another
view:
ART.
817
applies
 uprightness,
in
order
that
their
testimony
may
be
believed

‐ executed
by
a
Filipino
and
an
alien
 and
accepted.

o VOID
as
to
Filipino
 

o ART.
816
or
817
applies
as
to
alien
 Held:
That
the
credibility
of
a
witness
is
presumed
unless


 the
contrary
is
proved.
That
the
rule
is
that
the

Subsection 4 – Witnesses to Wills instrumental
witnesses
in
order
to
be
competent
must
be


 shown
to
have
the
qualifications
under
ART.
820
and

ART.
820.
Any
person
of
sound
mind
and
of
the
age
of
 none
of
the
disqualifications
under
ART.
821.
That
the

eighteen
years
or
more,
and
not
blind,
deaf
or
dumb,
 contestant’s
arguments
must
fail.

and
able
to
read
and
write,
may
be
a
witness
to
the
 

execution
of
a
will
mentioned
in
article
805
of
this
Code.
 ART.
822.
If
the
witnesses
attesting
the
execution
of
a


 will
are
competent
at
the
time
of
attesting,
their


 becoming
subsequently
incompetent
shall
not
prevent

ART.
821.
The
following
are
disqualified
from
being
 the
allowance
of
the
will.

witnesses
to
a
will:
 


 Note:

(1)
Any
person
not
domiciled
in
the
Philippines;
 ‐ time
of
execution
of
the
will
is
the
only
relevant


 temporal
criterion

(2)
Those
who
have
been
convicted
of
falsification
of
a
 

document,
perjury,
or
false
testimony.

 ART.
823.
If
a
person
attests
to
the
execution
of
a
will,


 to
whom
or
to
whose
spouse,
or
parent,
or
child,
a

Six
qualifications
of
witnesses
 devise
or
legacy
is
given
by
such
will,
such
devise
or

‐ of
sound
mind
 legacy
shall,
so
far
only
as
concerns
such
person,
or

o attestation
is
an
act
of
the
senses
 spouse,
or
parent,
or
child
of
such
person,
or
any
one

‐ at
least
18
years
of
age
 claiming
under
such
person
or
spouse,
or
parent,
or

‐ not
blind,
deaf,
or
dumb
 child,
be
void,
unless
there
are
three
other
competent

o again,
witnessing
is
an
act
of
the
senses
 witnesses
to
such
will.
However,
such
person
so

o dumb
means
mute,
not
someone
who
is
 attesting
shall
be
admitted
as
a
witness
as
if
such
devise

simply
stupid
 or
legacy
had
not
been
made
or
given.

‐ able
to
read
and
write
 

o or
literate,
because
such
literate
 Notes:

witness
would
have
a
better
 ‐ article
is
misplaced,
since
it
is
not
concerned

understanding
of
the
solemnity
of
the
 with
capacity
to
be
a
witness,
but
with
capacity

execution
of
a
will
and
his
act
of
being
a
 to
succeed

witness
thereto
 ‐ in
essence,
a
witness
cannot
succeed
to
a
will
he

‐ domiciled
in
the
Philippines
 is
witnessing

o citizenship
of
witness,
immaterial
(even
 o because
such
witness
will
be
very

if
he
is
not
a
Filipino
or
a
foreigner)
 partial;
he
will
have
some
interest
to

o the
only
requirement
is
that
the
 protect
(i.e.
even
if
the
will
had
some

witness
is
domiciled
in
the
Philippines
 defect,
witness
will
of
course
not
testify

 there
is
a
high
probability
that
 as
to
said
defect)

witness
would
be
in
the
 ‐ it
must
be
noted
that
the
law
does
not
disqualify

country
if
will
is
probated
and
 the
witness

said
witness
is
called
to
testify
 

in
court
 Disqualification
of
a
witness
to
succeed
to
a
devise
or

‐ must
not
have
been
convicted
of
falsification
of
a
 legacy
when
there
are
only
three
witnesses

document,
perjury,
or
false
testimony
 ‐ competence
of
witnesses,
not
affected

o conviction
must
be
by
final
judgment
 ‐ will
is
valid
but
witness
(or
relatives
specified
in

o these
crimes
relate
to
the
witness’s
 this
article)
cannot
inherit

trustworthiness
or
credibility
 

 if
a
witness
had
been
 Article
also
applies
to
heirs
(not
only
legatees
and

convicted
of
murder
or
rape,
 devisees)

he
is
qualified
because
he
can
 ‐ intent
of
the
law
is
to
cover
all
testamentary

still
be
honest
 institutions


 

Competence
and
credibility,
distinguished
 Disqualification
to
succeed
applies
only
to


 testamentary
disposition
made
in
favor
of
the
witness

Gonzales
v.
CA
(1979)
 or
the
specified
relatives


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 12 of 73
 ‐ if
the
party
is
also
entitled
to
a
legitime
or
an
 books
of
account
or
inventories.

intestate
share,
that
portion
is
not
affected
by
the
 

party’s
witnessing
the
will
 Documents

o testamentary
disposition
in
favor
of
a
 ‐ inventories,
books
of
accounts,
documents
of

witness,
VOID
 title,
papers
of
similar
nature

o but
if
the
same
witness
is
a
compulsory
 ‐ must
not
make
testamentary
dispositions
(lest

heir,
his
legitime
is
unaffected
 formal
requirements
for
wills
be
circumvented)


 

EXCEPTION
 Holographic
wills
cannot
incorporate
documents
by

‐ if
there
are
three
other
witnesses
(or
four
 reference

witnesses)—
 ‐ par.
4
of
the
article
requires
the
signatures
of
the

o the
testamentary
disposition
in
favor
of
 testator
and
the
witnesses
on
every
page
of
the

one
of
them
is
valid
 incorporated
document
(except
voluminous


 annexes)

ART.
824.
A
mere
charge
on
the
estate
of
the
testator
 

for
the
payment
of
debts
due
at
the
time
of
the
testator’s
 Subsection 6 – Revocation of Wills and
death
does
not
prevent
his
creditors
from
being
 Testamentary Dispositions
competent
witnesses
to
his
will.


 ART.
828.
A
will
may
be
revoked
by
the
testator
at
any

Notes:
 time
before
his
death.
Any
waiver
or
restriction
of
this

‐ the
creditor
does
not
need
the
testator’s
will
in
 right
is
void.


order
that
he
may
be
paid
 

o his
claim
will
be
proved
in
the
 A
will
is
essentially
revocable
or
ambulatory

settlement
of
the
decedent’s
estate
 ‐ this
characteristic
cannot
be
waived
even
by
the

o the
creditor
is
not
an
heir
 testator


 ‐ a
will
is
revocable
ad
nutum,
i.e.
at
the
testator’s

Subsection 5 – Codicils and Incorporation by pleasure,
during
his
lifetime

Reference ‐ no
such
thing
as
an
irrevocable
will

‐ cf.
ART.
777
(successional
rights
vest
only
upon

ART.
825.
A
codicil
is
a
supplement
or
addition
to
a
will,
 death)

made
after
the
execution
of
a
will
and
annexed
to
be
 

taken
as
a
part
thereof,
by
which
any
disposition
made
 ART.
829.
A
revocation
done
outside
the
Philippines,
by

in
the
original
will
is
explained,
added
to,
or
altered.
 a
person
who
does
not
have
his
domicile
in
this
country,


 is
valid
when
it
is
done
according
to
the
law
of
the
place

ART.
826.
In
order
that
a
codicil
may
be
effective,
it
 where
the
will
was
made,
or
according
to
the
law
of
the

shall
be
executed
as
in
the
case
of
a
will.
 place
in
which
the
testator
had
his
domicile
at
the
time;


 and
if
the
revocation
takes
place
in
this
country,
when
it

Codicil
 is
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
this
Code.

‐ explains,
adds
to,
or
alters
a
disposition
in
a
prior
 

will
 Rules
for
revocation


 ‐ if
made
in
the
Philippines

Subsequent
will
 o follow
Philippine
law

‐ makes
independent
and
distinct
dispositions
 ‐ if
made
outside
the
Philippines


 o if
testator
domiciled
in
the
Philippines

Codicil
need
not
conform
to
the
form
of
the
will
to
  follow
law
of
place
of

which
it
refers
 execution,
or

‐ an
attested
will
may
have
a
holographic
codicil
  follow
law
of
place
where

‐ a
holographic
will
may
have
an
attested
codicil
 testator
was
domiciled
at
the


 time
of
revocation

ART.
827.
If
a
will,
executed
as
required
by
this
Code,
 o if
testator
domiciled
in
the
Philippines

incorporates
into
itself
by
reference
any
document
or
 (not
governed
by
ART.
829)

paper,
such
document
or
paper
shall
not
be
considered
  follow
Philippine
law

a
part
of
the
will
unless
the
following
requisites
are
  follow
law
of
place
of

present:
 revocation


  follow
law
of
place
of

(1)
The
document
or
paper
referred
to
in
the
will
must
 execution

be
in
existence
at
the
time
of
the
execution
of
the
will;
 


 ART.
830.
No
will
shall
be
revoked
except
in
the

(2)
The
will
must
clearly
describe
and
identify
the
same,
 following
cases:

stating
among
other
things
the
number
of
pages
thereof;
 


 (a)
By
implication
of
law;
or

(3)
It
must
be
identified
by
clear
and
satisfactory
proof
 

as
the
document
or
paper
referred
to
therein;
and
 (b)
By
some
will,
codicil,
or
other
writing
executed
as


 provided
in
case
of
wills;
or

(4)
It
must
be
signed
by
the
testator
and
the
witnesses
 

on
each
and
every
page,
except
in
case
of
voluminous
 (c)
By
burning,
tearing,
cancelling,
or
obliterating
the


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 13 of 73
will
with
intention
of
revoking
it,
by
the
testator
  same
as
in
testamentary

himself,
or
by
some
other
person
in
his
presence,
and
by
 capacity

his
express
direction.
If
burned,
torn,
cancelled,
or
 o the
testator
must
have
completed

obliterated
by
some
other
person,
without
the
express
 everything
he
intended
to
do

direction
of
the
testator,
the
will
may
still
be
 

established,
and
the
estate
distributed
in
accordance
 *must
concur,
otherwise,
no
revocation

therewith,
if
its
contents,
and
due
execution,
and
the
 

fact
of
its
unauthorized
destruction,
cancellation,
or
 Testate
Estate
of
Adriana
Maloto
v.
CA
(1988)

obliteration
are
established
according
to
the
Rules
of
 

Court.

 Facts:
Heirs
of
late
Maloto
instituted
intestate
proceeding


 for
settlement
of
decedent’s
estate.
Later,
a
document

First
mode
of
revocation:
By
operation
of
law—
 purporting
to
be
the
will
of
decedent
was
discovered.

‐ revocation
may
be
total
or
partial
 Some
heirs
filed
a
petition
for
probate
of
alleged
will.

‐ examples
 Opposition:
that
the
testatrix’s
will
had
been
revoked,
her

o preterition
(ART.
854)
 maid
having
burned
the
same.

o legal
separation
(ART.
63,
par.
4,
 

Family
Code)
 Held:
That
there
was
no
valid
revocation
by
physical

o unworthiness
to
succeed
(ART.
1032)
 destruction
because
animus
revocandi
and
corpus
did
not

o transformation,
alienation,
or
loss
of
 concur.
That
while
animus
revocandi
may
be
conceded

the
object
devised
or
bequeathed
(ART.
 because
that
is
a
state
of
mind,
corpus
was
not

957)
 established.
That
it
was
not
shown
that
the
paper
burned

o judicial
demand
of
a
credit
given
as
a
 by
the
maid
was
the
will
of
the
testatrix;
that
the
burning

legacy
(ART.
936)
 was
not
proven
to
have
been
done
under
the
testatrix’s


 express
direction;
that
the
burning
was
not
done
in
the

Second
mode
of
revocation:
By
a
subsequent
will
or
 presence
of
the
testatrix.

codicil—
 

‐ revocation
may
be
total
or
partial
 The
loss
or
unavailability
of
a
will
may,
under
certain

‐ requisites
 circumstances,
give
rise
to
the
presumption
that
it
had

o subsequent
instrument
must
comply
 been
revoked
by
physical
destruction

with
the
formal
requirements
of
a
will
 

o testator
must
possess
testamentary
 Gago
v.
Mamuyac
(1927)

capacity
 

o subsequent
instrument
must
either
 Facts:
Proponent
sought
to
have
will
of
decedent

contain
an
express
revocatory
clause
 probated,
presenting
a
carbon
copy
of
same.
Opposition:

(express)
or
be
incompatible
with
the
 that
original
(will)
had
been
revoked
by
testator,
as

prior
will
(implied)
 testified
to
by
witnesses.
Original
copy
of
will
could
not
be

‐ revocatory
will
must
be
probated
 found.


 

Third
mode
of
revocation:
By
physical
destruction—
 Held:
That
there
is
a
presumption
that
the
will
had
been

‐ four
ways
of
destroying:
 revoked
(cancelled
or
destroyed)
if
it
cannot
be
found
and

o burning
 is
shown
to
be
in
the
possession
of
the
testator
when
last

o tearing
 seen.
That
the
presumption
is
that
the
will
was
revoked
by

o cancelling
 the
testator
himself.
That
the
will
of
the
testator
in
this

o obliterating
 case
is
presumed
to
have
been
properly
revoked.


 

Physical
destruction
may
be
done—
 ART.
831.
Subsequent
wills
which
do
not
revoke
the

‐ by
testator
personally,
or
 previous
ones
in
an
express
manner,
annul
only
such

‐ by
another
person
acting
in
the
testator’s
 dispositions
in
the
prior
wills
as
are
inconsistent
with

presence
and
by
the
testator’s
express
direction
 or
contrary
to
those
contained
in
the
later
wills.


 

Effect
of
unauthorized
destruction
 Note:

‐ will
may
be
proved
as
lost
or
destroyed
 ‐ the
execution
of
a
subsequent
will
does
not
ipso

o but
only
if
will
is
attested
 facto
revoke
a
prior
one

o if
holographic,
will
cannot
be
probated
 

if
lost
or
destroyed
without
authority
 ART.
832.
A
revocation
made
in
a
subsequent
will
shall

(Gan
v,
Yap),
unless
a
copy
survives
 take
effect,
even
if
the
new
will
should
become

(Rodelas
v.
Aranza)
 inoperative
by
reason
of
the
incapacity
of
the
heirs,


 devisees
or
legatees
designated
therein,
or
by
their

Elements
of
a
valid
revocation
by
physical
 renunciation.

destruction*
 

‐ corpus
 Efficacy
of
the
revocatory
clause
does
not
depend
on

o the
physical
destruction
itself
 the
testamentary
dispositions
of
the
revoking
will

o there
must
be
evidence
of
physical
 ‐ unless
the
testator
so
provides

destruction
 

‐ animus

o capacity
and
intent
to
revoke


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 14 of 73
GENERAL
RULE:
Revocation
is
an
absolute
provision
 

independent
of
the
acceptance
or
capacity
of
the
new
 Diaz
v.
De
Leon
(1922)

heirs
 


 Facts:
Testator
executed
a
second
will
revoking
the
first.

EXCEPTION
(“dependent
relative
revocation”):
If
 First
will
presented
to
court
for
probate.

testator
provides
in
the
subsequent
will
that
the
 

revocation
of
the
prior
one
is—
 Held:
That
the
second
will
did
not
constitute
sufficient

‐ dependent
on
the
capacity
of
the
heirs,
devisees,
 revocation.
That
existence
of
animus
revocandi,
sufficient

or
legatees
instituted
in
the
subsequent
will,
or
 for
revocation.
That
first
will,
having
been
shown
to
have

‐ dependent
on
the
acceptance
of
the
heirs,
 been
destroyed
with
animus
revocandi,
is
considered

devisees,
or
legatees
instituted
in
the
subsequent
 revoked.
That
first
will
was
returned
to
testator
who

will
 ordered
his
servant
to
tear
the
same,
which
was
done
in


 the
presence
of
testator,
clearly
manifesting
his
intent
to

Dependent
relative
revocation,
explanation
(Molo
v.
 revoke
said
first
will.
That
first
will
cannot
be
probated
for

Molo
[1951])
 having
been
destroyed
with
animus
revocandi.

‐ if
act
of
revocation
of
a
previous
(original)
will
is
 

made
by
executing
a
subsequent
(new)
will,
the
 Rule
if
revocation
is
implied
(incompatibility
of

revocation
is
conditional
and
dependent
upon
 provisions)

the
efficacy
of
the
subsequent
will
 ‐ rule
in
ART.
832
applies

‐ if,
for
any
reason,
the
new
will
intended
to
be
 ‐ intent
of
testator
to
set
aside
prior
will
is
clear

made
as
a
substitute
is
inoperative,
the
 

revocation
fails
and
the
original
will
remains
in
 ART.
833.
A
revocation
of
a
will
based
on
a
false
cause

full
force
 or
illegal
cause
is
null
and
void.

‐ failure
of
the
new
will
upon
whose
validity
the
 

revocation
depends
is
equivalent
to
the
non‐ Wills,
revocable
ad
nutum

fulfillment
of
a
suspensive
condition,
and
hence
 ‐ testator
does
not
have
to
have
a
reason
or
cause

prevents
the
revocation
of
the
original
will
 for
revoking
his
will


 ‐ the
law
protects
the
testator’s
true
intent
(i.e.
to

Dependent
relative
revocation
applies
ONLY
if
it
 revoke),
so
this
article
sets
aside
a
revocation

appears
that
the
testator
intended
his
act
of
 that
does
not
reflect
such
true
intent

revocation
to
be
conditioned
on—
 

‐ the
making
of
a
new
will,
or
 Requisites
for
the
application
of
ART.
833
regarding

‐ the
validity
of
a
new
will,
or
 revocation
for
a
false
cause

‐ the
efficacy
of
a
new
will
 ‐ cause
must
be
concrete,
factual,
and
not
purely


 subjective

Rule
of
dependent
relative
revocation
applies
if
the
 ‐ cause
must
be
false

revocation
is
by
physical
destruction
 ‐ testator
must
not
know
of
the
falsity
of
the
cause


 ‐ it
must
appear
from
the
will
that
the
testator
is

Molo
v.
Molo
(1951)
 revoking
because
of
the
false
cause


 

Facts:
Testator
left
two
wills:
original
and
new
which
 Extension
of
ART.
833
to
illegal
causes
(reason:
public

contained
a
revocatory
clause.
New
will
was
probated.
 policy),
in
effect,
restricts
the
testator’s
freedom
to

Later,
probation
was
set
aside
as
oppositors
proved
that
 revoke

new
will
not
made
in
accordance
with
law.
Proponents
 ‐ illegal
cause
must
be
stated
in
the
will
as
the

sought
to
have
original
will
probated.
Opposition:
that
 cause
of
revocation

original
will
had
been
revoked
by
new
will,
 

notwithstanding
disallowance
of
new
will.
Evidence
was
 ART.
834.
The
recognition
of
an
illegitimate
child
does

presented
by
contestants
that
original
will
had
been
 not
lose
its
legal
effect,
even
though
the
will
wherein
it

destroyed
by
testator.
 was
made
should
be
revoked.


 

Held:
That
original
will
stands
because
subsequent
(new)
 Notes:

will
containing
a
revocatory
clause
has
been
disallowed.
 ‐ recognition
of
an
illegitimate
child
in
a
will
is

That
a
subsequent
will
containing
a
revocatory
clause
 irrevocable
(i.e.
even
if
the
will
is
revoked,
the

which
was
denied
probate
cannot
produce
the
effect
of
 recognition
remains
effective)

annulling
the
original
or
previous
will
because
the
 ‐ under
the
Family
Code
(cf.
ART.
175,
Family

revocatory
clause
is
void.
That
destruction
of
original
will
 Code),
admission
of
illegitimate
filiation
in
a
will

cannot
have
the
effect
of
defeating
said
will
(prior
will)
 would
constitute
proof
of
illegitimate
filiation

because
of
the
fact
that
it
is
founded
on
mistaken
belief
 

that
subsequent
will
has
been
validly
executed
and
would
 Subsection 7 – Republication and Revival of Wills
be
given
effect.


 ART.
835.
The
testator
cannot
republish,
without

Balane
Thinks:
 reproducing
in
a
subsequent
will,
the
dispositions

‐ “Can
it
not
be
argued
that
the
act
of
the
testator
 contained
in
a
previous
one
which
is
void
as
to
its
form.

in
destroying
the
will
in
fact
confirmed
his
intent
 

to
revoke
it?
(referring
to
the
case
of
Molo
v.
 ART.
836.
The
execution
of
a
codicil
referring
to
a

Molo)”
 previous
will
has
the
effect
of
republishing
the
will
as


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 15 of 73
modified
by
the
codicil.
 with
the
Rules
of
Court.


 

Notes:
 The
testator
himself
may,
during
his
lifetime,
petition

‐ republication
or
revival
to
give
back
efficacy
to
a
 the
court
having
jurisdiction
for
the
allowance
of
his

will
which
has
become
inefficacious
 will.
In
such
case,
the
pertinent
provisions
of
the
Rules


 of
Court
for
the
allowance
of
wills
after
the
testator’s

Will,
void
as
to
form
if
it
does
not
comply
with
the
 death
shall
govern.

requirements
of
ART.
804
to
808;
810
to
814;
818
and
 

819
 The
Supreme
Court
shall
formulate
such
additional


 Rules
of
Court
as
may
be
necessary
for
the
allowance
of

How
to
republish
a
will
that
is
void
as
to
its
form—
 wills
on
petition
of
the
testator.

‐ to
execute
a
subsequent
will
and
reproduce
(i.e.
 

copy
out)
the
dispositions
of
the
original
will
 Subject
to
the
right
of
appeal,
the
allowance
of
the
will,

o mere
reference,
not
enough
 either
during
the
lifetime
of
the
testator
or
after
his


 death,
shall
be
conclusive
as
to
its
due
execution.


How
to
republish
a
will
that
is
not
void
as
to
its
form
 

but
(a)
void
for
a
reason
other
than
a
formal
defect
 Probate,
defined

[e.g.
a
will
that
institutes
one
of
the
three
attesting
 ‐ a
judicial
process
to
determine
the
due
execution

witnesses],
or
(b)
previously
revoked—
 (formal
or
extrinsic
validity)
of
a
will

‐ to
execute
a
subsequent
will
or
codicil
referring
 

to
the
previous
will
 Probate
of
a
will,
mandatory

o no
need
to
reproduce
the
provisions
of
 

the
prior
will
in
the
subsequent
 Guevara
v.
Guevara
(1943)

instrument
 


 Facts:
Testator
executed
a
will
which
was
never

ART.
837.
If
after
making
a
will,
the
testator
makes
a
 presented
to
court
for
probate.
Respondent
sought
to

second
will
expressly
revoking
the
first,
the
revocation
 recover
a
parcel
of
land
sold
to
petitioner,
claiming
that

of
the
second
will
does
not
revive
the
first
will,
which
 said
land
was
part
of
her
legitime.
To
support
her
claim,

can
be
revived
only
by
another
will
or
codicil.
 respondent
presented
the
will
before
the
court
to
prove


 that
she
was
acknowledged
by
testator
as
his
natural

Explanation—
 child,
and
only
for
that
purpose
(i.e.
not
for
probate).

‐ the
revocation
of
a
second
will
(revoking
a
first
 Respondent
claimed
to
be
an
intestate
and
compulsory

will)
by
a
third
will
does
not
revive
the
first
will
 heir
of
decedent.

o the
revocatory
clause
of
a
revoked
will
 

(second
will)
remains
effective
 Held:
That
the
procedure
adopted
by
respondent
cannot

(because
third
will
revoking
second
 be
sanctioned
because
presentation
of
will
to
court
for

will
does
not
revive
first
will)
 probate
is
mandatory,
and
its
allowance
essential
and


 indispensable
for
its
efficacy.


Balane
Notes:
 

‐ this
article
is
based
on
the
theory
of
instant
 Two
stages
of
settlement
of
estate

revocation,
which
is
inconsistent
with
the
 ‐ probate
of
will

principle
that
wills
take
effect
mortis
causa
 o formal
validity
is
determined

‐ a
revocatory
will,
as
in
every
will,
in
order
to
 ‐ settlement
proper

have
effect
must
be
probated;
but
a
second
will
 o substantive
validity
(i.e.
efficacy
of

revoking
the
first,
which
second
will
has
already
 provisions)
of
will
is
passed
upon

been
revoked,
must
be
submitted
to
court
for
 

probate?
 Once
a
decree
of
probate
becomes
final,
it
is
res


 judicata

ART.
837
does
not
apply
in
case
of
implied
revocation
 

(i.e.
the
article
only
applies
if
revocation
of
the
first
 De
la
Cerna
v.
Potot
(1964)

will
by
the
second
will
is
express)—
 

‐ the
revocation
of
a
second
will
(revoking
a
first
 Facts:
Joint
will
executed
by
testator
and
testatrix.
When

will)
by
a
third
will
would
revive
the
first
will,
 testator
died,
will
admitted
to
probate.
Probate
decree

UNLESS
the
third
will
is
itself
inconsistent
with
 became
final.
Later,
same
will
submitted
to
court
for

the
first
 probate
when
testatrix
died.
Probate
court
denied
probate


 (the
second
time)
because
joint
wills
are
void.

EXCEPTION
 

‐ if
the
second
will
is
holographic
and
is
revoked
 Held:
That
the
admission
of
a
joint
will
to
probate
is
an

by
physical
destruction
 error
of
law
which
should
have
been
corrected
by
appeal,

o because
it
cannot
be
probated,
unless
a
 but
which
did
not
affect
the
jurisdiction
of
the
probate

copy
survives
 court,
nor
the
conclusive
effect
of
its
final
decision.
That


 since
the
probate
court
(during
the
first
probate)
has

Subsection 8 – Allowance and Disallowance of Wills spoken
with
finality
when
it
admitted
the
joint
will
to

probate,
the
final
decree
of
probate
has
conclusive
effect

ART.
838.
No
will
shall
pass
either
real
or
personal
 as
to
testator’s
will.

property
unless
it
is
proved
and
allowed
in
accordance
 


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 16 of 73
Scope
of
final
decree
of
probate:
 examination
and
resolution
of
the
extrinsic
validity
of
the


 will,
the
general
rule
is
not
inflexible
and
absolute,
for

GENERAL
RULE:
Conclusive
as
to
due
execution
(i.e.
 probate
court
not
powerless
to
pass
upon
certain

extrinsic
or
formal
validity
only)
 provisions
of
will.
That
probate
of
a
will
might
become
an


 idle
ceremony
if
on
its
face
it
appears
to
be
intrinsically

Gallanosa
v.
Arcangel
(1978)
 void.
That
a
donation
cannot
be
given
between
persons


 living
in
adultery
or
concubinage,
in
which
case
donation

Facts:
Legal
heirs
of
testator
filed
an
action
for
annulment
 is
void.
That
this
rule
also
applies
to
testamentary

of
testator’s
duly
probated
will.
Ground:
fraud
in
the
 dispositions.
That
therefore
the
testamentary
disposition

execution
and
simulation.
Testamentary
heirs
opposed.
 in
favor
of
kabit
is
void.

Lower
court
annulled
probated
will.
 


 Baltazar
v.
Laxa
(2012)

Held:
That
procedural
laws
do
not
sanction
an
action
for
 

the
“annulment”
of
a
will.
That
decree
of
probate
of
will
is
 Facts:
Will
of
the
testatrix
presented
to
court
for
probate.

conclusive
as
to
its
due
execution
or
formal
validity.
That
 Opposition:
those
enumerated
in
ART.
839,
infra).

admission
of
will
to
probate
means
that
the
testator
was
 

of
sound
and
disposing
mind;
that
his
consent
was
not
 Held:
That
courts
are
only
tasked
to
pass
upon
the

vitiated;
that
the
will
was
signed
by
him
in
the
 extrinsic
validity
of
will
in
probate
proceedings.
That
due

presence
of
the
required
number
of
witnesses;
and
 execution
of
will
or
its
extrinsic
validity
pertains
to

that
the
will
is
genuine.
That
these
facts
cannot
again
be
 whether
testator,
being
of
sound
mind,
freely
executed

questioned
in
a
subsequent
proceeding,
not
even
in
a
 will
in
accordance
with
formalities
prescribed
by
law

criminal
action
for
forgery
of
will.
That
trial
judge
gravely
 (ART.
805
to
806).
That
there
is
faithful
compliance
with

abused
his
discretion
in
annulling
duly
probated
will.
 formalities
laid
down
by
law
apparent
from
face
of
will.


 That
contestants
failed
to
substantiate
their
allegations,

What
formal
validity
encompasses
(Dorotheo
v.
CA
 hence
probate
of
will
must
be
allowed.


[1999])
 

‐ whether
the
will
submitted
is
indeed
the
 ART.
839.
The
will
shall
be
disallowed
in
any
of
the

decedent’s
last
will
and
testament
 following
cases:

‐ compliance
with
the
prescribed
formalities
for
 

the
execution
of
wills
 (1)
If
the
formalities
required
by
law
have
not
been

‐ testamentary
capacity
 complied
with;

‐ due
execution
of
the
will
 


 (2)
If
the
testator
was
insane,
or
otherwise
mentally

Due
execution
means:
 incapable
of
making
a
will,
at
the
time
of
its
execution;

‐ the
testator’s
sound
and
disposing
mind
 

‐ freedom
from
vitiating
factors
(duress,
menace,
 (3)
If
it
was
executed
through
force
or
under
duress,
or

undue
influence)
 the
influence
of
fear,
or
threats;

‐ will
genuine,
not
forgery
 

‐ proper
testamentary
age
 (4)
If
it
was
procured
by
undue
and
improper
pressure

‐ the
testator
is
not
expressly
prohibited
bylaw
 and
influence,
on
the
part
of
the
beneficiary
or
of
some

from
making
a
will
 other
person;


 

Another
way
of
defining
the
scope
of
a
final
decree
of
 (5)
If
the
signature
of
the
testator
was
procured
by

probate
is
to
refer
to
ART.
839,
infra—
 fraud;

‐ objection
to
a
will
on
any
of
the
grounds
 

enumerated
in
that
article
is
foreclosed
by
a
final
 (6)
If
the
testator
acted
by
mistake
or
did
not
intend

decree
of
probate
 that
the
instrument
he
signed
should
be
his
will
at
the


 time
of
affixing
his
signature
thereto.


EXCEPTION:
A
decree
of
probate
does
not
concern
 

itself
with
the
question
of
intrinsic
validity,
and
the
 Grounds
for
disallowance
of
a
will
listed
in
ART.
839,

probate
court
should
not
pass
upon
that
issue,
except
 exclusive

if
on
its
face
the
will
appears
to
be
intrinsically
void
 ‐ a
final
probate
decree
forecloses
any
subsequent


 challenge
on
any
of
the
matters
enumerated
in

Nepomuceno
v.
CA
(1985)
 this
article


 ‐ if
any
of
these
grounds
for
disallowance
is

Facts:
Testator
devised
entire
free
portion
to
kabit.
 proved,
the
will
shall
be
set
aside
as
void

Testator
noted
in
his
will
that
he
could
not
marry
kabit
 o a
will
is
either
valid
or
void
(no
such

because
he
was
legally
married
to
someone
else.
Kabit
 thing
as
a
voidable
will)

presented
will
to
court
for
probate.
Legal
wife
opposed.
  VALID
–
if
none
of
defects
in

Probate
denied:
the
will
was
invalid
on
its
face
because
of
 ART.
839
are
present

prohibited
disposition.
Appellate
court
reversed:
will
valid
  VOID
–
if
any
one
of
the

except
that
devise
in
favor
of
kabit
is
null
and
void,
per
 defects
is
present

ART.
739
in
relation
with
ART.
1028
of
the
Civil
Code.
 


 Re
ART.
839(1)—

Held:
That
while
the
general
rule
is
that
in
probate
 ‐ See
ART.
804
to
814,
818
to
819,
and
820
to

proceedings
the
court’s
area
of
inquiry
is
limited
to
an
 821


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 17 of 73

 o the
entire
hereditary
estate

Re
ART.
839(2)—
 ‐ if
testator
has
compulsory
heirs:

‐ cf.
ART.
796
to
803
 o the
disposable
portion
(i.e.
the
net


 hereditary
estate
minus
the
legitimes)

Re
ART.
839(3)—
 

‐ force
(violence),
as
defined
in
contract
law
(ART.
 If
testator
disposes
by
will
of
less
than
he
is
allowed

1335)
 whether
or
not
he
leaves
compulsory
heirs—

‐ duress
(intimidation),
as
defined
in
contract
law
 ‐ mixed
succession
results

(ART.
1335)
 o testamentary
succession
as
to
that
part


 disposed
of
by
will,
and

Re
ART.
839(4)—
 o intestate
succession
as
to
that
part
not

‐ undue
or
improper
pressure
or
influence
(undue
 disposed
of
by
will

influence),
as
defined
in
contract
law
(ART.
 o (legitimes
pass
by
strict
operation
of

1337)
 law)


 

Re
ART.
839(5)—
 ART.
843.
The
testator
shall
designate
the
heir
by
his

‐ fraud,
as
defined
in
contract
law
(ART.
1338)
 name
and
surname,
and
when
there
are
two
persons


 having
the
same
names,
he
shall
indicate
some

Re
ART.
839(6)—
 circumstance
by
which
the
instituted
heir
may
be

‐ mistake,
as
defined
in
contract
law
(ART.
1331)
 known.


 

Section 2 – Institution of Heir Even
though
the
testator
may
have
omitted
the
name
of

the
heir,
should
he
designate
him
in
such
manner
that

ART.
840.
Institution
of
heir
is
an
act
by
virtue
of
which
 there
can
be
no
doubt
as
to
who
has
been
instituted,
the

a
testator
designates
in
his
will
the
person
or
persons
 institution
shall
be
valid.

who
are
to
succeed
him
in
his
property
and
 

transmissible
rights
and
obligations.

 ART.
844.
An
error
in
the
name,
surname,
or


 circumstances
of
the
heir
shall
not
vitiate
the
institution

Notes:
 when
it
is
possible,
in
any
other
manner,
to
know
with

‐ rules
on
institution
of
heir
apply
also
to
 certainty
the
person
instituted.

institution
of
devisees
and
legatees
 

‐ wills
are
for
institution
of
heirs
 If,
among
persons
having
the
same
names
and


 surnames,
there
is
a
similarity
of
circumstances
in
such

ART.
841.
A
will
shall
be
valid
even
though
it
should
not
 a
way
that,
even
with
the
use
of
other
proof,
the
person

contain
an
institution
of
an
heir,
or
such
institution
 instituted
cannot
be
identified,
none
of
them
shall
be
an

should
not
comprise
the
entire
estate,
and
even
though
 heir.

the
person
so
instituted
should
not
accept
the
 

inheritance
or
should
be
incapacitated
to
succeed.
 Requirement
for
designation
of
heir


 ‐ that
the
heir,
legatee,
or
devisee
must
be

In
such
cases
the
testamentary
dispositions
made
in
 identified
in
the
will
with
sufficient
clarity
to

accordance
with
law
shall
be
complied
with
and
the
 leave
no
doubt
as
to
the
testator’s
intention

remainder
of
the
estate
shall
pass
to
the
legal
heirs.
 


 Designation
of
name
and
surname
is
directory

Notes:
 ‐ what
is
mandatory
is
that
the
identity
of
the

‐ cf.
Seangio
v.
Reyes
(2006)
 heirs,
legatees,
or
devisees
must
be
sufficiently

o involving
a
will
without
testamentary
 established
(usually,
by
giving
the
name
and

dispositions
(disinheritance)
 surname,
but
there
are
other
ways)

‐ if
heir,
legatee,
or
devisee
does
not
accept
or
is
 

incapacitated
 Other
ways
of
establishing
identity
of
heir,
devisee,
or

o intestacy
as
to
that
part
results
 legacy


 ‐ “I
designate
as
heir
to
one‐eighth
of
my
estate

ART.
842.
One
who
has
no
compulsory
heirs
may
 my
eldest
first
cousin”

dispose
by
will
of
all
his
estate
or
any
part
of
it
in
favor
 ‐ “I
devise
my
lechon
parlor
to
my
Civil
Procedure

of
any
person
having
capacity
to
succeed.

 professor”


 

One
who
has
compulsory
heirs
may
dispose
of
his
estate
 If
there
is
any
ambiguity
in
the
designation,
the

provided
he
does
not
contravene
the
provisions
of
this
 ambiguity
must
be
resolved
in
accordance
with
ART.

Code
with
regard
to
the
legitime
of
said
heirs.
 789


 ‐ i.e.
by
evidence
aliunde,
excluding
oral

Even
if
will
does
not
contain
any
testamentary
 declarations
of
the
testator

disposition—
 

‐ it
will
be
formally
valid
provided
it
complies
with
 If
ambiguity
cannot
be
resolved—

all
the
formal
requisites
 ‐ testator’s
intent
becomes
unascertainable


 o intestacy
therefore
as
to
that
portion

How
much
can
be
disposed
of
by
will—
 results

‐ if
testator
has
no
compulsory
heirs:
 


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 18 of 73
ART.
845.
Every
disposition
in
favor
of
an
unknown
 ART.
847.
When
the
testator
institutes
some
heirs

person
shall
be
void,
unless
by
some
event
or
 individually
and
others
collectively
as
when
he
says,
“I

circumstance
his
identity
becomes
certain.
However,
a
 designate
as
my
heirs
A
and
B,
and
the
children
of
C,”

disposition
in
favor
of
a
definite
class
or
group
of
 those
collectively
designated
shall
be
considered
as

persons
shall
be
valid.
 individually
instituted,
unless
it
clearly
appears
that
the


 intention
of
the
testator
was
otherwise.

Unknown
person
 

‐ refers
to
a
successor
whose
identity
cannot
be
 Equality
and
individuality
of
designation

determined
because
the
designation
in
the
will
is
 ‐ in
addition,
this
article
establishes
the

so
unclear
or
so
ambiguous
as
to
be
incapable
of
 presumption
that
the
heirs
collectively
referred

resolution
 to
are
designated
per
capita
along
with
those

‐ this
does
not
refer
to
one
with
whom
the
testator
 separately
designated

is
not
personally
acquainted
 ‐ if
testator
intends
a
block
designation,
he
must

‐ testator
may
institute
somebody
who
is
a
perfect
 so
specify

stranger
to
him,
provided
the
identity
is
clear
 


 Illustration

Illustrations
of
a
successor
whose
identity
cannot
be
 ‐ “I
designate
as
heirs
Mrs.
Shoal
Halimawis,
her

determined
 daughter
Ms.
Cera
Halimawis,
and
Block
A2015

‐ “I
designate
as
heir
to
one‐fourth
of
my
estate
a
 of
the
PUP
College
of
Law”
(Block
A2015

fiction
writer”
 composed
of
20
people;
testator
died
single
and

‐ “I
give
one‐third
of
my
estate
to
someone
who
 without
legitimate
issue)

cares”
 o Mrs.
Shoal,
Ms.
Cera,
and
the
20
people


 of
Block
A2015
would
be
considered
as

Illustration
of
a
designation
of
an
unknown
person
 individually
instituted

whose
identity,
“by
some
event
or
circumstance”
  each
would
receive
1/22
of

becomes
certain
 the
estate

‐ “I
designate
as
heir
to
one‐fourth
of
my
estate,
 

whoever
tops
the
bar
the
year
after
my
death”
 ART.
848.
If
the
testator
should
institute
his
brothers


 and
sisters,
and
he
has
some
of
full
blood
and
others
of

Illustration
of
a
disposition
in
favor
of
a
definite
class
 half
blood,
the
inheritance
shall
be
distributed
equally

or
group
of
persons
 unless
a
different
intention
appears.

‐ “I
institute
as
heir
to
the
entire
free
portion
of
 

my
estate,
the
poor”
 Again,
EQUALITY
of
shares


 ‐ if
testator
intends
otherwise,
he
must
so
specify

ART.
846.
Heirs
instituted
without
designation
of
 

shares
shall
inherit
in
equal
parts.
 This
article
applies
to
testamentary
succession
only


 ‐ in
testamentary
succession

General
presumption
in
cases
of
collective
 o equality
of
shares
of
full‐
and
half‐blood

designation—
 brothers
and
sisters,
unless
the
testator

‐ EQUALITY
 provides
otherwise

‐ if
testator
intends
an
unequal
apportionment,
he
 ‐ in
intestate
succession

should
so
specify
 o proportion
of
2:1
between
full‐
and


 half‐blood
brothers
and
sisters
(ART.

ART.
846
applies
only
to
testamentary
heirs
as
such
 1006)
and
only
if
the
disqualification
in

(or
devisees
or
legatees),
and
NOT
to
an
heir
who
is
 ART.
992
does
not
apply

both
a
compulsory
and
a
testamentary
heir
(because
 

the
heir
will
get
his
legitime
and
his
testamentary
 ART.
848
seems
to
apply
even
to
illegitimate
brothers

share)
 and
sisters,
in
cases
where
the
testator
is
of
legitimate


 status,
and
vice­versa

To
illustrate—
 ‐ the
article
makes
no
distinction

‐ a
testator
institutes
his
son,
his
friend,
and
his
 ‐ ubi
lex
non
distinguit,
nec
nos
distinguere

cousin
as
testamentary
heirs
 debemus

o son
will
get
his
legitime
plus
his
 

testamentary
share
 ART.
849.
When
the
testator
calls
to
the
succession
a

o friend
and
cousin
each
get
an
equal
 person
and
his
children,
they
are
all
deemed
to
have

share
 been
instituted
simultaneously
and
not
successively.

o son’s
testamentary
share
is
equal
to
 

each
of
friend’s
and
cousin’s
 Note:

testamentary
share
 ‐ equality
and
individuality
rule
again

 son
gets
more
(legitime
plus
 

testamentary
share)
 ART.
850.
The
statement
of
a
false
cause
for
the


 institution
of
an
heir
shall
be
considered
as
not
written,

Not
explicitly
covered
by
ART.
846
is
a
situation
where
 unless
it
appears
from
the
will
that
the
testator
would

the
shares
of
some
of
the
heirs
are
designated
and
 not
have
made
such
institution
if
he
had
known
the

those
of
others
are
not
 falsity
of
such
cause.


 


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 19 of 73
Note:
 instituted
heirs
should
become
sole
heirs
to
the
whole

‐ truth
or
falsity
of
cause
is
immaterial
because
the
 estate,
or
the
whole
free
portion,
as
the
case
may
be,

basis
of
institution,
like
donation,
is
liberality
 and
each
of
them
has
been
instituted
to
an
aliquot
part


 of
the
inheritance
and
their
aliquot
parts
together
do

General
Rule:
Falsity
of
stated
cause
for
testamentary
 not
cover
the
whole
inheritance,
or
the
whole
free

disposition
does
not
affect
validity
or
efficacy
of
 portion,
each
part
shall
be
increased
proportionally.

institution
 

‐ reason:
testamentary
dispositions
are
ultimately
 ART.
853.
If
each
of
the
instituted
heirs
has
been
given

based
on
liberality
 an
aliquot
part
of
the
inheritance,
and
the
parts
together


 exceed
the
whole
inheritance,
or
the
whole
free
portion,

Exception:
Falsity
of
stated
cause
for
institution
will
 as
the
case
may
be,
each
part
shall
be
reduced

set
aside
or
annul
the
institution
if
certain
factors
are
 proportionally.

present
 

‐ the
factors
/
requisites
(Austria
v.
Reyes
[1970])
 Elements
common
to
both
ART.
852
and
853

o the
cause
for
the
institution
must
be
 ‐ there
are
more
than
one
instituted
heir

stated
in
the
will
 ‐ the
testator
intended
them
to
get
the
whole

o the
cause
must
be
shown
to
be
false
 estate
or
the
whole
disposable
portion

o it
must
appear
from
the
face
of
the
will
 ‐ the
testator
has
designated
a
definite
portion
for

that
the
testator
would
not
have
made
 each
heir

such
institution
if
he
had
known
the
 


falsity
of
the
cause
 In
ART.
852—


 ‐ total
of
all
portions
is
less
than
the
whole
estate

Austria
v.
Reyes
(1970)
 (or
free
portion)


 o therefore,
a
proportionate
increase
is

Facts:
Testatrix
instituted
as
heirs
her
legally
adopted
 necessary

children.
Ante
mortem
probate
of
will
allowed.
Opposition
 o difference
cannot
pass
by
intestacy

to
partition
of
estate:
entire
estate
should
descend
to
 because
the
intention
of
the
testator
is

contestants
by
intestacy
because
of
intrinsic
nullity
of
 clear—to
give
the
instituted
heirs
the

institution
of
heirs
(theory
of
false
adoption);
that
 entire
amount

testatrix
was
led
into
believing
that
instituted
heirs
 

entitled
to
legitimes
as
compulsory
heirs,
as
evidenced
by
 In
ART.
853—

her
use
of
the
phrase
“sapilitang
mana.”

 ‐ the
total
exceeds
the
whole
estate
(or
free


 portion)

Held:
That
requisites
for
annulment
(see
factors
 o therefore,
a
proportionate
reduction

enumerated
in
the
Exception
above)
of
institution
of
heirs
 must
be
made

based
on
false
cause
not
present.
That
there
was
not
even
 

a
cause
for
institution
stated
in
will.
That
testatrix’s
use
of
 Illustrations
of
ART.
852:

phrase
“sapilitang
mana”
probably
means
that
she
 ‐ X
dies
without
any
compulsory
heirs
but
leaves
a

approved
of
system
of
legitimes.
 will:
“I
institute
A,
B,
and
C
to
my
entire
estate
in


 the
following
proportions:
A
–
1/2,
B
–
1/3.
C
–

Correlate
ART.
850
(annulling
factor:
falsity)
with
 1/8.”
The
estate
is
valued
at
P600,000
at
the
time

ART.
1028
in
relation
to
ART.
739
(annulling
factor:
 of
X’s
death.

illegality)
 o the
total
of
the
specified
portions
is


 only
23/24

ART.
851.
If
the
testator
has
instituted
only
one
heir,
 o total
of
proportions:
575,000

and
the
institution
is
limited
to
an
aliquot
part
of
the
  A
=
300,000
(1/2
or
12/24
of

inheritance,
legal
succession
takes
place
with
respect
to
 600,000)

the
remainder
of
the
estate.
  B
=
200,000
(1/3
or
8/24)


  C
=
75,000
(1/8
or
3/24)

The
same
rule
applies,
if
the
testator
has
instituted
 o to
find
A’s
increased
share
(x):

several
heirs
each
being
limited
to
an
aliquot
part,
and
 

all
the
parts
do
not
cover
the
whole
inheritance.
 SOLUTION
1:


 














x










=



300,000_

Wording
of
ART.
851,
erroneous
 








600,000









575,000

‐ legal
succession
does
not
take
place
with
respect
 

to
the
remainder
of
the
estate,
but
to
the
 
 
 









575x







=


180,000,000_

remainder
of
the
disposable
portion
 
 
 










575
 






575

o there
may
be
compulsory
heirs
whose
 

legitimes
will
cover
part
of
the
estate
 
 
 













x










=




313,043.48

o the
legitimes
do
not
pass
by
legal
or
 

intestate
succession
 
 
 SOLUTION
2:


 
 
 




A
is
entitled
to
12/24

ART.
851
states
exactly
the
same
rule
laid
down
in
 
 
 




B
is
entitled
to
8/24

ART.
841
 
 
 




C
is
entitled
to
3/24


 
 
 
 Total:



23/24

ART.
852.
If
it
was
the
intention
of
the
testator
that
the
 


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 20 of 73

 
 
 Ratio
of
12:8:3
=
23
 
 
 SOLUTION
2:


 
 
 




A
is
entitled
to
6/24


 So:
 
 
 




B
is
entitled
to
3/24


 
 
 




C
is
entitled
to
2/24


 




12




=









x_____
 
 
 
 Total:
11/24


 




23
 




600,000
 


 
 
 
 Ratio
of
6:3:2
=
11


 




23x


=




7,200,000__





 


 




23
 











23
 
 
 




So:


 


 





x






=




313,043.48
 
 
 












6










=












x_____


 
 
 











11





 300,000

o find
B’s
increased
share
using
any
of
 

the
solutions
presented
above
(you
 
 
 










11x







=






1,800,000__

may
also
use
your
own
devised
solution
 
 
 











11























11

and
share
it
with
the
class);
your
 

answer
must
be
208,695.65
 
 
 
 x






=






163,636.36


 


 o find
B’s
increased
share;
your
answer


 must
be
81,818.19


 


 


 


 

o find
C’s
increased
share;
your
answer
 

must
be
78,260.87
 


 


 o find
C’s
increased
share;
your
answer


 must
be
54,545.45


 


 


 


 

o now
add
A’s,
B’s,
and
C’s
increased
 

shares;
total
must
be
600,000
 


 

‐ X
dies
with
Y
(a
legitimate
child)
as
his
only
 

compulsory
heir.
X
leaves
a
will:
“I
give
A,
B,
and
 o now
add
A’s,
B’s,
and
C’s
increased

C
the
entire
free
portion
of
my
estate,
such
that
A
 shares;
the
total
must
be
300,000
(Y
is

gets
1/4,
B
gets
1/8,
and
C
gets
1/2
of
said
free
 entitled
to
300,000,
his
legitime)

portion.”
X’s
net
estate
is
worth
P600,000.
 

o the
total
of
the
specified
portions
is
 Illustrations
of
ART.
853:

only
11/24
 ‐ X
dies
without
any
compulsory
heirs
but
leaves
a

o total
of
proportions:
275,000
 will:
“I
institute
A,
B,
and
C
to
my
entire
estate.
A

 A
=
150,000
(1/4
or
6/24
of
 is
to
get
1/2,
B
is
to
get
1/3,
and
C
is
to
get
1/4

600,000)
 thereof.”
X’s
net
estate
is
valued
at
P600,000
at

 B
=
75,000
(1/8
or
3/24)
 the
time
of
his
death.

 C
=
50,000
(1/12
or
2/24)
 o the
total
of
the
specified
portions
is

o NOTE:
the
free
portion
is
only
1/2
of
 13/12

the
estate,
i.e.
half
of
600,000
or
only
 o total
proportions:
650,000

300,000
  A
=
300,000
(1/2
or
6/12
of

 as
the
total
legacies
given
to
A,
 600,000)

B,
and
C
is
only
275,000
  B
=
200,000
(1/3
or
4/12)

(25,000
short
of
300,000)
  C
=
150,000
(1/4
or
3/12)

their
shares
need
to
be
 o to
find
A’s
reduced
share
(x):

proportionately
increased
 


 SOLUTION
1:

SOLUTION
1:
 
 
 













x











=






300,000__
















x













=








150,000__
 
 
 







600,000













650,000









300,000


















275,000
 


 
 
 










650x





=






180,000,000_
















275x






=





45,000,000_
 
 
 











650
 









650


 
 
 275
 
 275
 


 
 
 
 x







=






276,923.08


 
 
 x











=







163,636.36
 


 
 
 SOLUTION
2:


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 21 of 73

 
 




A
is
entitled
to
6/12
 


 
 




B
is
entitled
to
4/12
 











325x




=







45,000,000_


 
 




C
is
entitled
to
3/12
 












325
 









325


 
 
 Total:
13/12
 


 
 x








=






138,461.54


 
 
 Ratio
of
6:4:3
=
13
 


 SOLUTION
2:


 
 




So:
 




A
is
entitled
to
6/24


 




B
is
entitled
to
4/24


 
 











6








=





_




x_____
 




C
is
entitled
to
3/24


 
 










13
















600,000
 
 Total:
13/24


 


 
 











13x





=







3,600,000__
 Ratio
of
6:4:3
=
13


 
 












13








13
 


 
 
 So:


 
 
 x







=







276,923.08
 


 
 
 





6








=










x_____

o find
B’s
reduced
share;
your
answer
 
 
 




13
 







300,000

must
be
184,615.38
 


 
 
 




13x





=




1,800,000__


 
 
 





13


 
 13


 


 
 
 










x






=






138,461.54


 


 o find
B’s
reduced
share;
your
answer


 must
be
92,307.69


 

o find
C’s
reduced
share;
your
answer
 

must
be
138,461.54
 


 


 


 


 


 


 o find
C’s
reduced
share;
your
answer


 must
be
69,230.77

o now
add
A’s,
B’s,
and
C’s
reduced
 

shares;
the
total
must
now
be
600,000
 


 

‐ X
dies
with
Y
(a
legitimate
child)
as
his
only
 

compulsory
heir.
X
leaves
a
will:
“I
give
A,
B,
and
 

C
the
entire
disposable
portion
of
my
estate,
such
 

that
A
is
to
get
1/4
of
the
estate,
B
is
to
get
1/6
of
 

my
estate,
and
C
is
to
get
1/8
of
my
estate.”
X’s
 o now
add
A’s,
B’s,
and
C’s
reduced

net
estate
is
worth
P600,000.
 shares;
the
total
must
now
be
300,000

o the
total
of
the
specified
portions
is
 (Y
is
entitled
to
300,000,
his
legitime)

13/24
(more
than
1/2
or
12/24
 

available
as
disposable)
 ART.
854.

The
preterition
or
omission
of
one,
some,
or

o total
of
proportions:
325,000
 all
of
the
compulsory
heirs
in
the
direct
line,
whether

 A
=
150,000
(1/4
or
6/24
of
 living
at
the
time
of
the
execution
of
the
will
or
born

600,000)
 after
the
death
of
the
testator,
shall
annul
the
institution

 B
=
100,000
(1/6
or
4/24)
 of
heir;
but
the
devises
and
legacies
shall
be
valid

 C
=
75,000
(1/8
or
3/24)
 insofar
as
they
are
not
inofficious.

o NOTE:
the
free
portion
is
only
1/2
of
 

the
estate,
i.e.
half
of
600,000
or
only
 If
the
omitted
compulsory
heirs
should
die
before
the

300,000
 testator,
the
institution
shall
be
effectual,
without

 as
the
total
legacies
given
to
A,
 prejudice
to
the
right
of
representation.


B,
and
C
is
325,000
(25,000
in
 

excess
of
the
300,000
 Preterition
(omission)
in
sum:

disposable
portion)
their
 ‐ omission
from
what?

shares
need
to
be
 o from
inheritance,
NOT
from
the
will

proportionately
decreased
 (“total
omission
in
the
inheritance”)


 ‐ who
can
be
preterited?

SOLUTION
1:
 o compulsory
heirs
in
the
direct
line
















x









=








150,000__
 ‐ what
is
the
effect
of
preterition?










300,000













325,000


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 22 of 73
 o annuls
the
institution
of
heir
but
 Held:
That
there
was
no
preterition
because
Helen
Garcia,

respects
legacies
and
devises
insofar
as
 a
compulsory
heir,
was
not
entirely
omitted
from
the

these
do
not
impair
the
legitimes
 inheritance
as
in
fact
she
received
a
legacy.
That
Helen


 Garcia’s
remedy
is
to
have
her
legitime
satisfied.

The
following
cases
do
NOT
constitute
preterition:*
 

‐ if
the
heir
in
question
is
instituted
in
the
will
but
 Heirs
of
Ureta
v.
Heirs
of
Ureta
(2011)

the
portion
given
to
him
by
the
will
is
less
than
 

his
legitime
(Reyes
v.
Barretto­Datu
[1967])
 Facts:
Heirs
of
Policronio
argued
that
they
had
been

‐ if
the
heir
is
given
a
legacy
or
devise
(Aznar
v.
 preterited
because
they
were
deprived
of
a
share
in
the

Duncan
[1966])
 estate
of
their
late
father.

‐ if
the
heir
had
received
a
donation
inter
vivos
 

from
the
testator
 Held:
That
preterition
is
a
concept
of
testamentary

o donation
inter
vivos
is
considered
as
an
 succession
and
that
where
decedent
leaves
no
will,
as
in

advance
on
the
legitime
(cf.
ART.
906,
 this
case,
there
can
be
no
preterition.

909,
910,
and
1062)
 

‐ if
the
heir
is
not
mentioned
in
the
will
nor
was
a
 There
is
preteriton
if
a
compulsory
heir
received

recipient
of
a
donation
inter
vivos
from
the
 nothing
from
the
testator
by
way
of:

testator,
but
not
all
of
the
estate
is
disposed
of
by
 ‐ testamentary
succession

will
 ‐ legacy
or
devise

o the
omitted
heir
would
receive
 ‐ donation
inter
vivos

something
by
intestacy
from
the
vacant
 ‐ intestacy

portion
(not
disposed
of
by
will)
 


 What
constitutes
preterition
is
not
omission

*in
all
these
cases,
the
remedy
of
the
compulsory
heir,
if
 (in
the
sense
of
not
being
mention)
in
the
will
but

the
value
of
what
he
received
is
less
than
his
legitime,
is
to
 being
completely
left
out
of
the
inheritance

demand
completion
of
the
same
(ART.
906
and
907)
 


 Seangio
v.
Reyes
(2006)

Reyes
v.
Barretto­Datu
(1967)
 


 Facts:
Testator
executed
a
holographic
will
wherein
he

Facts:
Testator
instituted
as
heirs
his
two
daughters,
 disinherited
one
of
his
compulsory
heirs
(Alfredo,

Salud
and
Milagros.
Later,
it
turned
out
that
Salud
was
not
 testator’s
son).
Virginia’s
name
mentioned
in
the

the
testator’s
daughter
by
his
wife.
Milagros
claimed
that
 holographic
will.

Salud
not
entitled
to
any
share
in
her
father’s
estate.
 


 Held:
That
there
was
no
preterition
because
it
was

Held:
That
while
the
share
assigned
to
Salud
impinged
on
 testator’s
intention
to
bequeath
his
estate
to
all
his

the
legitime
of
Milagros,
Salud
did
not
for
that
reason
 compulsory
heirs
except
Alfredo.
That
testator
did
not

cease
to
be
a
testamentary
heir.
That
there
was
no
 institute
an
heir
to
the
exclusion
of
other
compulsory

preterition
or
total
omission
of
a
forced
heir
(Milagros)
 heirs.
That
mere
mention
of
Virginia’s
name
did
not

despite
the
fact
that
Milagros
was
allotted
in
her
father’s
 institute
her
as
universal
heir
but
a
mere
witness
to

will
a
share
smaller
than
her
legitime.
That
such
allotment
 Alfredo’s
maltreatment
of
testator.

did
not
invalidate
the
institution
of
heir
(Salud).
 


 Who
are
included
within
the
terms
of
ART.
854

Balane
Comments:
 ‐ a
compulsory
heir
in
the
direct
line,
“whether

‐ in
Reyes:
(a)
there
was
a
compulsory
heir
 living
at
the
time
of
the
execution
of
the
will
or

[Milagros];
(b)
such
heir
was
instituted
in
the
 born
after
the
death
of
the
testator”

will;
(c)
the
testamentary
disposition
given
to
 o but
quasi‐posthumous
children
also

such
heir
was
less
than
her
legitime
 included

o there
was
NO
PRETERITION
  those
born
after
the
execution

o reason:
there
was
NO
TOTAL
 of
the
will
but
before
the

OMISSION
inasmuch
as
the
heir
 testator’s
death

received
something
from
the
 

inheritance
 Compulsory
heirs
in
the
direct
line—

o remedy
of
compulsory
heir
who
 ‐ children
or
descendants*

received
less
than
his
legitime:

 o including
adopted
children
(Acain
v.

 completion
or
satisfaction
of
 IAC
[1987])

legitime
(ART.
906
and
907)
 ‐ parents
or
ascendants
(in
default
of
children
or


 descendants)*

Aznar
v.
Duncan
(1966)
 


 *legitimate
or
illegitimate;
the
law
does
not
distinguish

Facts:
Testator
instituted
as
heir
his
acknowledged
 (Manresa)

natural
daughter,
Lucy
Duncan.
Helen
Garcia,
another
 

natural
daughter
of
testator
who
however
was
not
 Surviving
spouse
is
NOT
a
compulsory
heir
in
the

acknowledged,
complained
that
she
had
been
preterited.
 direct
line

Helen
Garcia
was
given
only
a
legacy
of
3,600
pesos.
 ‐ while
a
compulsory
heir,
he
is
NOT
in
the
direct


 line
(Balanay
v.
Martinez,
Acain
v.
IAC)

‐ meaning
of
direct
line
(ART.
964,
par.
2)


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 23 of 73
 o “a
direct
line
is
that
constituted
by
the
 abrogate,
to
make
void,
to
reduce
to
nothing,
to
annihilate,

series
of
degrees
among
ascendants
 to
obliterate,
to
blot
out,
to
make
void
or
of
no
effect,
to

and
descendants”
 nullify,
to
abolish.
That
institution
of
testatrix’s
sister
as


 sole
her
is
annulled.

Predecease
of
preterited
compulsory
heir
(par.
2,
 

ART.
854)
 Preterition
contra
ineffective
disinheritance

‐ the
determination
of
whether
or
not
there
are
 ‐ preterition
is
the
total
omission
from
the

preterited
heirs
can
be
made
only
upon
the
 inheritance,
without
the
heir
being
expressly

testator’s
death
 disinherited

‐ if
the
preterited
heir
predeceases
(or
is
 o implied
basis:
inadvertent
omission
by

unworthy
to
succeed)
the
testator,
preterition
 the
testator

becomes
moot
  so
if
testator
explicitly

o BUT
if
there
is
a
descendant
of
that
heir
 disinherits
the
heir,
ART.
854

who
is
himself
preterited,
then
the
 will
not
apply

effects
of
preterition
will
arise
 ‐ if
the
disinheritance
is
ineffective
for
absence
of

o to
illustrate—
 one
or
other
of
the
requisites
for
a
valid

 if
a
testator
(X)
makes
a
will
 disinheritance—

which
results
in
the
 o the
heir
is
simply
entitled
to
demand

preterition
of
one
of
his
two
 his
rightful
share

sons
(A);
A
predeceases
his
 

father
X
but
A
leaves
a
son
(A‐ ART.
855.
The
share
of
a
child
or
descendant
omitted
in

1);
ART.
854
applies
(i.e.
A‐1
 a
will
must
first
be
taken
from
the
part
of
the
estate
not

is
preterited
because
he
 disposed
of
by
will,
if
any;
if
that
is
not
sufficient,
so

succeeds
X
by
representation
 much
as
may
be
necessary
must
be
taken
proportionally

of
his
father
A,
the
son
of
X)
 from
the
shares
of
the
other
compulsory
heirs.


 

Adopted
children—
 Proper
application
of
ART.
855—


 ‐ where
a
compulsory
heir
is
not
preterited
but

Acain
v.
IAC
(1987)
 left
something
(because
not
all
the
estate
is


 disposed
of
by
will)
less
than
his
legitime

Facts:
Widow
and
legally
adopted
child
of
testator
 

opposed
probate
of
testator’s
will:
they
had
been
 How
to
fill
up
a
compulsory
heir’s
impaired
legitime:

preterited.
Will
had
no
legacies
or
devises.
 ‐ from
the
vacant
portion



 ‐ from
the
shares
of
the
testamentary
heirs,

Held:
That
widow
not
preterited
because
she
is
not
a
 legatees,
and
devises,
proportionally

compulsory
heir
in
the
direct
line;
but
legally
adopted
 

child,
preterited.
That
adoption
gives
to
adopted
person
 ART.
855
is
superfluous
because
is
speaks
of

same
rights
and
duties
as
if
he
were
legitimate
child
of
 completion
of
legitime
(dealt
with
in
detail
in
ART.

adopter
and
makes
adopted
person
a
legal
heir
of
adopter.
 907,
et
seq.)

That
will
is
totally
abrogated.
 


 ART.
855
is
inaccurate

Effect
of
preterition
 ‐ coverage
should
be
all
compulsory
heirs,
not
just

‐ annulment
of
the
institution
of
heir,
but
 children
or
descendants

‐ validity
of
legacies
and
devises
to
the
extent
that
 ‐ proportionate
reduction
must
be
borne
by

these
do
not
impair
legitimes
(to
the
extent
of
 testamentary
heirs,
including
devisees
and

the
free
portion;
legacies
and
devises
merely
to
 legatees,
and
NOT
by
the
compulsory
heirs

be
reduced
if
legitimes
are
impaired)
 

o preterition
is
the
only
instance
where
 ART.
856.
A
voluntary
heir
who
dies
before
the
testator

distinction
between
heirs
and
legatees
 transmits
nothing
to
his
heirs.

/
devisees
is
relevant
 

 if
will
contains
only
 A
compulsory
heir
who
dies
before
the
testator,
a

institutions
of
heirs
and
there
 person
incapacitated
to
succeed,
and
one
who

is
preterition—total
intestacy
 renounces
the
inheritance,
shall
transmit
no
right
to
his

results
 own
heirs
except
in
cases
expressly
provided
for
in
this


 Code.

Meaning
of
annulment
of
institution
of
heir:
 


 Right
to
succeed
cannot
be
transmitted—it
is
a
purely

Nuguid
v.
Nuguid
(1966)
 personal
right


 

Facts:
Testatrix
died
without
descendants.
Testatrix
 Representation

instituted
in
her
will
her
sister
as
sole
heir.
Testatrix’s
 ‐ representative
is
raised
to
the
level
of
the
person

parents
opposed
probate:
that
they
had
been
preterited.
 represented


 

Held:
That
testatrix’s
parents
(forced
heirs
in
the
direct
 Complete
statement
of
the
rule:

ascending
line)
had
been
preterited,
as
will
completely
 ‐ an
heir
(whether
compulsory,
voluntary
or

omits
both
of
them.
That
the
word
“annul”
means
to
 testamentary,
or
legal)
transmits
nothing
to
his


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 24 of 73
 heirs
in
case
of
predecease,
incapacity,
 ‐ incapacity
of
the
first
heir

renunciation,
or
disinheritance
 

o however,
in
case
of
predecease
or
 How
testator
may
provide
for
simple
substitution
with

incapacity
of
compulsory
or
legal
heirs,
 all
three
causes—

as
well
as
disinheritance
of
compulsory
 ‐ by
specifying
all
the
three
causes

heirs—
 ‐ by
merely
providing
for
a
simple
substitution

 the
rules
on
representation
 

shall
apply
 Restricted
simple
substitution


 ‐ testator
may
limit
the
operation
of
simple

Section 3 – Substitution of Heirs substitution
by
specifying
only
one
or
two
of
the

three
causes

ART.
857.
Substitution
is
the
appointment
of
another
 o vacancy
results
if
the
cause
specified

heir
so
that
he
may
enter
into
the
inheritance
in
default
 does
not
happen
(i.e.
if
another
cause

of
the
heir
originally
instituted.
 not
specified
in
the
will
occurs)


 

Simple
substitution
is
really
a
form
of
conditional
 ART.
860.
Two
or
more
persons
may
be
substituted
for

institution
 one;
and
one
person
for
two
or
more
heirs.


 

Basis
of
substitutions
 Brief
or
compendious
substitution

‐ testamentary
freedom
 ‐ a
possible
variation
of
either
a
vulgar
or
a

‐ in
simple
substitutions,
the
testator
simply
 fideicomisaria

makes
a
second
choice,
in
case
the
first
choice
 ‐ brief

does
not
inherit
 o two
or
more
substitutes
for
one

‐ in
fideicommissary
substitutions,
the
testator
 original
heir

imposes
a
restriction
or
burden
on
the
first
heir
 ‐ compendious

coupled
with
a
selection
of
a
subsequent
 o one
substitute
for
two
or
more
original

recipient
of
the
property
 heirs


 

ART.
858.
Substitution
of
heirs
may
be:
 Substitution
will
take
place
only
if
all
the
original


 heirs
are
disqualified—

(1)
Simple
or
common;
 ‐ if
one
is
substituted
for
two
or
more
original


 heirs,
and
one
but
not
all
is
not
qualified
to

(2)
Brief
of
compendious;
 inherit


 o NO
SUBSTITUTION—share
left
vacant

(3)
Reciprocal;
or
 will
accrue
to
surviving
co‐heir/s


  if
A
and
B
were
instituted
as

(4)
Fideicommissary.
 heirs
to
1/3
of
the
estate,
with


 C
as
substitute,
substitution

Four
kinds
of
substitution:
 will
take
place
only
if
both
A

‐ simple
or
common
(vulgar)
[ART.
859]
 and
B
are
disqualified
to

‐ brief
or
compendious
(brevilocua
o
compendiosa)
 inherit;
if
only
A
is

[ART.
860]
 disqualified,
B
would
inherit

‐ reciprocal
(recíproca)
[ART.
861]
 A’s
share,
exclusively

‐ fideicommissary
(fideicomisaria)
[ART.
863]
 o EXCEPTION—


  if
testator
provides
otherwise

In
reality,
there
are
only
two
kinds
of
substitutions:
 (that
substitution
will
take

vulgar
and
fideicomisaria
(mutually
exclusive,
i.e.
 place
in
case
any
one
of
the

substitution
must
be
one
or
the
other,
cannot
be
both
 original
heirs
dies,
renounces,

at
the
same
time)
 or
is
incapacitated

‐ the
other
two
are
modalidades
of
the
vulgar
or
 

the
fideicomisaria
 ART.
861.
If
heirs
instituted
in
unequal
shares
should


 be
reciprocally
substituted,
the
substitute
shall
acquire

ART.
859.
The
testator
may
designate
one
or
more
 the
share
of
the
heir
who
dies,
renounces,
or
is

persons
to
substitute
the
heir
or
heirs
instituted
in
case
 incapacitated,
unless
it
clearly
appears
that
the

such
heir
or
heirs
should
die
before
him,
or
should
not
 intention
of
the
testator
was
otherwise.
If
there
are

wish,
or
should
be
incapacitated
to
accept
the
 more
than
one
substitute,
they
shall
have
the
same

inheritance.
 share
in
the
substitution
as
in
the
institution.


 

A
simple
substitution
without
a
statement
of
the
cases
 Reciprocal
substitution

to
which
it
refers,
shall
comprise
the
three
mentioned
in
 ‐ just
a
variation
of
simple
or
fideicommissary

the
preceding
paragraph
unless
the
testator
has
 substitution

otherwise
provided.

 


 Illustration
of
second
sentence,
ART.
861—

Causes
of
simple
substitution
 ‐ A,
B,
and
C
are
instituted,
respectively,
to
1/2,

‐ predecease
of
the
first
heir
 1/3,
and
1/6
of
the
estate

‐ renunciation
of
the
first
heir


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 25 of 73
 o if
A
predeceases
the
testator,
B
and
C
 child
vis‐à‐vis
his
adopter
(cf.

will
acquire
A’s
1/2
portion
in
the
 Acain
v.
IAC)

proportion
of
2:1
(their
testamentary
 ‐ the
dual
obligation
imposed
upon
the
fiduciary

shares
being
1/3
and
1/6)
 to
preserve
the
property
and
to
transmit
it
after

o should
B
predecease,
A
and
C
will
get
 the
lapse
of
the
period
to
the
fideicommissary

B’s
1/3
portion
in
proportion
of
3:1
 heir

(1/2
and
1/6)
 o this
is
the
essence
of
the
fideicomisaria

o if
C
predeceases,
A
and
B
will
share
C’s
 (Crisologo
v.
Singson
[1962])

1/6
portion
in
the
proportion
of
3:2
 o fiduciary
or
first
heir
is
basically
a


 usufructuary,
with
the
right
to
use
and

ART.
862.
The
substitute
shall
be
subject
to
the
same
 enjoy
the
property
but
without
the

charges
and
conditions
imposed
upon
the
instituted
 right
to
dispose
of
the
same
(jus

heir,
unless
the
testator
has
expressly
provided
the
 disponendi)

contrary,
or
the
charges
or
conditions
are
personally
 o effect
if
there
is
no
obligation
to

applicable
only
to
the
heir
instituted.
 preserve
and
transmit—there
is
no


 fideicommissary
substitution,
but

Rationale
 something
else
(PCIB
v.
Escolin

‐ substitute
merely
takes
the
place
of
the
original
 [1974])

heir
 ‐ both
heirs
must
be
living
and
qualified
to


 succeed
at
the
time
of
the
testator’s
death

ART.
863.
A
fideicommissary
substitution
by
virtue
of
 o living


which
the
fiduciary
or
first
heir
instituted
is
entrusted
 o qualified
(cf.
ART.
1024
to
1034)

with
the
obligation
to
preserve
and
to
transmit
to
a
  these
two
requisites
are
met

second
heir
the
whole
or
part
of
the
inheritance,
shall
 only
upon
the
testator’s
death,

be
valid
and
shall
take
effect,
provided
such
substitution
 and
applies
to
both
the
first

does
not
go
beyond
one
degree
from
the
heir
originally
 and
second
heirs

instituted,
and
provided,
further,
that
the
fiduciary
or
  thus,
the
second
heir
need
not

first
heir
and
the
second
heir
are
living
at
the
time
of
the
 survive
the
first
heir

death
of
the
testator.

  if
the
second
heir
dies
before


 the
first
heir,
the
second
heir’s

Elements
of
the
fideicomisaria
 own
heirs
merely
take
his

‐ a
first
heir
(fiduciary
/
fiduciario)
who
takes
the
 place

property
upon
the
testator’s
death
 

o the
fiduciary
enters
upon
the
 Palacios
v.
Ramirez
(1982)

inheritance
upon
the
opening
of
the
 

succession
(i.e.
when
the
testator
dies)
 Facts:
Testator’s
will
instituted
his
companion
over
2/3
of

‐ a
second
heir
(fideicommissary
heir
/
 estate
(usufruct),
and
at
the
same
time
instituted
as

fideicomisario)
who
takes
the
property
 substitutes
of
companion
two
others
not
related
at
all
to

subsequently
from
the
fiduciary
 companion.

o fideicommissary
heir
does
not
receive
 

property
until
the
fiduciary’s
right
 Held:
That
the
fideicommissary
substitution
is
void

expires
 because
law
mandates
that
“such
substitution
does
not
go

o both
heirs
enter
into
the
inheritance
 beyond
one
degree
from
the
heir
originally
instituted.”

successively
(i.e.
one
after
the
other,
 That
“degree”
means
generation,
and
second
heir
must
be

each
in
his
own
turn)
 related
to
and
be
one
generation
from
first
heir.
That

o note
that
while
the
fideicommissary
 fideicommissary
heir
can
only
be
either
a
child
or
a
parent

heir
does
not
receive
property
upon
the
 of
first
heir.

testator’s
death,
his
right
thereto
vests
 

at
that
time
and
merely
becomes
 Balane
Criticizes
the
Palacios
Ruling:

subject
to
a
period,
and
that
right
 ‐ per
Justice
José
Vitug,
the
Palacios

passes
to
his
own
heirs
should
he
die
 interpretation
of
“degree”
as
degree
of

before
the
fiduciary’s
right
expires
 relationship
“would
disenfranchise
a
juridical

‐ the
second
heir
must
be
one
degree
from
the
 person
from
being
either
a
fiduciary
or

fiduciary
or
first
heir
 fideicommissary
heir”

o only
one
transmission
is
allowed
in
the
 

fideicomisaria
(from
fiduciary
to
the
 PCIB
v.
Escolin
(1974)

fideicommissary
heir)
 

o “one
degree”
means
that
the
 Facts:
Testatrix
instituted
to
the
whole
estate
her

fideicommissary
heir
must
be
in
the
 husband,
with
right
to
dispose,
and
at
the
same
time
her

first
degree
of
relationship
with
the
 siblings
or
the
respective
heirs
of
her
siblings,
as
heirs
to

fiduciary
or
first
heir
(i.e.
second
heir
 residue
and
remainder
of
estate,
after
death
of
husband.

must
either
be
a
child
or
a
parent
of
the
 

first
heir)
per
Palacios
v.
Ramirez
 Held:
That
there
is
no
fideicommissary
substitution

(1982),
infra
 because
there
is
no
obligation
on
the
part
of
testatrix’s

 the
rule
applies
and
is
true
a
 husband
as
first
heir,
to
preserve
properties
for
substitute

fortiori
in
case
of
an
adopted
 heirs.
That
siblings
of
testatrix
instituted
simultaneously


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 26 of 73
with
testatrix’s
husband,
subject
to
certain
conditions.
  improvements

That
brothers
and
sisters
of
testatrix
were
to
inherit
what
 

husband
would
not
dispose
of
during
his
lifetime.
That
 Damage
to,
or
deterioration
of,
property

this
is
a
valid
simultaneous
institution
of
heir.
 ‐ if
caused
by
a
fortuitous
event
or
ordinary
wear


 and
tear

Balane
Comments:
 o fiduciary
not
liable

‐ the
institution
in
PCIB
is
a
simultaneous
 ‐ if
caused
by
fiduciary’s
fault
or
negligence

institution
(not
a
fideicomisaria
because
there
is
 o fiduciary
liable

no
obligation
imposed
upon
the
husband
to
 

preserve
the
estate
or
any
part
thereof
for
 ART.
866.
The
second
heir
shall
acquire
a
right
to
the

anyone
else)
 succession
from
the
time
of
the
testator’s
death,
even

o on
the
one
hand,
of
the
husband
subject
 though
he
should
die
before
the
fiduciary.
The
right
of

to
a
resolutory
condition
(i.e.
right
 the
second
heir
shall
pass
to
his
heirs.

terminates
at
the
time
of
death)
 

o on
the
other,
of
the
husband’s
brothers‐
 Notes:

and
sisters‐in‐law
subject
to
a
 ‐ second
heir’s
right
vests
upon
the
testator’s

suspensive
condition
(i.e.
condition
 death
(cf.
ART.
777
and
ART.
878
since
as
far
as

may
or
may
not
happen—remainder
of
 the
second
heir
is
concerned,
the
institution
of

estate)
 him
is
one
subject
to
a
suspensive
term)


 ‐ the
second
heir
need
not
survive
the
first
heir
in

Tenure
of
the
fiduciary
or
first
heir
 order
for
substitution
to
be
effective

‐ primary
rule
 o the
second
heir’s
own
heirs
simply
take

o period
indicated
by
the
testator
 his
place

‐ secondary
rule
 

o the
fiduciary’s
lifetime
(if
the
testator
 ART.
867.
The
following
shall
not
take
effect:

did
not
indicate
a
period)
 


 (1)
Fideicommissary
substitutions
which
are
not
made

ART.
864.
A
fideicommissary
substitution
can
never
 in
an
express
manner,
either
by
giving
them
this
name,

burden
the
legitime.
 or
imposing
upon
the
fiduciary
the
absolute
obligation


 to
deliver
the
property
to
a
second
heir;

Note:
 

‐ the
legitime
passes
by
strict
operation
of
law,
 (2)
Provisions
which
contain
a
perpetual
prohibition
to

therefore
the
testator
has
no
power
over
it
 alienate,
and
even
a
temporary
one,
beyond
the
limit


 fixed
in
Article
863;

ART.
865.
Every
fideicommissary
substitution
must
be
 

expressly
made
in
order
that
it
may
be
valid.
 (3)
Those
which
impose
upon
the
heir
the
charge
of


 paying
to
various
persons
successively,
beyond
the
limit

The
fiduciary
shall
be
obliged
to
deliver
the
inheritance
 prescribed
in
Article
863,
a
certain
income
or
pension;

to
the
second
heir,
without
other
deductions
than
those
 

which
arise
from
legitimate
expenses,
credits
and
 (4)
Those
which
leave
to
a
person
the
whole
or
part
of

improvements,
save
in
the
case
where
the
testator
has
 the
hereditary
property
in
order
that
he
may
apply
or

provided
otherwise.
 invest
the
same
according
to
secret
instructions


 communicated
to
him
by
the
testator.

Re
par.
1:
 

‐ manner
of
imposing
a
fideicomisaria:
express
 Re
par.
1:

o two
ways
 ‐ see
notes
under
ART.
865

 by
the
use
of
the
term
 ‐ note
that
lack
of
this
element
does
not,
by
that

fideicommissary,
or
 fact
alone,
nullify
the
institution

 by
imposing
upon
the
first
 o it
only
means
that
the
institution
is
not

heir
the
absolute
obligation
to
 a
fideicomisaria;
it
could
however
be

preserve
and
to
transmit
to
 something
else,
as
in
PCIB

the
second
heir
 


 Re
par.
2:

Re
par.
2:
 ‐ if
there
is
a
fideicomisaria,
the
limit
is
the
first

‐ allowable
deductions
 heir’s
lifetime

o general
rule:
the
fiduciary
should
 ‐ if
there
is
no
fideicomisaria,
the
limit
is
20
years

deliver
the
property
intact
and
 (ART.
870)

undiminished
to
the
fideicommissary
 

heir
upon
the
arrival
of
the
period
 Re
par.
3:

o exception:
the
only
deductions
allowed,
 ‐ there
can
only
be
two
beneficiaries
of
the

in
the
absence
of
a
contrary
provision
 pension,
one
after
the
other,
and
the
second

in
the
will—
 must
be
one
degree
from
the
first
(as
in
ART.

 legitimate
expenses
(i.e.
 863)

necessary
and
useful,
not
 ‐ there
is
no
prohibition
however
on
simultaneous

ornamental
expenses)
 beneficiaries

 credits
 


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 27 of 73
Re
par.
4:
 ‐ time
limitation
will
not
apply

‐ the
ostensible
heir
is
in
reality
only
a
dummy,
 ‐ ART.
863
will
apply,
which
allows,
as
a
period,

because
in
reality,
the
person
intended
to
be
 the
lifetime
of
the
first
heir

benefited
is
the
one
to
whom
the
secret
 

instructions
refer
 Rationale
(as
in
ART.
867,
par.
2,
supra)

o purpose
of
surreptitious
disposition
is
 ‐ commerce

to
circumvent
some
prohibition
or
 

disqualification—T.C.B.C.I.T.J.
(this
 Section 4 – Conditional Testamentary Dispositions
cannot
be
countenanced
in
this
 and Testamentary Dispositions With a Term
jurisdiction)

o effect:
entire
disposition
or
provision
is
 Three
kinds
of
testamentary
dispositions

VOID
 ‐ conditional
dispositions


 o condition
(see
ART.
1179,
par.
1)

ART.
868.
The
nullity
of
the
fideicommissary
 ‐ dispositions
with
a
term

substitution
does
not
prejudice
the
validity
of
the
 o term
(see
ART.
1193,
par.
1
and
3)

institution
of
the
heirs
first
designated;
the
 ‐ dispositions
with
a
mode
(modal
dispositions)

fideicommissary
clause
shall
simply
be
considered
as
 o mode
(see
ART.
882)

not
written.


 General Provisions:
Effect
if
fideicommissary
substitution
is
void
or

ineffective—
 ART.
871.
The
institution
of
an
heir
may
be
made

‐ institution
of
first
heir
simply
becomes
pure
and
 conditionally,
or
for
a
certain
purpose
or
cause.

unqualified
 


 ART.
872.
The
testator
cannot
impose
any
charge,

Effect
if
the
institution
of
the
first
heir
is
void
or
 condition
or
substitution
whatsoever
upon
the
legitime

ineffective—
 prescribed
in
this
Code.
Should
he
do
so,
the
same
shall

‐ not
provided
in
ART.
868
 be
considered
as
not
imposed.

‐ “when
the
fiduciary
predeceases
or
is
unable
to
 

succeed,
the
fideicommissary
heir
takes
the
 Conditions:
inheritance
upon
the
death
of
the
decedent”
(Mr.

Justice
Vitug)
 ART.
873.
Impossible
conditions
and
those
contrary
to

o the
nullity
or
inefficacy
of
the
 law
or
good
customs
shall
be
considered
as
not
imposed

institution
of
the
fiduciary
should
not
 and
shall
in
no
manner
prejudice
the
heir,
even
if
the

nullify
the
institution
of
the
 testator
should
otherwise
provide.

fideicommissary
heir
 

o the
right
of
the
fideicommissary
heir
 Impossible
conditions

should
then
be
absolute
and
effective
 ‐ may
be
factually
or
legally
impossible

upon
the
testator’s
death,
as
if
no
 

fiduciary
or
first
heir
had
been
 Effect
if
impossible
or
illegal
condition
is
imposed
by

instituted
 testator

 since
ultimately,
the
intention
 ‐ condition
is
simply
considered
as
not
written

of
the
testator
is
to
ultimately
 o testamentary
disposition
is
not

pass
the
property
to
the
 annulled

second
heir
(Manresa)
 o disposition
becomes
pure
(no


 condition)

ART.
869.
A
provision
whereby
the
testator
leaves
to
a
 ‐ rule
in
donations
is
same
(ART.
727)
while
rule

person
the
whole
or
part
of
the
inheritance,
and
to
 in
obligations
is
different
(ART.
1183)

another
the
usufruct,
shall
be
valid.
If
he
gives
the
 o reason
for
the
difference:
basis
of

usufruct
to
various
persons,
not
simultaneously,
but
 testamentary
dispositions
and

successively,
the
provisions
of
Article
863
shall
apply.
 donations,
both
gratuity
(liberality);
on


 the
other
hand,
obligations
are
onerous

Note:
 (condition
imposed
is
causa,
and
if

‐ if
testator
institutes
successive
usufructuaries,
 eliminated
for
being
impossible
or

there
can
only
be
two,
one
after
the
other,
and
as
 illegal,
there
would
be
a
failure
of

to
the
two
of
them,
all
the
requisites
of
ART.
863
 consideration)

must
be
present
 


 ART.
874.
An
absolute
condition
not
to
contract
a
first

ART.
870.
The
dispositions
of
the
testator
declaring
all
 or
subsequent
marriage
shall
be
considered
as
not

or
part
of
the
estate
inalienable
for
more
than
twenty
 written
unless
such
condition
has
been
imposed
on
the

years
are
void.
 widow
or
widower
by
the
deceased
spouse,
or
by
the


 latter’s
ascendants
or
descendants.

Effect
if
testator
imposes
a
longer
period
than
20
 

years
 Nevertheless,
the
right
of
usufruct,
or
an
allowance
or

‐ prohibition
to
partition
is
valid
only
for
20
years
 some
personal
prestation
may
be
devised
or


 bequeathed
to
any
person
for
the
time
during
which
he

If
there
is
a
fideicommissary
substitution—
 or
she
should
remain
unmarried
or
in
widowhood.


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 28 of 73

 

Conditions
prohibiting
marriage
 This
rule
shall
not
apply
when
the
condition,
already

‐ if
a
first
marriage
is
prohibited
 complied
with,
cannot
be
fulfilled
again.

o condition
always
considered
not
 

imposed
 ART.
877.
If
the
condition
is
casual
or
mixed,
it
shall
be

‐ if
a
subsequent
marriage
is
prohibited
 sufficient
if
it
happen
or
be
fulfilled
at
any
time
before

o if
imposed
by
the
deceased
spouse
or
 or
after
the
death
of
the
testator,
unless
he
has
provided

by
his
/
her
ascendants
or
 otherwise.

descendants—VALID
 

o if
imposed
by
anyone
else—considered
 Should
it
have
existed
or
should
it
have
been
fulfilled
at

not
written
 the
time
the
will
was
executed
and
the
testator
was


 unaware
thereof,
it
shall
be
deemed
as
complied
with.

Re
par.
2:
 

‐ this
paragraph
may
provide
the
testator
of
a
 If
he
had
knowledge
thereof,
the
condition
shall
be

means
of
terminating
the
testamentary
 considered
fulfilled
only
when
it
is
of
such
a
nature
that

benefaction
should
the
heir
contract
marriage
 it
can
no
longer
exist
or
be
complied
with
again.

(even
a
first
one)
 

‐ wording
of
disposition
must
not
be
so
as
to
 ART.
883.
x
x
x

constitute
a
prohibition
forbidden
in
par.
1
 

o e.g.
“I
institute
as
heir
to
1/5
of
my
free
 If
the
person
interested
in
the
condition
should
prevent

portion
Mr.
Quevedough
provided
he
 its
fulfillment,
without
the
fault
of
the
heir,
the
condition

does
not
marry
a
lawyer
or
a
non‐ shall
be
deemed
to
have
been
complied
with.

lawyer”
 

 NOT
ALLOWED
(absolute
 ART.
879.
If
the
potestative
condition
imposed
upon

prohibition)
 the
heir
is
negative,
or
consists
in
not
doing
or
not

o e.g.
“I
institute
as
heir
to
my
entire
free
 giving
something,
he
shall
comply
by
giving
a
security

portion
Ms.
Buttad
for
as
long
as
she
 that
he
will
not
do
or
give
that
which
has
been

remains
single
or
a
widow”
 prohibited
by
the
testator,
and
that
in
case
of

 ALLOWED
 contravention
he
will
return
whatever
he
may
have


 received,
together
with
its
fruits
and
interests.

ART.
874
does
not
prohibit
the
imposition
of
a
 

condition
to
marry
(either
with
reference
to
a
 These
articles
govern
potestative,
casual,
and
mixed

particular
person
or
not)
 conditions

‐ cf.
condition
to
marry
 ‐ potestative:
one
that
depends
solely
on
the
will
of


 the
heir
/
legatee
/
devisee

Neither
does
ART.
874
declare
void
a
relative
 o e.g.
“I
institute
as
heir
to
4/5
of
my
free

prohibition
 portion
Ms.
Chit
Ha‐e
provided
that
she

‐ e.g.
“I
institute
to
2/5
of
my
free
portion
Mr.
 establish
a
permanent
residence
in

Seraphim
Salvavidador
provided
he
does
not
 Burunggan”

marry
a
hotel
receptionist”
 ‐ casual:
one
that
depends
on
the
will
of
a
third


 person
or
on
chance

ART.
875.
Any
disposition
made
upon
the
condition
 o e.g.
“I
institute
as
heir
to
4/5
of
my
free

that
the
heir
shall
make
some
provision
in
his
will
in
 portion
Ms.
Chit
Ha‐e
provided
that
Mt.

favor
of
the
testator
or
of
any
other
person
shall
be
void.
 Pinatubo
erupts”
(chance)


 o e.g.
“I
institute
as
heir
to
4/5
of
my
free

This
article
is
the
scriptura
captatoria
(“Legacy­ portion
Ms.
Chit
Ha‐e
provided
that

hunting
dispositions,
whether
to
heirs
or
legatees,
are
 Knorr
Miswari
surrenders
to
the

void”)
 President”
(will
of
a
third
person)

‐ it
is
not
allowed
 ‐ mixed:
one
that
depends
partly
on
the
will
of
the

‐ quid
pro
quo,
forbidden
 heir
/
legatee
/
devisee
and
partly
either
on
the


 will
of
a
third
person
or
chance

Reasons
for
the
prohibition
 o e.g.
“I
institute
as
heir
to
4/5
of
my
free

‐ captatoria
converts
testamentary
grants
into
 portion
Ms.
Chit
Ha‐e
provided
she

contractual
transactions
 marries
during
my
lifetime
Mr.
Rubber

‐ it
deprives
the
heir
of
testamentary
freedom
 Bellyhar”
(dependent
partly
on
the
will

‐ it
gives
the
testator
the
power
to
dispose
mortis
 of
Ms.
Chit
Hae,
the
heiress,
and
the
will

causa
not
only
of
his
property,
but
also
of
his
 of
Mr.
Bellyhar,
a
third
person)

heir’s
 


 Rule
on
potestative
conditions
(ART.
876)

What
is
declared
void—
 ‐ positive

‐ testamentary
disposition
itself,
not
merely
the
 o general
rule:
must
be
fulfilled
as
soon

condition
 as
the
heir
learns
of
the
testator’s
death


 o exception:

ART.
876.
Any
purely
potestative
condition
imposed
  if
the
condition
was
already

upon
an
heir
must
be
fulfilled
by
him
as
soon
as
he
 complied
with
at
the
time
the

learns
of
the
testator’s
death.


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 29 of 73
 heir
learns
of
the
testator’s
 to
the
intestate
heirs,
as
the
case
may

death,
and
 be

 the
condition
is
of
such
a
 

nature
that
it
cannot
be
 ART.
880
must
not
be
applied
to
institutions
with
a

fulfilled
again
 term
despite
wording

o constructive
compliance
(ART.
883,
 ‐ otherwise,
there
will
be
an
irreconcilable
conflict

par.
2):
condition
deemed
fulfilled
 with
ART.
885,
par.
2,
which
mandates
that

‐ negative
(ART.
879)
 before
the
arrival
of
the
term,
the
property

o heir
must
give
security
(caución
 should
be
given
to
the
legal
heirs

muciana)
to
guarantee
the
return
of
the
 

value
of
the
property,
fruits,
and
 Re
par.
2,
ART.
880—

interests,
in
case
of
contravention
 ‐ property
shall
be
in
the
executor’s
or

 if
condition
is
violated,
 administrator’s
custody
until
the
heir
furnishes

intestate
or
legal
heirs
must
 the
caución
muciana

go
after
security
(caución
 

muciana)
 Procedural
rules
governing
appointment
of


 administrator—

Rule
on
casual
or
mixed
conditions
(ART.
877)
 ‐ Rules
77
to
90,
Rules
of
Court

‐ general
rule:
may
be
fulfilled
at
any
time
(before
 

or
after
the
testator’s
death),
unless
the
testator
 ART.
884.
Conditions
imposed
by
the
testator
upon
the

provides
otherwise
 heirs
shall
be
governed
by
the
rules
established
for

o qualification:
if
already
fulfilled
at
the
 conditional
obligations
in
all
matters
not
provided
for

time
of
the
execution
of
the
will—
 by
this
Section.

 if
testator
unaware
of
fact
of
 

fulfillment—deemed
fulfilled
 Note:

 if
testator
aware
thereof—(a)
 ‐ suppletorily
governing
conditional
institutions

if
cannot
be
fulfilled
again:
 are
ART.
1179
to
1192,
on
conditional

deemed
fulfilled;
(b)
if
can
be
 obligations

fulfilled
again:
must
be
 

fulfilled
again
 Terms:
‐ constructive
compliance
(ART.
883,
par.
2)

o if
casual—not
applicable
 ART.
878.
A
disposition
with
a
suspensive
term
does

o if
mixed—
 not
prevent
the
instituted
heir
from
acquiring
his
rights

 if
dependent
partly
on
 and
transmitting
them
to
his
heirs
even
before
the

chance—not
applicable
 arrival
of
the
term.

 if
dependent
partly
on
the
will
 

of
a
third
party—(a)
if
third
 Term:
certain
to
arrive

party
is
an
interested
party:
 ‐ may
either
be
suspensive
or
resolutory

applicable;
(b)
if
third
party
is
 

not
an
interested
party:
not
 Condition:
uncertain
to
happen

applicable
 


 When
heir’s
right
vests
(in
dispositions
with
a
term)

ART.
880.
If
the
heir
be
instituted
under
a
suspensive
 ‐ upon
the
testator’s
death

condition
or
term,
the
estate
shall
be
placed
under
 o should
heir
die
before
the
arrival
of
the

administration
until
the
condition
is
fulfilled,
or
until
it
 suspensive
term,
he
merely
transmits

becomes
certain
that
it
cannot
be
fulfilled,
or
until
the
 his
right
to
his
own
heirs
who
can

arrival
of
the
term.
 demand
when
the
term
arrives
(cf.


 ART.
866)

The
same
shall
be
done
if
the
heir
does
not
give
the
 

security
required
in
the
preceding
article.
 Rule
in
conditional
institutions
(if
instituted
heir
dies


 before
the
happening
of
the
condition)

ART.
881.
The
appointment
of
the
administrator
of
the
 ‐ cf.
ART.
1034,
par.
3
(“if
the
institution,
devise,

estate
mentioned
in
the
preceding
article,
as
well
as
the
 or
legacy
should
be
conditional,
the
time
of
the

manner
of
the
administration
and
the
rights
and
 compliance
with
the
condition
shall
also
be

obligations
of
the
administrator
shall
be
governed
by
 considered”)

the
Rules
of
Court.
 o import:
in
conditional
institutions,
the


 heir
should
be
living
and
qualified
to

Between
time
of
testator’s
death
and
time
of
 succeed
both
at
the
time
of
the

fulfillment
of
suspensive
condition
or
of
certainty
of
 testator’s
death
and
at
the
time
of
the

its
non­occurrence—
 happening
of
the
condition

‐ property
to
be
placed
under
administration
  i.e.,
the
heir
or
devisee
or

o if
condition
happens:
property
to
be
 legatee
who
dies
before
the

turned
over
to
instituted
heir
 happening
of
the
condition,

o if
it
becomes
certain
that
condition
will
 even
if
he
survives
the

not
happen:
property
to
be
turned
over
 testator,
transmits
no
right
to

to
a
secondary
heir
(if
there
is
one)
or
 his
heirs
(Spanish
Civil
Code)


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 30 of 73

 Ms.
Coscolluela
100
piculs
of
sugar,
and
that
should
Mr.

ART.
885.
The
designation
of
the
day
or
time
when
the
 Rabadilla
die,
his
heirs
shall
similarly
have
same

effects
of
the
institution
of
an
heir
shall
commence
or
 obligation,
and
in
the
event
that
property
devised
is
sold,

cease
shall
be
valid.
 etc.,
seller,
etc.
shall
have
same
obligation.


 

In
both
cases,
the
legal
heir
shall
be
considered
as
called
 Held:
That
the
institution
of
Mr.
Rabadilla
is
a
modal

to
the
succession
until
the
arrival
of
the
period
or
 institution
(because
it
imposes
a
charge
or
obligation

(from)
its
expiration.
But
in
the
first
case
he
shall
not
 upon
the
instituted
heir
without
affecting
the
efficacy
of

enter
into
possession
of
the
property
until
after
having
 such
institution),
and
ART.
882
applies.
That
in
modal

given
sufficient
security,
with
the
intervention
of
the
 institutions,
the
testator
states
(a)
the
object
of
the

instituted
heir.
 institution,
(b)
the
purpose
or
application
of
the
property


 left
by
the
testator,
or
(c)
the
charge
imposed
by
the

If
term
suspensive
(ex
die,
“out
in
the
day”;
“[from]
its
 testator
upon
the
heir.
That
a
condition
suspends
but
does

[period’s]
expiration”)—
 not
obligate;
and
the
mode
obligates
but
does
not

‐ before
the
arrival
of
the
term,
the
property
 suspend.
That
to
some
extent,
mode
is
similar
to
a

should
be
delivered
to
the
legal
or
intestate
heirs
 resolutory
condition.

‐ a
caución
muciana
has
to
be
posted
by
them
 


 Caución
muciana
to
be
posted
by
the
instituted
heir

If
term
is
resolutory
(in
diem,
“into
the
day”;
“until
the
 

arrival
of
the
period”)—
 ART.
883.
When
without
the
fault
of
the
heir,
an

‐ before
the
arrival
of
the
term,
the
property
 institution
referred
to
in
the
preceding
article
cannot

should
be
delivered
to
the
instituted
heir
 take
effect
in
the
exact
manner
stated
by
the
testator,
it

‐ no
caución
muciana
required
 shall
be
complied
with
in
a
manner
most
analogous
to


 and
in
conformity
with
his
wishes.

Modes: 

x
x
x

ART.
882.
The
statement
of
the
object
of
the
institution
 

or
the
application
of
the
property
left
by
the
testator,
or
 Note:

the
charge
imposed
by
him,
shall
not
be
considered
as

a
 ‐ intention
of
the
testator
should
always
be
the

condition
unless
it
appears
that
such
was
his
intention.
 guiding
norm
in
determining
the
sufficiency
of


 the
analogous
performance

That
which
has
been
left
in
this
manner
may
be
claimed
 o e.g.
“I
institute
as
heir
to
1/5
of
my
free

at
once
provided
that
the
instituted
heir
or
his
heirs
 portion
Mr.
St.
Peter
and
he
shall,
every

give
security
for
compliance
with
the
wishes
of
the
 month,
give
to
my
daughter
Ms.
Cera

testator
and
for
the
return
of
anything
he
or
they
may
 Halimawis
one
sack
of
Milagrosa
rice

receive,
together
with
its
fruits
and
interests,
if
he
or
 the
expense
for
which
is
to
be
taken

they
should
disregard
this
obligation.
 from
said
1/5
share”


  if
Milagrosa
rice
is
no
longer

ART.
882,
par.
1—
 available
in
the
market,
then
a

‐ defines
a
mode
obliquely
 variety
of
similar
quality

‐ in
brief,
a
mode
is
an
obligation
imposed
upon
 should
be
given
by
Mr.
St.

the
heir,
without
suspending
(as
a
condition
 Peter,
the
instituted
heir,
to

does)
the
effectivity
of
the
institution
 Ms.
Cera
Halimawis,
in
the

o a
mode
obligates
but
does
not
suspend
 same
quantity

o a
condition
suspends
but
does
not
 

obligate
 Section 5 – Legitime


Mode
must
be
clearly
imposed
as
an
obligation
 Preliminary
Notes:

‐ mere
preferences
or
wishes
expressed
by
 ‐ legitime

testator,
not
modes
 o the
portion
of
the
decedent’s
estate

o e.g.
“I
institute
as
heir
to
2/5
of
my
free
 reserved
by
law
in
favor
of
certain
heirs

portion
Ms.
Steffanie
Summera
and
I
 ‐ free
or
disposable
portion

would
be
very
delighted
and
my
soul
 o the
portion
left
available
for

would
surely
rest
in
peace
if
she
gives
 testamentary
disposition
after
the

my
daughter
Ms.
Cera
Halimawis
 legitimes
have
been
covered

money
allowance
of
P50,000
per
month
 ‐ compulsory
heirs

to
be
taken
from
said
2/5
of
my
free
 o the
heirs
for
whom
the
law
reserves
a

portion”—NOT
MODE
 portion
of
the
decedent’s
estate


 

A
mode
functions
similarly
to
a
resolutory
condition
 Nature
of
legitimes


 ‐ legitimes
are
set
aside
by
mandate
of
law

Rabadilla
v.
CA
(2000)
 ‐ testator
is
required
to
set
aside
or
reserve
them


 o the
testator
is
prohibited
from

Facts:
Testatrix
instituted
as
heir
in
her
will
Mr.
Rabadilla,
 disposing
by
gratuitous
title
(inter

predecessor
of
petitioners.
Will
stated
that
Mr.
Rabadilla
 vivos
or
mortis
causa)
of
these

shall
have
obligation
until
he
dies,
every
year,
to
give
to
 legitimes


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 31 of 73
 o but
dispositions
by
onerous
title
are
 o called
as
such
because
they
succeed
as

NOT
prohibited
because,
in
theory,
 compulsory
heirs
together
with

nothing
is
lost
from
the
estate
in
an
 primary
or
secondary
heirs
(except

onerous
disposition,
(there
is
merely
an
 only
that
illegitimate
children
/

exchange
of
values)
 descendants
exclude
illegitimate

‐ because
the
testator
is
compelled
to
set
aside
the
 parents,
i.e.
only
illegitimate
children
/

legitimes,
the
heirs
in
whose
favor
the
legitimes
 descendants
will
get
their
legitimes,
the

are
set
aside
are
called
compulsory
heirs
 illegitimate
parents
to
get
nothing
in

o note:
testator
is
the
one
compelled,
not
 the
form
of
legitimes)

his
heirs
who
are
free
to
accept
or
 

reject
the
inheritance
 The
COMPULSORY
HEIRS

‐ legitimate
children
(law
does
not
specify
how

ART.
886.
Legitime
is
that
part
of
the
testator’s
 they
should
share,
but
universal
agreement
is

property
which
he
cannot
dispose
of
because
the
law
 that
they
will
share
equally
regardless
of
age,

has
reserved
it
for
certain
heirs
who
are,
therefore,
 sex,
or
marriage
of
origin;
include
legitimate

called
compulsory
heirs.
 descendants
other
than
children,
in
the
proper


 cases)

ART.
887.
The
following
are
compulsory
heirs:
 o ART.
164,
Family
Code


  children
conceived
or
born

(1)
Legitimate
children
and
descendants,
with
respect
 during
the
marriage
of

to
their
legitimate
parents
and
ascendants;
 parents


  children
conceived
of
artificial

(2)
In
default
of
the
foregoing,
legitimate
parents
and
 insemination

ascendants,
with
respect
to
their
legitimate
children
 o ART.
54,
Family
Code

and
descendants;
  children
conceived
or
born


 before
judgment
of
annulment

(3)
The
widow
or
widower;
 or
absolute
nullity
of
marriage


 under
ART.
36
has
become

(4)
Acknowledged
natural
children,
and
natural
 final
/
executory

children
by
legal
fiction;
  children
conceived
or
born
of


 subsequent
marriage
under

(5)
Other
illegitimate
children
referred
to
in
Article
287.
 ART.
53
(i.e.
after
annulment


 /
declaration
of
nullity
of

Compulsory
heirs
mentioned
in
Nos.
3,
4,
and
5
are
not
 marriage,
and
separated

excluded
by
those
in
Nos.
1
and
2;
neither
do
they
 spouses
subsequently

exclude
one
another.
 remarry)


 o ART.
179,
Family
Code

In
all
cases
of
illegitimate
children,
their
filiation
must
  legitimated
children
(i.e.

be
duly
proved.
 subsequent
valid
marriage


 between
parents
of

The
father
or
mother
of
illegitimate
children
of
the
 illegitimate
children)

three
classes
mentioned,
shall
inherit
from
them
in
the
 o Sec.
17
and
18,
RA
8552
(Domestic

manner
and
to
the
extent
established
by
this
Code.
 Adoption
Act
of
1998)


  adopted
children
(is
an

ART.
887
enumerates
the
compulsory
heirs;
 adopted
child
entitled
to

enumeration
is
exclusive
 inherit
by
compulsory
and


 intestate
succession
from
his

Classification
of
compulsory
heirs
 biological
parents
and

‐ primary
–
legitimate
children
and
/
or
 relatives?—no
answer)

descendants
 ‐ legitimate
descendants

o called
as
such
because
they
are
 o general
rule:
the
nearer
exclude
the

preferred
over,
and
exclude,
the
 more
remote

secondary
  children,
if
all
qualified,
will

‐ secondary
–
legitimate
parents
and
/
or
 exclude
grandchildren,
and
so

ascendants;
illegitimate
parents
 on

o called
as
such
because
they
receive
 o qualification:
right
of
representation

legitimes
only
in
default
of
the
primary
 (succession
per
stirpes),
when
proper

 legitimate
parents
/
 ‐ legitimate
parents
(include
legitimate
ascendants

ascendants
–
only
in
default
of
 other
than
parents,
in
the
proper
cases—see

legitimate
children
/
 Baritua
v.
CA
[1990],
infra)

descendants
 o including
adopter
(per
Sec.
18,
RA

 illegitimate
parents
–
only
in
 8552)

default
of
any
kind
of
children
 ‐ legitimate
ascendants

/
descendants
 o only
in
default
of
parents

‐ concurring
–
surviving
spouse;
illegitimate

children
and
/
or
descendants


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 32 of 73
 o the
rule
(absolute
in
the
ascending
 ascendants
of
whatever

line):
the
nearer
exclude
the
more
 degree)

remote
 o excluded
by
legitimate
children
and

‐ surviving
spouse
 illegitimate
children

o of
the
decedent,
not
the
spouse
of
a
  unlike
legitimate
parents

child
who
has
predeceased
the
 (excluded
only
by
legitimate

decedent
(Rosales
v.
Rosales
[1987],
 children
/
descendants)

infra)
 

o marriage
must
be
valid
or
voidable
 Variations
in
legitimary
portions

(with
no
final
decree
of
annulment
at
 ‐ general
rule:
1/2
of
estate
is
given
to
one
heir
or

the
time
of
the
decedent’s
death)
 one
group
of
heirs

o mere
estrangement
not
a
ground
for
 ‐ exceptions:

disqualification
of
surviving
spouse
as
 o surviving
spouse
and
illegitimate

heir
 children
(ART.
894)

o effect
of
decree
of
legal
separation
 o surviving
spouse
in
a
marriage
in

 offending
spouse:
 articulo
mortis,
with
the
conditions

DISQUALIFIED
to
inherit
 specified
(ART.
900,
par.
2)

 innocent
spouse:
QUALIFIED
 o surviving
spouse
and
illegitimate

to
inherit
 parents
(ART.
903)

o death
of
either
spouse
during
pendency
 

of
petition
for
legal
separation— The
different
combinations

dismissal
of
case
 ‐ legitimate
children
alone
(ART.
888)

 surviving
spouse,
QUALIFIED
 o 1/2
of
estate
divided
equally

to
inherit
(whether
innocent
 ‐ legitimate
children
and
surviving
spouse
(ART.

or
not)
(Lapuz
v.
Eufemio
 892,
par.
2)

[1972],
infra)
 o legitimate
children
–
1/2
of
estate

‐ illegitimate
children
 o surviving
spouse
–
a
share
equal
to
that

o in
general:
children
conceived
and
born
 of
one
child

outside
a
valid
marriage
(ART.
165,
 ‐ one
legitimate
child
and
surviving
spouse
(ART.

Family
Code)
 892,
par.
1)

o in
particular:
children
born
of—(taken
 o legitimate
child
–
1/2
of
estate

from
Sempio­Diy)
 o surviving
spouse
–
1/4
of
estate

 couples
who
are
not
legally
 ‐ legitimate
children
and
illegitimate
children

married,
or
of
common‐law
 (ART.
176,
Family
Code)

marriages
 o legitimate
children
–
1/2
of
estate

 incestuous
marriages
 o illegitimate
children
–
each
will
get
1/2

 bigamous
marriages
 of
share
of
one
legitimate
child

 adulterous
relations
between
 ‐ legitimate
children,
illegitimate
children,
and

the
parents
 surviving
spouse

 marriages
void
for
reasons
of
 o legitimate
children
–
1/2
of
estate

public
policy
under
ART.
38,
 o illegitimate
children
–
each
will
get
1/2

Family
Code
 of
share
of
one
legitimate
child

 couples
below
18
years
old,
 o surviving
spouse
–
a
share
equal
to
that

whether
married
(void)
or
not
 of
one
legitimate
child

 other
void
marriages
under
  his
or
her
share
is
preferred

ART.
35,
Family
Code
 over
those
of
the
illegitimate

o note:
rule
if
decedent
died
before
the
 children
which
shall
be

effectivity
of
the
Family
Code
(August
 reduced
if
necessary
(ART.

3,
1988)
is
ART.
895
of
the
Civil
Code
 895)

o cf.
right
of
representation
(an
 ‐ one
legitimate
child,
illegitimate
children,
and

illegitimate
child
can
be
represented
by
 surviving
spouse

both
legitimate
and
illegitimate
 o legitimate
children
–
1/2
of
estate

descendants,
while
a
legitimate
child
 o illegitimate
children
–
each
will
get
1/2

can
only
be
represented
by
legitimate
 of
share
of
one
legitimate
child

descendants,
per
ART.
902
and
ART.
  in
effect,
just
divide
the
1/4

992)
 remainder
of
estate
to
the

‐ illegitimate
descendants
 illegitimate
children,
equally

o same
rule
as
in
legitimate
descendants
 o surviving
spouse
–
1/4
of
estate

 nearer
exclude
the
more
  his
or
her
share
is
preferred

remote
 over
those
of
the
illegitimate

 right
of
representation
 children
which
shall
be

‐ illegitimate
parents
 reduced
if
necessary
(ART.

o only
parents
in
the
illegitimate
 895)

ascending
line)
 ‐ legitimate
parents
alone
(ART.
889)

 unlike
in
the
legitimate
 o 1/2
of
estate

ascending
line
(includes


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 33 of 73
 ‐ legitimate
parents
and
illegitimate
children
 

(ART.
896)
 Held:
That
decedent’s
parents
not
entitled
to
payment

o legitimate
parents
–
1/2
of
estate
 because
payment
was
already
received
by
decedent’s

o illegitimate
children
–
1/4
of
estate
 surviving
spouse
and
child,
the
deceased’s
compulsory

‐ legitimate
parents
and
surviving
spouse
(ART.
 heirs.
That
parents
of
deceased
succeed
only
when
latter

893)
 dies
without
legitimate
descendant.
That
surviving
spouse

o legitimate
parents
–
1/2
of
estate
 concurs
with
all
classes
of
heirs.

o surviving
spouse
–
1/4
of
estate
 

‐ legitimate
parents,
illegitimate
children,
and
 Tumbokon
v.
Legaspi
(2010)

surviving
spouse
(ART.
899)
 

o legitimate
parents
–
1/2
of
estate
 Facts:
Grandmother
(decedent)
died
intestate.
She
left
as

o illegitimate
children
–
1/4
of
estate
 compulsory
and
intestate
heirs
her
daughter
and
her

o surviving
spouse
–
1/8
of
estate
 grandson
(son
of
predeceased
daughter).
Widower
or
son‐
‐ surviving
spouse
alone

 in‐law
(husband
of
predeceased
daughter)
claimed
to
be

o 1/2
of
estate
(ART.
900,
par.
1),
or
 decedent’s
compulsory
heir.

o 1/3
of
estate
(if
marriage,
being
in
 

articulo
mortis,
falls
under
ART.
900,
 Held:
That
son‐in‐law
(widower
of
decedent’s

par.
2)
 predeceased
daughter)
not
a
compulsory
heir
of
decedent.

‐ surviving
spouse
and
illegitimate
children
(ART.
 

894)
 Articles governing the particular combinations:
o surviving
spouse
–
1/3
of
estate

o illegitimate
children
–
1/3
of
estate
 ART.
888.
The
legitime
of
legitimate
children
and

‐ surviving
spouse
and
illegitimate
parents
(ART.
 descendants
consists
of
one‐half
of
the
hereditary
estate

903)
 of
the
father
and
of
the
mother.

o surviving
spouse
–
1/4
of
estate
 

o illegitimate
parents
–
1/4
of
estate
 The
latter
may
freely
dispose
of
the
remaining
half,

‐ illegitimate
children
alone
(ART.
901)
 subject
to
the
rights
of
illegitimate
children
and
of
the

o 1/2
of
estate
 surviving
spouse
as
hereinafter
provided.

‐ Illegitimate
parents
alone
(ART.
903)
 

o 1/2
of
estate
 Equal
sharing
among
legitimate
children
(including


 adopted
children)
regardless
of
age,
sex,
or
marriage

Rosales
v.
Rosales
(1987)
 of
origin,
of
1/2
of
the
estate
of
their
deceased
parent


 

Facts:
Decedent
died
intestate,
leaving
as
heirs
her
 Descendants
other
than
children

husband,
her
child,
and
her
grandchild
by
another
child
 ‐ general
rule:
the
nearer
exclude
the
more
remote

who
predeceased
her.
Widow
of
the
child
who
 o grandchildren
cannot
inherit
since

predeceased
decedent
claimed
that
she,
as
surviving
 children
will
bar
them,
unless
all
the

spouse
of
predeceased
child,
was
a
compulsory
heir
of
 children
renounce

mother‐in‐law
(decedent).
 o the
rule
goes
on
down
the
line
(no
limit


 to
the
number
of
degrees
in
the

Held:
That
spouse
of
predeceased
child
of
decedent
not
a
 descending
line
that
may
be
called
to

compulsory
heir
of
decedent
mother‐in‐law.
That
ART.
 succeed)

887
refers
to
estate
of
deceased
spouse
in
which
case
 ‐ qualification:
right
of
representation

surviving
spouse
is
a
compulsory
heir,
and
does
not
apply
 

to
estate
of
parent‐in‐law.
 ART.
889.
The
legitime
of
legitimate
parents
or


 ascendants
consists
of
one‐half
of
the
hereditary
estates

Lapuz
v.
Eufemio
(1972)
 of
their
children
and
descendants.


 

Facts:
Wife
filed
a
petition
for
legal
separation
against
 The
children
or
descendants
may
freely
dispose
of
the

husband:
sexual
infidelity.
Wife
died
pendente
lite.
Trial
 other
half,
subject
to
the
rights
of
illegitimate
children

court
dismissed
action.
 and
of
the
surviving
spouse
as
hereinafter
provided.


 

Held:
That
death
of
either
spouse
during
pendency
of
 ART.
890.
The
legitime
reserved
for
the
legitimate

action
for
legal
separation
(before
final
decree)
abates
 parents
shall
be
divided
between
them
equally;
if
one
of

action.
That
this
abatement
also
applies
if
action
involves
 the
parents
should
have
died,
the
whole
shall
pass
to

property
rights.
That
effect
is
ultimately,
surviving
spouse,
 the
survivor.

whether
guilty
or
not
(note:
no
final
decree
of
legal
 

separation
because
of
death
of
one
of
the
spouses),
is
not
 If
the
testator
leaves
neither
father
nor
mother,
but
is

disqualified
to
inherit
from
decedent
(spouse
who
died).
 survived
by
ascendants
of
equal
degree
of
the
paternal


 and
maternal
lines,
the
legitime
shall
be
divided
equally

Baritua
v.
CA
(1990)
 between
both
lines.
If
the
ascendants
should
be
of


 different
degrees,
it
shall
pertain
entirely
to
the
ones

Facts:
Decedent
died
in
an
accident,
and
parties
 nearest
in
degree
of
either
line.

responsible
for
death
settled
with
surviving
spouse.
 

Decedent’s
parents
later
filed
a
complaint
for
damages
 Legitimate
parents
/
ascendants
as
secondary

against
parties
liable
for
death
of
their
son.
 compulsory
heirs


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 34 of 73
 ‐ they
succeed
only
in
default
of
the
legitimate
 ‐ marriages
judicially
annulled
or
declared
void
ab

descending
line
 initio


 o same
rule
as
in
reappearance
applies;

Three
basic
rules
governing
succession
in
the
 problem
arises
if
either
or
both

ascending
line—
 partners
in
the
defective
marriage

‐ the
nearer
exclude
the
more
remote
 remarry
later

o rule
is
ABSOLUTE
(i.e.
no
qualification;
 ‐ Balane
comments:
why
should
consorts
of
a

no
right
of
representation)
 terminated
marriage,
or
an
annulled
one,
or
one

‐ division
by
line
 declared
void
ab
initio,
continue
to
be
heirs
of

o applies
if
there
are
more
than
one
 each
other
when
the
very
basis
of
the
right
of

ascendant
in
the
nearest
degree
 succession
(i.e.
marriage)
no
longer
exists?

o legitime
to
be
divided
in
equal
parts
 

between
the
paternal
and
maternal
 TEST:
Legitimate
children,
surviving
spouse—what
is

lines
 the
sharing?

‐ equal
division
within
the
line
 

o after
portion
corresponding
to
the
line
 Determination
of
surviving
spouse’s
share:

has
been
assigned,
there
will
be
equal
 ‐ as
long
as
at
least
one
of
several
children
inherits

apportionment
between
or
among
the
 in
his
own
right

recipients
between
the
line,
should
 o equivalent
to
share
of
one
child

there
be
more
than
one
 ‐ suppose
all
the
children
predecease
(or
are


 disinherited
or
unworthy
to
succeed):
all
the

ART.
892.
If
only
one
legitimate
child
or
descendant
of
 grandchildren
inherit
per
stirpes,
and
therefore

the
deceased
survives,
the
widow
or
widower
shall
be
 in
different
amounts

entitled
to
one‐fourth
of
the
hereditary
estate.
In
case
of
 o spouse
still
gets
a
share
equivalent
to

a
legal
separation,
the
surviving
spouse
may
inherit
if
it
 that
of
what
one
child
would
have

was
the
deceased
who
had
given
cause
for
the
same.
 gotten
if
qualified


 ‐ suppose
all
the
children
renounce:
all
the

If
there
are
two
or
more
legitimate
children
or
 grandchildren
inherit
per
capita,
and
therefore

descendants,
the
surviving
spouse
shall
be
entitled
to
a
 equally

portion
equal
to
the
legitime
of
each
of
the
legitimate
 o spouse
still
gets
a
share
equivalent
to

children
or
descendants.
 that
of
what
one
child
would
have


 gotten
had
he
succeeded

In
both
cases,
the
legitime
of
the
surviving
spouse
shall
 

be
taken
from
the
portion
that
can
be
freely
disposed
of
 In
what
instance
then
will
the
surviving
spouse
get
a

by
the
testator.
 share
equivalent
to
the
share
of
a
descendant?


 

TEST:
One
legitimate
child,
surviving
spouse—what
is
 ART.
893.
If
the
testator
leaves
no
legitimate

the
sharing?

 descendants,
but
leaves
legitimate
ascendants,
the


 surviving
spouse
shall
have
a
right
to
one‐fourth
of
the

If
there
has
been
legal
separation—
 hereditary
estate.

‐ if
there
is
a
final
decree
of
legal
separation
and
 

the
deceased
is
the
offending
spouse
 This
fourth
shall
be
taken
from
the
free
portion
of
the

o surviving
spouse
gets
his
legitime
 estate.

(ART.
63,
par.
4,
Family
Code)
 

‐ if
there
is
a
final
decree
of
legal
separation
and
 TEST:
Legitimate
ascendants,
surviving
spouse—what

the
deceased
is
the
innocent
spouse
 is
the
sharing?

o surviving
(offending)
spouse
is
 

disqualified
from
inheriting
(idem.)
 ART.
894.
If
the
testator
leaves
illegitimate
children,
the

‐ if
after
the
final
decree
of
legal
separation
there
 surviving
spouse
shall
be
entitled
to
one‐third
of
the

was
a
reconciliation
between
the
spouses
 hereditary
estate
of
the
deceased
and
the
illegitimate

o reciprocal
right
to
succeed
is
restored
 children
to
another
third.
The
remaining
third
shall
be

(reconciliation
sets
aside
the
final
 at
the
free
disposal
of
the
testator.

decree)
(ART.
66,
par.
2,
Family
Code)
 


 TEST:
Illegitimate
children,
surviving
spouse—what
is

Death
pendente
lite—see
Lapuz
v.
Eufemio,
supra
 the
sharing?


 

Problem:
Termination
of
marriage
by
reappearance
of
 [ART.
895.
The
legitime
of
each
of
the
acknowledged

prior
spouse
/
decree
of
annulment
or
absolute
nullity
 natural
children
and
each
of
the
natural
children
by

of
marriage
 legal
fiction
shall
consist
of
one‐half
of
the
legitime
of

‐ reappearance
of
prior
spouse
 each
of
the
legitimate
children
or
descendants.

o suppose
a
person
(husband),
believing
 

in
good
faith
that
his
wife
had
already
 The
legitime
of
an
illegitimate
child
who
is
neither
an

died,
remarries,
and
then
subsequently
 acknowledged
natural,
nor
a
natural
child
by
legal

his
wife
reappears,
are
both
his
first
 fiction,
shall
be
equal
in
every
case
to
four‐fifths
of
the

wife
and
second
wife
entitled
to
 legitime
of
an
acknowledged
natural
child.]

legitime
from
the
husband
if
he
dies?
 


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 35 of 73
The
legitime
of
the
illegitimate
children
shall
be
taken
 testator
was
solemnized
in
articulo
mortis,
and
the

from
the
portion
of
the
estate
at
the
free
disposal
of
the
 testator
died
within
three
months
from
the
time
of
the

testator,
provided
that
in
no
case
shall
the
total
legitime
 marriage,
the
legitime
of
the
surviving
spouse
as
the

of
such
illegitimate
children
exceed
that
free
portion,
 sole
heir
shall
be
one‐third
of
the
hereditary
estate,

and
that
the
legitime
of
the
surviving
spouse
must
first
 except
when
they
have
been
living
as
husband
and
wife

be
fully
satisfied.
 for
more
than
five
years.
In
the
latter
case,
the
legitime


 of
the
surviving
spouse
shall
be
that
specified
in
the

TEST:
One
legitimate
child,
illegitimate
children,
 preceding
paragraph.

surviving
spouse—what
is
the
sharing?
 


 Surviving
spouse
as
sole
compulsory
heir

TEST:
Legitimate
children,
illegitimate
children,
 ‐ general
rule:
1/2
of
estate

surviving
spouse—what
is
the
sharing?
 ‐ exception:
1/3
of
estate,
if
the
following


 circumstances
concur

Reduction
of
shares
(if
total
legitimes
exceed
the
 o the
marriage
was
in
articulo
mortis

entire
estate);
rules
 o the
testator
died
within
three
months

‐ legitimes
of
legitimate
children
never
reduced
 from
the
time
of
the
marriage

(they
are
primary
and
preferred
compulsory
 o the
parties
did
not
cohabit
for
more

heirs)
 than
five
years,
and

‐ legitime
of
surviving
spouse
never
reduced
 o the
spouse
who
died
was
the
party
in

‐ legitimes
of
illegitimate
children
will
be
reduced
 articulo
mortis
at
the
time
of
the

pro
rata
and
without
preference
among
them
 marriage


 

ART.
896.
Illegitimate
children
who
may
survive
with
 ART.
901.
When
the
testator
dies
leaving
illegitimate

legitimate
parents
or
ascendants
of
the
deceased
shall
 children
and
no
other
compulsory
heirs,
such

be
entitled
to
one‐fourth
of
the
hereditary
estate
to
be
 illegitimate
children
shall
have
a
right
to
one‐half
of
the

taken
from
the
portion
at
the
free
disposal
of
the
 hereditary
estate
of
the
deceased.

testator.
 


 The
other
half
shall
be
at
the
free
disposal
of
the

TEST:
Illegitimate
children,
legitimate
parents—what
 testator.

is
the
sharing?
 


 TEST:
Illegitimate
children
alone—how
much
do
they

ART.
897.
When
the
widow
or
widower
survives
with
 get?

legitimate
children
or
descendants,
and
acknowledged
 

natural
children,
or
natural
children
by
legal
fiction,
 ART.
902.
The
rights
of
illegitimate
children
set
forth
in

such
surviving
spouse
shall
be
entitled
to
a
portion
 the
preceding
articles
are
transmitted
upon
their
death

equal
to
the
legitime
of
each
of
the
legitimate
children
 to
their
descendants,
whether
legitimate
or
illegitimate.

which
must
be
taken
from
that
part
of
the
estate
which
 

the
testator
can
freely
dispose
of.
 Right
of
representation
to
the
legitimate
and


 illegitimate
descendants
of
an
illegitimate
child

ART.
898.
If
the
widow
or
widower
survives
with
 ‐ compare
with
ART.
992
(in
case
of
legitimate

legitimate
children
or
descendants,
and
with
 children,
right
of
representation
is
given
only
to

illegitimate
children
other
than
acknowledged
natural,
 their
legitimate
descendants)

or
natural
children
by
legal
fiction,
the
share
of
the
 ‐ effect:
right
of
representation
of
illegitimate

surviving
spouse
shall
be
the
same
as
that
provided
in
 children
is
broader
than
right
of
representation

the
preceding
article.
 of
legitimate
children


 

ART.
899.
When
the
widow
or
widower
survives
with
 ART.
903.
The
legitime
of
the
parents
who
have
an

legitimate
parents
or
ascendants
and
with
illegitimate
 illegitimate
child,
when
such
child
leaves
neither

children,
such
surviving
spouse
shall
be
entitled
to
one‐ legitimate
descendants,
nor
a
surviving
spouse,
nor

eighth
of
the
hereditary
estate
of
the
deceased
which
 illegitimate
children,
is
one‐half
of
the
hereditary
estate

must
be
taken
from
the
free
portion,
and
the
illegitimate
 of
such
illegitimate
child.
If
only
legitimate
or

children
shall
be
entitled
to
one‐fourth
of
the
estate
 illegitimate
children
are
left,
the
parents
are
not
entitled

which
shall
be
taken
also
from
the
disposable
portion.
 to
any
legitime
whatsoever.
If
only
the
widow
or

The
testator
may
freely
dispose
of
the
remaining
one‐ widower
survives
with
parents
of
the
illegitimate
child,

eighth
of
the
estate.
 the
legitime
of
the
parents
is
one‐fourth
of
the


 hereditary
estate
of
the
child,
and
that
of
the
surviving

TEST:
Legitimate
parents,
illegitimate
children,
 spouse
also
one‐fourth
of
the
estate.

surviving
spouse—what
is
the
sharing?
 


 TEST:
Illegitimate
parents
alone—how
much
do
they

ART.
900.
If
the
only
survivor
is
the
widow
or
widower,
 get?

she
or
he
shall
be
entitled
to
one‐half
of
the
hereditary
 

estate
of
the
deceased
spouse,
and
the
testator
may
 TEST:
Illegitimate
parents,
surviving
spouse—what
is

freely
dispose
of
the
other
half.
 the
sharing?


 

If
the
marriage
between
the
surviving
spouse
and
the


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 36 of 73
This
is
the
only
instance
when
illegitimate
children
 

exclude
secondary
compulsory
heirs
(illegitimate
 7) 1
legitimate
child
=

parents)
 surviving
spouse
=


 

Intent
of
the
law
in
giving
spouse
arbitrary
shares—
 8) 1
legitimate
parent
=

‐ so
that
something
may
be
left
for
free
disposition
 2
illegitimate
children
=


 

LEGITIMES
QUIZZER
SET
1:
Write
how
much
each
 9) 3
legitimate
children
=

compulsory
heir
would
get.
Do
not
show
your
 2
adopted
children
=

solution.
Time
limit—5
minutes.

 surviving
spouse
=


 

1) 1
legitimate
child
=

 10) 2
legitimate
children
=

1
adopted
child
=
 surviving
spouse
=


 

2) 2
adopted
children
=
 The Reserva Troncal
legitimate
parents
=
 



 ART.
891.
The
ascendant
who
inherits
from
his

3) 1
adopted
child
=
 descendant
any
property
which
the
latter
may
have

4
illegitimate
children
=
 acquired
by
gratuitous
title
from
another
ascendant,
or


 a
brother
or
sister,
is
obliged
to
reserve
such
property

4) surviving
spouse
=
 as
he
may
acquired
by
operation
of
law
for
the
benefit

6
legitimate
children
=
 of
relatives
who
are
within
the
third
degree
and
who


 belong
to
the
line
from
which
the
said
property
came.


5) 5
legitimate
children
=
 

1
illegitimate
child
=
 Illustration
and
diagram


 

6) 5
illegitimate
children
=
 

legitimate
parents
=
 









O
or
M.S.




















































R’ista


 

7) 4
illegitimate
children
=
 

legitimate
parents
=
 




















g.t.


















































o.
of
l.

















surviving
spouse
=
 


 

8) legitimate
parents
=
 P

surviving
spouse
=
 
 R’ios


 

9) 1
legitimate
child
=
 

legitimate
parents
=
 Explanation
of
illustration
and
diagram—

1
illegitimate
child
=
 ‐ P
(prepositus)
inherits
a
piece
of
land
from
his

surviving
spouse
=
 father,
O
or
M.S.
(origin
or
mediate
source).


 Subsequently,
P
dies,
intestate,
single,
and

10) surviving
spouse
=
 without
legitimate
issue,
and
the
land
is
in
turn

1
illegitimate
parent
=
 inherited
by
his
mother
R’ista
(reservista)


 ‐ R’ista
is
now
required
to
reserve
the
property
in

LEGITIMES
QUIZZER
SET
2:
Write
how
much
each
 favor
of
P’s
paternal
relatives
within
the
third

compulsory
heir
would
get.
Do
not
show
your
 degree
(R’ios
or
reservatarios)

solution.
Time
limit—5
minutes.

 


 Other
terms
for
reserva
troncal

1) 3
legitimate
children
=
 ‐ lineal,
familiar,
extraordinaria,
semi‐troncal,

surviving
spouse
=
 pseudo‐troncal


 

2) 2
legitimate
children
=
 Purpose

4
illegitimate
children
=
 ‐ “the
reserva
troncal
is
a
special
rule
designed

surviving
spouse
=
 primarily
to
assure
the
return
of
the
reservable


 property
to
the
third
degree
relatives
belonging

3) 3
legitimate
children
=
 to
the
line
from
which
the
property
originally

2
adopted
children
=
 came,
and
to
avoid
its
being
dissipated...by
the


 relatives
of
the
inheriting
ascendant
(Padura
v.

4) illegitimate
parents
=
 Baldovino
[1958])

2
illegitimate
children
=
 ‐ “to
avoid
the
danger
that
property
existing
for


 many
years
in
a
family’s
patrimony
might
pass

5) 2
legitimate
children
=
 gratuitously
to
outsiders
through
the
accident
of

1
illegitimate
child
=
 marriage
and
untimely
death
(Gonzales
v.
CFI


 [1981])

6) 3
adopted
children
=
 ‐ “to
prevent
outsiders
from
acquiring,
through
an

1
legitimate
parent
=
 accident
of
life,
property
which,
but
for
such


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 37 of 73
 accident,
would
have
remained
in
the
family”
 ‐ origin
or
mediate
source

(idem.)
 o the
transferor
in
the
first
transfer


 ‐ prepositus

Requisites
(as
given
in
Chua
v.
CFI
[1977])
 o the
first
transferee,
who
is
a

‐ that
the
property
was
acquired
by
a
descendant
 descendant
or
brother
/
sister
of
the

from
an
ascendant
or
from
a
brother
or
sister
by
 origin

gratuitous
title
 ‐ reservista
or
reservor

o term
descendant
should
read
person
(if
 o the
ascendant
obliged
to
reserve

grantor
is
brother
or
sister,
acquirer
is
 ‐ reservatarios
or
reservees

not
a
descendant)
 o the
relatives
benefited

o acquisition
is
by
gratuitous
title
(título
 

lucrative)
when
the
recipient
does
not
 Two
basic
rules—

give
anything
in
return
 ‐ no
inquiry
is
to
be
made
beyond
the
origin

 encompasses
transmissions
 o it
does
not
matter
who
the
owner
of
the

by
donation
or
by
succession
 property
was
before
it
was
acquired
by

of
whatever
kind
 the
origin

‐ that
said
descendant
died
without
an
issue
 ‐ all
the
relationships
among
the
parties
must
be

o should
read:
“that
said
person
died
 legitimate

without
legitimate
issue”
(because
only
 

legitimate
descendants
will
prevent
the
 The
Origin
/
Mediate
Source

property
from
being
inherited
by
the
 ‐ either
an
ascendant
or
a
brother
or
sister
of
the

legitimate
ascending
line
by
operation
 prepositus

of
law)
 o ascendant:
may
be
of
any
degree
of

 if
descendant
dies
with
 ascent

illegitimate
issue,
there
will
 o brother
or
sister:
conflicting
views

be
reserva
troncal
  one
view
–
must
be
of
the

‐ that
the
property
is
inherited
by
another
 half‐blood
(because

ascendant
by
operation
of
law
 otherwise,
property
would

o by
operation
of
law
is
limited
to
 not
change
lines
in
passing
to

succession
to
the
legitime
or
by
 a
common
ascendant
of
the

intestacy,
NOT
testamentary
succession
 prepositus
and
the
brother;

 no
donation
 no
reserve
if
fraternal

‐ that
there
are
relatives
within
the
third
degree
 relationship
is
of
the
full‐
belonging
to
the
line
from
which
said
property
 blood
because
it
would
be

came
 impossible
to
identify
the
line

o reservatarios,
to
be
discussed
infra
 of
origin—whether
paternal


 or
maternal)
(J.B.L.
Reyes)

Process
  another
view
–
does
not

‐ first
transfer
 matter
whether
of
the
full‐
or

o by
gratuitous
title,
from
a
person
to
his
 half‐blood
(Sánchez
Román)

descendant,
brother,
or
sister
 

‐ second
transfer
 The
Prepositus

o by
operation
of
law,
from
the
transferee
 ‐ either
a
descendant
or
a
brother
or
sister
of
the

in
the
first
transfer
to
another
 origin
who
receives
property
from
the
origin
by

ascendant
 gratuitous
title

 it
is
this
second
transfer
that
 o he
is
the
first
transferee

creates
the
reserva
 ‐ while
property
is
still
with
him,
there
is
as
yet
no

‐ third
transfer
 reserva

o from
the
transferee
in
the
second
 o reserve
arises
only
upon
the
second

transfer
to
the
relatives
(reservatarios)
 transfer


 o while
prepositus
owns
the
property,
he

Solivio
v.
CA
(1990)
 has
all
rights
of
ownership
over
it
and


 may
exercise
such
rights
in
order
to

Facts:
Mother
died
intestate,
leaving
all
properties
to
sole
 prevent
a
reserve
from
arising,
by:

heir,
her
child.
Child
(decedent)
died
intestate,
single,
and
  substituting
or
alienating
the

without
legitimate
issue.
Decedent
was
survived
by
 property

maternal
aunt
and
paternal
aunt.
Maternal
aunt:
  bequeathing
or
devising
it

properties
left
by
decedent
belong
to
her
because
she
is
a
 either
to
the
potential

third
degree
relative
of
decedent’s
mother,
from
whose
 reservista
or
to
third
persons

line
property
came.
 (subject
to
the
constraints
of


 the
legitime),
or

Held:
That
there
is
no
reserva
troncal
because
descendant
  partitioning
in
such
a
way
as

(decedent)
inherited
from
ascendant
(mother),
the
 to
assign
the
property
to

reverse
of
situation
covered
by
ART.
891.
 parties
other
than
the


 potential
reservista
(subject

Parties


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 38 of 73
 to
the
constraints
of
the
 o it
is
not
required
that
the
reservatario

legitime)
 must
already
be
living
when
the

‐ the
prepositus
therefore
is
the
arbiter
of
the
 prepositus
dies,
because
the
reserve
is

reserva
troncal
(Sánchez
Román)
 established
in
favor
of
a
group
or
class,


 not
in
favor
of
specific
individuals

The
Reservista
 (Manresa)

‐ he
is
an
ascendant
of
the
prepositus,
of
whatever
  as
long
as
the
reservatario
is

degree
 alive
at
the
time
of
the

o must
be
an
ascendant
other
than
the
 reservista’s
death,
he
qualifies

origin
(if
the
origin
is
also
an
 as
such,
even
if
he
was

ascendant)
 conceived
and
born
after
the

 if
two
parties
are
the
same
 prepositus’s
death

person,
no
reserva
troncal
 ‐ preference
among
the
reservatarios

‐ should
the
origin
and
the
reservista
belong
to
 o rules
on
intestate
succession
govern

different
lines
(i.e.
grandchild
receives
property
 how
reservable
property
is
to
be

by
donation
from
paternal
grandfather;
 distributed
to
reservatarios
(Padura
v.

grandchild
dies;
property
received
by
donation
 Baldovino
[1958])

passes
by
succession
to
the
legitime
and
  i.e.
the
nearer
exclude
the

intestacy
to
the
father,
the
paternal
grandfather’s
 more
remote,
share
of
2:1
in

son)?
 favor
of
full‐blood
in
relation

o one
view
–
no
because
another
 to
half‐blood
relatives
of
the

ascendant
is
one
belonging
to
a
line
 prepositus

other
than
that
of
the
reservista
 ‐ representation
among
the
reservatarios
(see

(purpose
of
reserve
is
only
curative)
 Florentino
v.
Florentino
[1919])

(J.B.L.
Reyes)
 o there
is
only
one
instance
of

o another
view
–
yes
because
(a)
the
law
 representation
among
the

does
not
distinguish,
and
(b)
purpose
of
 reservatarios:

reserva
is
not
only
curative,
but
also
  if
the
prepositus
was
survived

preventive,
i.e.
to
prevent
the
property
 by
brothers
or
sisters
and

from
leaving
the
line
(Sánchez
Román)
 children
of
a
predeceased
or


 incapacitated
brother
or

The
Reservatarios
 sister

‐ the
reserva
is
in
favor
of
a
class,
collectively
 

referred
to
as
the
reservatarios
(reservees)
 Padura
v.
Baldovino
(1958)

‐ requirements
to
be
a
reservatario:
 

o he
must
be
within
the
third
degree
of
 Facts:
Origin
(father)
died,
leaving
properties
by
will
to

consanguinity
from
the
prepositus
 surviving
wife
(mother
or
reservista)
and
three
children

(Cabardo
v.
Villanueva
[1922])
 (one
from
first
marriage,
two
from
second
marriage).
One

o he
must
belong
to
the
line
from
which
 of
two
children
(prepositus,
single,
without
legitimate

the
property
came
(determined
by
the
 issue)
in
the
second
marriage
predeceased
the
mother

origin)
 (reservista).
Reservatarios
were
full‐blood
sister
of

 if
origin
is
an
ascendant— prepositus
and
his
half‐brother
(child
of
origin
from
first

either
of
the
paternal
or
 marriage).

maternal
line
 

 if
origin
is
a
brother
or
sister
 Held:
That
reservatarios
of
the
full‐blood
are
entitled
to
a

of
the
full
blood—it
would
be
 share
twice
as
large
as
that
of
others
(half‐blood

impossible
to
distinguish
the
 relatives).
That
reservable
property
should
pass
not
to
all

lines
 reservatarios
as
a
class
but
only
to
those
nearest
in
degree

o must
the
reservatario
also
be
related
to
 to
the
prepositus,
excluding
those
reservatarios
of
more

the
origin?
 remote
degree.
That
reserva
troncal
merely
determines

 one
view:
no,
because
the
 group
of
relatives
(reservatarios)
to
whom
property

article
speaks
only
of
two
 should
be
returned;
but
within
that
group
individual
right

lines
(paternal
and
maternal)
 to
property
should
be
decided
by
rules
of
intestate

of
the
descendant,
without
 succession.
That
basic
principles
of
intestacy
to
be
applied

regard
to
subdivisions
 are
(a)
proximity
in
degree,
(b)
right
of
representation,

(Manresa)
 and
(c)
rule
of
double
share
for
relatives
or
collaterals
of

 another
view:
yes,
otherwise
 whole
blood.

results
would
arise
 

completely
contrary
to
the
 Florentino
v.
Florentino
(1919)

purpose
of
the
reserva,
which
 

is
to
prevent
property
from
 Facts:
Origin
left
by
will
all
his
properties
to
11
children.

passing
to
persons
not
of
the
 One
child
(prepositus)
died
intestate,
single,
and
without

line
of
origin
(Sánchez
 legitimate
issue,

and
was
succeeded
by
his
mother

Román)
 (reservista).
Reservista
instituted
her
daughter
as
sole

‐ reserva
in
favor
of
reservatarios
as
a
class
 heir,
giving
to
daughter
the
properties
she
inherited
from

prepositus,
her
son.
Surviving
siblings
and
nephews
and


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 39 of 73
nieces,
as
representatives
of
predeceased
siblings
of
 

prepositus
complained.
 Gonzales
v.
CFI
(1981)


 

Held:
That
properties
given
by
reservista
to
her
daughter
 Facts:
Father
(origin)
died
intestate.
Property
of
father

are
reservable.
That
reservatarios
within
the
third
degree,
 passed
to
children.
One
child
(prepositus)
died
intestate,

as
in
case
of
nephews
and
nieces
of
prepositus
from
whom
 single,
and
without
legitimate
issue.
Property
inherited
by

reservable
property
came,
have
right
of
representation
(to
 child
passed
by
operation
of
law
to
mother
(reservista).

represent
their
ascendants,
or
fathers
and
mothers,
who
 Mother
gave
by
holographic
will
property
she
inherited

are
brothers
and
sisters
of
prepositus).
 from
prepositus
to
her
grandchildren
(children
of
her


 surviving
sons).

Juridical
nature
 

‐ nature
of
reservista’s
right
(Edroso
v.
Sablan
 Held:
That
reservista
cannot
convey
reservable
properties

[1913],
infra)
 by
will
(mortis
causa)
to
reservatarios
within
the
third

o reservista’s
right
over
the
reserved
 degree,
to
the
exclusion
of
reservatarios
in
the
second

property
is
one
of
ownership
 degree
(her
surviving
daughters
and
sons).
That
the

o ownership
is
subject
to
a
resolutory
 principle
is
that
the
nearer
excluded
the
more
remote.

condition
(i.e.
the
existence
of
 That
reservista
cannot
by
will
select
reservatarios
to

reservatarios
at
the
time
of
the
 whom
reservable
property
should
be
given
and
deprive

reservista’s
death)
 the
other
reservatarios
of
their
share
therein.

o right
of
ownership
is
alienable,
but
 

subject
to
the
same
resolutory
 Balane
Comments:

condition
 ‐ the
rule
therefore
is
that
upon
the
reservista’s

o reservista’s
right
of
ownership
is
 death,
the
reserved
property
passes
by
strict

registrable
(if
property
can
be
 operation
of
law
(according
to
the
rules
of

registered)
 intestate
succession)
to
the
proper
reservatarios

‐ nature
of
reservatarios’
right
(Sienes
v.
Esparcia
 ‐ thus
the
selection
of
which
reservatarios
will
get

[1961],
infra)
 the
property
is
made
by
law
and
not
by
the

o reservatarios’
right
over
the
reserved
 reservista

property
is
one
of
expectancy
 

o expectancy
is
subject
to
a
suspensive
 Property
reserved

condition
(i.e.
existence
of
reservista
at
 ‐ kind
of
property
reservable

the
time
of
the
reservatarios’
death;
 o any
kind
(real
or
personal,
corporeal
or

expectancy
ripens
into
ownership
if
the
 incorporeal,
fungible
or
non‐fungible,

reservatarios
survive
the
reservista)
 etc)

o right
of
expectancy
is
alienable,
but
  in
Rodriguez
v.
Rodriguez

subject
to
the
same
suspensive
 (1957),
a
sugar
quota

condition
 allotment
(incorporeal)
was

o reservatarios’
right
of
expectancy
is
 held
to
be
reservable

registrable
(if
property
can
be
 ‐ effect
of
substitution

registered)
 o the
rule
is
that
the
very
same
property


 must
go
thru
the
process
of

Edroso
v.
Sablan
(1913)
 transmissions


 o what
must
come
from
the
origin
to
the

Facts:
Father
(origin)
died
with
a
will.
Property
of
father
 prepositus
(by
gratuitous
title)
and
to

passed
to
only
son
(prepositus)
who
died
intestate,
single,
 the
reservista
(by
operation
of
law)

and
without
legitimate
issue.
Property
of
son
inherited
 must
be
the
same
property

from
his
father
passed
by
operation
of
law
to
mother
  if
prepositus
substitutes
the

(reservista).
Mother
sought
to
have
property
inherited
 property
by
selling,
bartering,

from
son
registered.
Uncles
of
son
or
prepositus
(brothers
 or
exchanging
it.
the

of
father
or
origin),
reservatarios,
opposed.
 substitute
cannot
be
reserved


  e.g.
there
would
be
no
reserva

Held:
See
nature
of
reservista’s
right,
supra.
 if
the
prepositus
sold
the


 property
he
received
from
the

Sienes
v.
Esparcia
(1961)
 origin
under
a
pacto
de
retro


 and
then
redeemed
it

Facts:
Father
(origin)
died
with
a
will.
Property
of
father
 (because
property
would
not

passed
to
five
children.
One
child
(prepositus)
died
 be
the
same
as
prepositus

intestate,
single,
and
without
legitimate
issue.
Property
of
 bought
it
back
from
the

child
inherited
from
his
father
passed
by
operation
of
law
 vendee
a
retro)

to
mother
(reservista).
Mother
sold
property.
Surviving
 

half‐sisters
of
prepositus
also
sold
same
property.
 Reserved
property,
not
part
of
reservista’s
estate


 upon
his
death:

Held:
See
nature
of
reservatarios’
right,
supra.
 


 Cano
v.
Director
(1959)

Reservista
has
no
power
to
appoint,
by
will,
which
 

reservatarios
were
to
get
the
reserved
property:


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 40 of 73
Facts:
Reservista
died.
Surviving
reservatario
sought
to
  3M
as
reservista’s
legitime

have
land
(reserved
property)
registered
in
her
name.
Son
 (composed
of
1M
from
the
2M

of
reservista
opposed.
 reservable
property,
and
2M


 from
the
4M
own
property
of

Held:
That
reservatario
is
not
reservista’s
successor
 the
prepositus;
1M
of
the
2M

mortis
causa
nor
is
reservable
property
part
of
 reservable
property
passes
to

reservista’s
estate.
That
upon
death
of
reservista,
 reservista
by
will,
and
2M
of

reservatario
nearest
to
prepositus
becomes
automatically
 the
4M
own
property
of
the

and
by
operation
of
law
owner
of
reservable
property.
 prepositus
passes
to

That
reservable
property
cannot
be
transmitted
by
a
 reservista
by
will)

reservista
to
his
own
successors
mortis
causa
so
long
as
a
 

reservatario
within
the
third
degree
from
prepositus
and
 Rights
of
reservatarios
and
obligations
of
the

belonging
to
line
where
property
came
exists
when
 reservista

reservista
dies.
 ‐ to
inventory
the
reserved
properties


 ‐ to
annotate
the
reservable
character
(if

Balane
States:
 registered
immovables)
in
the
Registry
of

‐ since
the
reserved
property
is
not
computed
as
 Property
within
90
days
from
acceptance
by
the

part
of
the
reservista’s
estate,
it
is
not
taken
into
 reservista

account
in
determining
the
legitimes
of
the
 o there
is
only
one
title
to
the
immovable

reservista’s
compulsory
heirs
 property,
the
registered
owner
being


 the
reservista,
and
the
reservable

A
problem
will
arise
if
two
circumstances
concur:
(a)
 character
of
the
property
has
to
be

the
prepositus
makes
a
will
instituting
the
ascendant­ annotated
at
the
back
of
the
title
as
a

reservista
to
the
whole
or
a
part
of
the
free
portion;
 lien
or
encumbrance
in
favor
of
the

and
(b)
there
is
left
in
the
prepositus’s
estate,
upon
his
 reservatarios

death,
in
addition
to
the
reserved
property,
property
 ‐ to
appraise
the
movables

not
reservable
[or,
if
(a)
prepositus
dies
with
two
or
 ‐ to
secure
by
means
of
mortgage:
(a)
the

more
properties,
one
reservable,
one
his
own;
and
(b)
 indemnity
for
any
deterioration
of
or
damage
to

prepositus
makes
a
will
giving
all
or
part
of
the
free
 the
property
occasioned
by
the
reservista’s
fault

porstion
to
reservista]
 or
negligence,
and
(b)
the
payment
of
the
value

‐ two
theories
advanced:
 of
such
reserved
movables
as
may
have
been

o reserva
máxima
–
as
much
of
the
 alienated
by
the
reservista
onerously
or

potentially
reservable
property
as
 gratuitously

possible
must
be
deemed
included
in
 

the
part
that
passes
by
operation
of
law
 Extinguishment;
how
reserva
troncal
extinguished

(maximizing
the
scope
of
the
reserva)

 ‐ by
death
of
reservista

o reserva
mínima
–
every
single
 o reservatarios
to
get
property;
no
more

property
in
the
prepositus’s
estate
 reserva

must
be
deemed
to
pass,
partly
by
will
  reserva
troncal
begins
when

and
partly
by
operation
of
law,
in
the
 the
prepositus
dies

same
proportion
that
the
part
given
by
  reserva
troncal
ends
when
the

will
bears
to
the
part
not
so
given
 reservista
dies
(reservatarios

‐ to
illustrate:
suppose
prepositus
receives
2M
 must
be
alive)

from
origin,
and
earns
4M
as
his
own;
prepositus
 ‐ by
death
of
all
the
reservatarios

makes
a
will
instituting
his
mother
(reservista)
 o note:
if
one
subscribes
to
the
view
that

to
his
free
portion
(1/2
of
estate);
prepositus
 the
reservista
can
belong
to
the
line
of

dies
single
and
without
legitimate
issue;
 origin,
death
of
all
reservatarios
will

reservista
inherits
entire
estate
of
prepositus
 not
ipso
facto
extinguish
the
reserva

(half
by
legitime,
half
by
testamentary
 because
the
reservista
could
have
a

succession);
how
much
of
the
2M
will
be
 child
subsequently,
who
would
be
a

reserved?
 reservatario


o reserva
máxima
–
all
of
the
2M
 ‐ by
renunciation
by
all
the
reservatarios,

(reservable
property)
will
pass
to
 provided
that
no
other
reservatario
is
born

reservista
as
her
legitime
(rule:
fit
as
 subsequently

much
of
reservable
property
in
that
 ‐ by
total
fortuitous
loss
of
the
reserved
property

part
which
passes
by
operation
of
law)
 ‐ by
confusion
or
merger
of
rights

 3M
as
reservista’s
legitime
 o as
when
the
reservatarios
acquire
the

(included
in
this
3M
is
the
2M
 reservista’s
right
by
a
contract
inter

reservable
property)
 vivos

o reserva
mínima
–
only
1M
of
the
2M
  e.g.
sale
of
reserva
to

reservable
property
will
pass
to
 reservatarios

reservista
as
part
of
her
legitime
(rule:
 ‐ prescription
or
adverse
possession

every
item
to
pass
to
reservista
in
 

proportion
or
ratio
as
to
how
much
of
 ART.
904.
The
testator
cannot
deprive
his
compulsory

the
free
portion
the
prepositus
gave
to
 heirs
of
their
legitime,
except
in
cases
expressly

the
reservista)
 provided
by
law.


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 41 of 73

 ‐ article
only
applies
to
transactions
of

Neither
can
he
impose
upon
the
same
any
burden,
 compromise
or
renunciation
between
the

encumbrance,
condition,
or
substitution
of
any
kind
 predecessor
and
the
prospective
compulsory

whatsoever.
 heir


 o BUT
a
transaction
of
similar
character

The
legitime
is
not
within
the
testator’s
control
 between
a
prospective
compulsory
heir

‐ legitime
passes
to
compulsory
heirs
by
strict
 and
another
prospective
compulsory

operation
of
law
 heir,
or
between
a
prospective


 compulsory
heir
and
a
stranger,
also

Testator
devoid
of
power
to
deprive
compulsory
heirs
 not
allowed
(ART.
1347,
par.
2)

of
legitime
  e.g.
A
asked
50M
from
his

‐ it
is
the
law,
not
the
testator,
which
determines
 wealthy
brother,
B
in
order
to

the
transmission
of
the
legitimes
 start
a
business,
in
exchange

‐ EXCEPT:
in
disinheritance
 for
which
A
renounces
the

o the
only
instance
in
which
the
law
 legitime
he
will
get
from
their

allows
the
testator
to
deprive
the
 father
X
in
favor
of
B;
X
dies;

compulsory
heirs
of
their
legitimes
 during
the
settlement
of
X’s


 estate
it
turns
out
that
A
is

Testator
devoid
of
power
to
impose
burdens
on
 entitled
to
80M
as
legitime;
B

legitime
 claims
that
A
can
no
longer

‐ qualifications:
in
at
least
two
instances,
the
law
 get
the
30M
balance
as
A

grants
the
testator
some
power
over
the
legitime
 already
renounced
his
share

o payment
of
legitime
in
cash
(ART.
 in
favor
of
B;
B
is
wrong,
for
A

1080,
par.
2)
as
when
a
parent
who
 can
still
get
his
30M
share

wishes
to
keep
an
agricultural
 

enterprise
intact,
and
such
agricultural
 ART.
906.
Any
compulsory
heir
to
whom
the
testator

enterprise
was
assigned
to
a
child
who
 has
left
by
any
title
less
than
the
legitime
belonging
to

does
not
know
how
to
operate
the
 him
may
demand
that
the
same
be
fully
satisfied.

same
 

o prohibition
on
partition
(ART.
1083,
 ART.
906
applies
only
to
transmissions
by
gratuitous

par.
1)
 title

‐ restrictions
on
the
legitime
imposed
by
law
 ‐ e.g.
donation,
etc.

o the
family
home
cannot
be
partitioned
 

(ART.
159,
Family
Code)
 This
is
the
well­known
right
of
completion
of
legitime

o the
reserva
troncal
 ‐ cf.
ART.
855,
909
and
910


 

ART.
905.
Every
renunciation
or
compromise
as
 Principle:
anything
that
a
compulsory
heir
receives
by

regards
a
future
legitime
between
the
person
owing
it
 gratuitous
title
from
the
predecessor
is
considered
as

and
his
compulsory
heirs
is
void,
and
the
latter
may
 an
advance
on
the
legitime
and
is
deducted
therefrom

claim
the
same
upon
the
death
of
the
former;
but
they
 ‐ exceptions:

must
bring
to
collation
whatever
they
may
have
 o if
the
predecessor
gave
the
compulsory

received
by
virtue
of
the
renunciation
or
compromise.
 heir
a
donation
inter
vivos
and


 provided
that
it
was
not
to
be
charged

Reason
for
the
rule—
 against
the
legitime
(ART.
1062)

‐ before
predecessor’s
death,
heir’s
right
is
simply
 o testamentary
dispositions
made
by
the

inchoate
 predecessor
to
the
compulsory
heir,


 unless
the
testator
provides
that
it

Duty
to
collate
 should
be
considered
part
of
the

‐ any
property
which
the
compulsory
heir
may
 legitime
(ART.
1063)

have
gratuitously
received
from
his
predecessor
 

by
virtue
of
the
renunciation
or
compromise
will
 ART.
907.
Testamentary
dispositions
that
impair
or

be
considered
as
an
advance
on
his
legitime
and
 diminish
the
legitime
of
the
compulsory
heirs
shall
be

must
be
duly
credited
 reduced
on
petition
of
the
same,
insofar
as
they
may
be

o e.g.
if
son
asked
for
30M
from
his
father
 inofficious
or
excessive.

in
order
to
start
a
business,
and
the
 

father
agrees,
the
30M
would
be
 Notes:

considered
as
an
advance
on
the
son’s
 ‐ same
principle
as
in
ART.
904

legitime
 ‐ if
testamentary
dispositions
exceed
the

 during
the
settlement
of
his
 disposable
portion,
compulsory
heirs
may

father’s
estate,
if
it
turns
out
 demand
their
reduction
to
the
extent
that
the

that
the
son
is
entitled
to
50M
 legitimes
have
been
impaired

as
legitime,
he
would
be
given
 ‐ cf.
ART.
911

20M
more
(the
30M
already
 

credited
to
his
legitime)
 ART.
908.
To
determine
the
legitime,
the
value
of
the


 property
left
at
the
death
of
the
testator
shall
be

Scope
and
prohibition
 considered,
deducting
all
debts
and
charges,
which
shall


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 42 of 73
not
include
those
imposed
in
the
will.
 


 Facts:
Decedent
sold
parcel
of
land
to
daughter.
Daughter

To
the
net
value
of
the
hereditary
estate,
shall
be
added
 had
husband
and
two
children.
Daughter
and
children

the
value
of
all
donations
by
the
testator
that
are
subject
 died
in
massacre,
in
which
daughter
died
ahead.
Children

to
collation,
at
the
time
he
made
them.





 became
heirs
of
mother.
When
children
died,
their
father


 (husband)
became
sole
heir.
Husband
(widower)

The
net
hereditary
estate
 extrajudicially
settled
estate
of
wife
with
parents‐in‐law

‐ ART.
908
makes
possible
the
computation
of
the
 (decedent
and
his
wife).
Decedent
died
and
a
collation
was

absolute
amounts
of
the
legitimes
by
laying
 asked
where
widower
included.

down
the
manner
of
computing
the
net
value
of
 

the
estate
(the
net
hereditary
estate),
on
which
 Held:
That
inclusion
of
widower
(son‐in‐law
in
relation
to

the
proportions
are
based
 decedent)
in
settlement
of
intestate
estate
of
his
father‐in‐

 law
(father
of
his
late
wife)
is
erroneous
because
son‐in‐
How
to
compute
the
hereditary
estate:
 law
not
a
compulsory
heir
of
his
father‐in‐law.
That

‐ inventory
of
all
existing
assets
 assuming
collation
were
proper,
still
property
sold
by

o appraisal
or
valuation
of
existing
assets
 decedent
to
his
dead
daughter
(wife
of
decedent’s
son‐in‐
at
the
time
of
the
decedent’s
death
 law
or
the
widower)
not
collationable
for
the
reason
that

o assets
include
only
those
that
survive
 transfer
was
not
by
gratuitous
title
but
by
onerous
title

the
decedent
(i.e.
not
extinguished
by
 (sale).
That
obligation
to
collate
is
lodged
with
decedent’s

his
death)
 compulsory
heir,
his
dead
daughter,
and
not
to
said

o value
determined
by
inventory
will
 deceased
daughter’s
husband.

constitute
the
gross
assets
 

‐ deduct
unpaid
debts
and
charges
 ART.
909.
Donations
given
to
children
shall
be
charged

o all
unpaid
obligations
of
the
decedent
 to
their
legitime.

must
be
deducted
from
gross
assets
 

o only
obligations
with
monetary
value,
 Donations
made
to
strangers
shall
be
charged
to
that

not
extinguished
by
death,
are
 part
of
the
estate
of
which
the
testator
could
have

considered
(i.e.
not
intuitu
personae
 disposed
by
his
last
will.

obligations)
 

o difference
between
gross
assets
and
 Insofar
as
they
may
be
inofficious
or
may
exceed
the

unpaid
obligations
will
be
the
available
 disposable
portion,
they
shall
be
reduced
according
to

assets
 the
rules
established
by
this
Code.

‐ add
the
value
of
donations
inter
vivos
 

o add
to
the
value
of
available
assets
all
 ART.
910.
Donations
which
an
illegitimate
child
may

the
inter
vivos
donations
made
by
the
 have
received
during
the
lifetime
of
his
father
or

decedent
 mother,
shall
be
charged
to
his
legitime.

o donations
inter
vivos
must
be
valued
as
 

of
the
time
they
were
made
(increase
 Should
they
exceed
the
portion
that
can
be
freely

or
decrease
in
value,
for
the
donee’s
 disposed
of,
they
shall
be
reduced
in
the
manner

account)
 prescribed
by
this
Code.

o sum
of
available
assets
and
all
 

donations
inter
vivos
is
the
net
 Donations
inter
vivos
to
compulsory
heirs,
considered

hereditary
estate
 as
an
advance
on
their
legitimes


 ‐ coverage
of
rule

To
illustrate—
 o applies
to
all
compulsory
heirs

‐ inventoried
assets:
17M
(gross
assets)
  including
ascendants

‐ deduct
debts:
6M
(11M
as
available
assets)
  excluding
a
surviving
spouse

‐ add
donations
inter
vivos:

4M
(15M
as
net
 (except
in
cases
of
donations

hereditary
estate)
 propter
nuptias
and
moderate

o if
testator
left
3
legitimate
children
and
 gifts)

a
surviving
spouse,
they
will
get
the
 ‐ exception

following:
 o rule
of
imputation
of
legitime
will
not

 2.5M
each
to
3
legitimate
 apply
if
donor
provided
otherwise

children
(rule:
1/2
of
estate)
 (vide
ART.
1062)

 2.5M
to
surviving
spouse
  in
which
case
donation
to
be

(rule:
share
equivalent
to
that
 imputed
to
the
free
portion

of
one
child)
 

 total
legitimes:
10M
 Donations
inter
vivos
to
strangers

 free
portion:
1M
(note:
 ‐ a
stranger
is
anyone
who
does
not
succeed
as
a

available
assets,
only
11M;
 compulsory
heir

value
of
net
hereditary
estate
 o e.g.
father,
if
decedent
has
children

[15M]
only
relevant
for
 ‐ donations
inter
vivos
to
strangers
are
imputed
to

purposes
of
computing
the
 the
disposable
portion

legitimes)
 


 ART.
911.
After
the
legitime
has
been
determined
in

Vizconde
v.
CA
(1998)
 accordance
with
the
three
preceding
articles,
the


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 43 of 73
reduction
shall
be
made
as
follows:
 one‐half
 of
 its
 value;
 and
 in
 a
 contrary
 case,
 to
 the


 compulsory
 heirs;
 but
 the
 former
 and
 the
 latter
 shall

(1)
Donations
shall
be
respected
as
long
as
the
legitime
 reimburse
 each
 other
 in
 cash
 for
 what
 respectively

can
be
covered,
reducing
or
annulling,
if
necessary,
the
 belongs
to
them.

devises
or
legacies
made
in
the
will;
 The
 devisee
 who
 is
 entitled
 to
 a
 legitime
 may
 retain
 the


 entire
property,
provided
its
value
does
not
exceed
that
of

(2)
The
reduction
of
the
devises
or
legacies
shall
be
pro
 the
disposable
portion
and
of
the
share
pertaining
to
him

rata,
without
any
distinction
whatever;
 as
legitime.
(821)



If
the
testator
has
directed
that
a
certain
devise
or
 

legacy
be
paid
in
preference
to
others,
it
shall
not
suffer
 Balane:

any
reduction
until
the
latter
have
been
applied
in
full
 Provision
covers
the
ff.
cases:

to
the
payment
of
the
legitime.
 1. The
devisee
has
to
be
reduced


 2. The
thing
given
as
a
devise
is
indivisible

(3)
If
the
devise
or
legacy
consists
of
a
usufruct
or
life
 • In
either
case,
there
should
be
pecuniary

annuity,
whose
value
may
be
considered
greater
than
 reimbursment
to
the
party
who
did
not
get
his

that
of
the
disposable
portion,
the
compulsory
heirs
 physical
portion
of
the
thing

may
choose
between
complying
with
the
testamentary
 

provision
and
delivering
to
the
devisee
or
legatee
the
 Rules:

part
of
the
inheritance
of
which
the
testator
could
freely
 1. If
the
extent
of
reduction
is
less
than
½
of
the

dispose.
 value
of
the
thing
–
it
should
be
given
to
the


 devisee.

Legitimes
are
inviolable
 2. If
the
extenet
of
reduction
is
½
or
more
of
the

‐ if
impaired,
gratuitous
dispositions
of
the
 value
of
the
thing
–
it
should
be
given
to
the

testator
(inter
vivos
or
mortis
causa)
have
to
be
 compulsory
heir.

set
aside
or
reduced
as
may
be
required
to
cover
 

the
legitimes
 Art.
 913.
 If
 the
 heirs
 or
 devisees
 do
 not
 choose
 to
 avail


 themselves
 of
 the
 right
 granted
 by
 the
 preceding
 article,

Method
of
reduction*
 any
 heir
 or
 devisee
 who
 did
 not
 have
 such
 right
 may

‐ first,
reduce
pro
rata
the
non‐preferred
legacies
 exercise
 it;
 should
 the
 latter
 not
 make
 use
 of
 it,
 the

and
devises
(ART.
911[2]),
and
the
 property
shall
be
sold
at
public
auction
at
the
instance
of

testamentary
dispositions
(to
heirs)
(ART.
907)
 any
one
of
the
interested
parties.
(822)

o no
preference
among
these
legacies,



devises,
and
testamentary
dispositions

Balane:

‐ second,
reduce
pro
rata
the
preferred
legacies

• This
article
applies
if
neither
party
(the

and
devises
(ART.
911,
last
par.)

compulsory
heir
and
the
devisee)
elects
to

‐ third,
reduce
the
donations
inter
vivos
according

exercise
his
right
under
Art.
912.

to
the
inverse
order
of
their
dates
(i.e.
the
oldest



is
the
most
preferred)

Rules:



1. Any
other
heir
or
devisee,
who
elects
to
do
so,

*reductions
shall
be
to
the
extent
required
to
complete
the

may
acquire
the
thing
and
pay
the
parties
(the

legitimes,
even
if
in
the
process,
the
disposition
is
reduced

compulsory
heir
and
the
devisee
in
question)

to
nothing

their
respective
share
in
money.



2. If
no
heir
or
devisee
elects
to
acquire
it,
it
shall

Devises
/
legacies
of
usufruct
/
life
annuities
/

be
sold
at
public
auction
and
the
net
proceeds

pensions
(ART.
911[3])

accordingly
divided
between
the
parties

‐ if
upon
being
capitalized
according
to
actuarial

concerned.

standards,
the
value
of
the
grant
exceeds
the
free



portion
(i.e.
it
impairs
the
legitime),
it
has
to
be

reduced,
because
the
legitime
cannot
be
 Art.
914

The
testator
may
devise
and
bequeath
the
free

impaired
 portion
as
he
may
deem
fit.
(n)

‐ the
testator
can
impose
no
usufruct
or
any
other



encumbrance
on
the
part
that
passes
as
legitime

6. Disinheritance
‐ subject
to
the
two
rules
abovementioned,
the



compulsory
heirs
may
elect
between
ceding
to

the
devisee
/
legatee
the
free
portion
(or
the
 Art.
915.
A
compulsory
heir
may,
in
consequence
of

proportional
part
thereof
corresponding
to
the
 disinheritance,
be
deprived
of
his
legitime,
for
causes

said
legacy
/
devise,
in
case
there
are
other
 expressly
stated
by
law.
(848a).

dispositions),
and
complying
with
the
terms
of
 

the
usufruct
or
life
annuity
or
pension
 Balane:


 Requisites
of
a
valid
disinheritance:
(SLaW­PUTT)


 1. It
must
be
made
in
a
will.

Art.
912.
If
the
devise
subject
to
reduction
should
consist
 • It
must
be
admitted
into
probate.

of
real
property,
which
cannot
be
conveniently
divided,
it
 2. It
must
be
for
a
cause
specified
by
law.

shall
 go
 to
 the
 devisee
 if
 the
 reduction
 does
 not
 absorb
 3. The
will
must
specify
the
cause.

4. It
must
be
unconditional.


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 44 of 73
 5. It
must
be
total.
 (7)
When
a
child
or
descendant
leads
a
dishonorable
or

6. The
cause
must
be
true.
 disgraceful
life;

7. If
the
truth
of
the
cause
is
denied,
it
must
be
 (8)
Conviction
of
a
crime
which
carries
with
it
the
penalty

proved
by
the
proponent.
 of
civil
interdiction.
(756,
853,
674a)



 

Effect
of
disinheritance:
 Balane:

The
disinherited
heir
forfeits:
 Grounds
for
disinheritance:
(DAMA­FASI)


1. his
legitime
 1. Attempt
against
the
life

2. his
intestate
portion,
if
any,
and
 • All
stages
of
commission
are
included
–

3. any
testamentary
disposition
made
in
a
prior
 attempted,
frustrtaed
or
consumated.

will
of
the
disinheriting
testator
 • Intent
to
kill
must
be
present.


 • Final
conviction
is
necessary.

Class
Notes:
 2. Accusation

• This
should
be
correlated
with
Art.
904.
 • This
includes
the
filing
of
the
complaint


 before
the
prosecutor,
or
presenting

Art.
916.
Disinheritance
can
be
effected
only
through
a
will
 incriminating
evidence
against
the
testator,

wherein
the
legal
cause
therefor
shall
be
specified.
(849)
 or
even
supressing
exculpatory
evidence.


 • There
should
be
imprisonment
of
more
than

Art.
917.
The
burden
of
proving
the
truth
of
the
cause
for
 six
years.

disinheritance
shall
rest
upon
the
other
heirs
of
the
 • The
accusation
must
be
found
to
be

testator,
if
the
disinherited
heir
should
deny
it.
(850)
 groundless.


 3. Adultery
and
concubinage

Art.
918.
Disinheritance
without
a
specification
of
the
 • Final
conviction
is
required.

cause,
or
for
a
cause
the
truth
of
which,
if
contradicted,
is
 4. Fraud,
violence,
intimidation
and
undue

not
proved,
or
which
is
not
one
of
those
set
forth
in
this
 influence
in
the
making
of
the
will

Code,
shall
annul
the
institution
of
heirs
insofar
as
it
may
 5. Refusal
to
support
without
justifiable
cause

prejudice
the
person
disinherited;
but
the
devises
and
 • The
demand
must
be
unjustifiably
refused.


legacies
and
other
testamentary
dispositions
shall
be
valid
 • Refusal
may
be
justified:


to
such
extent
as
will
not
impair
the
legitime.
(851a)
 o E.g.
If
the
obligor
does
not
have


 enough
resources
for
all
whom
he

Balane:
 is
obliged
to
support.
The

• If
the
disinheritance
lacks
one
or
other
of
the
 ascendants
are
only
third
in
the

requisites
in
this
article,
the
heir
in
question
gets
 hierarchy
of
preference
among

his
legitime.
 claimants
of
support.

• As
to
whether
he
will
get
also
any
part
of
the
 6. Maltreatment

intestate
portion
or
not,
it
depends
in
whether
 • It
is
required
that
the
act
of
verbal
or

the
testator
gave
away
the
free
portion
through
 physical
assault
be
of
serious
nature.

testamentary
dispositions:
 • No
conviction
is
required.
It
is
not
even

o If
through
testamentary
provision,
 required
that
any
criminal
case
be
filed.

these
dispositions
are
valid
and
the
 • This
may
be
proved
by
preponderance
of

compulsory
heir
improperly
 evidence.

disinherited
gets
only
his
legitime.
 7. Leads
a
dishonorable
or
disgraceful
life

o He
will
get
his
corresponding
share
of
 • There
must
be
habituality
to
the
conduct.

the
free
portion
is
if
is
not
through
 • The
conduct
need
not
be
sexual
in
nature.

testamentary
provision.
 8. Crime
with
civil
interdiction


 o Final
conviction
is
required.

Art.
919.
The
following
shall
be
sufficient
causes
for
the
 

disinheritance
of
children
and
descendants,
legitimate
as
 Class
Notes:

well
as
illegitimate:
 • Accusation

(1)
When
a
child
or
descendant
has
been
found
guilty
of
 o The
exoneration
or
acquittal
must
be

an
attempt
against
the
life
of
the
testator,
his
or
her
 because
the
charge
is
groundless.

spouse,
descendants,
or
ascendants;
  If
the
acquittal
is
only
beyond

(2)
When
a
child
or
descendant
has
accused
the
testator
of
 reasonable
doubt,
then
there

a
crime
for
which
the
law
prescribes
imprisonment
for
six
 is
some
ground.

years
or
more,
if
the
accusation
has
been
found
 • Fraud,
violence,
intimidation
and
undue

groundless;
 influence
in
the
making
of
the
will

(3)
When
a
child
or
descendant
has
been
convicted
of
 o No
conviction
is
required
here

adultery
or
concubinage
with
the
spouse
of
the
testator;
 • Maltreatment

(4)
When
a
child
or
descendant
by
fraud,
violence,
 o Usually
this
is
hard
to
prove
because

intimidation,
or
undue
influence
causes
the
testator
to
 there
is
no
witness
and
the
testator
is

make
a
will
or
to
change
one
already
made;
 dead.

(5)
A
refusal
without
justifiable
cause
to
support
the
 • Leads
a
dishonorable
or
disgraceful
life

parent
or
ascendant
who
disinherits
such
child
or
 o It
cannot
be
only
once.

descendant;
 o It
need
not
be
sexual
in
nature.
For

(6)
Maltreatment
of
the
testator
by
word
or
deed,
by
the
 example,
partaking
in
the
pork
barrel

child
or
descendant;
 scam
with
Janet
Napoles.


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 45 of 73

  Compelling
the
child
to

Art.
920.
The
following
shall
be
sufficient
causes
for
the
 be
or

disinheritance
of
parents
or
ascendants,
whether
  Subjecting
the
child
or

legitimate
or
illegitimate:
 allowing
him
to
be

(1)
When
the
parents
have
abandoned
their
children
or
 subjected
to
acts
of

induced
their
daughters
to
live
a
corrupt
or
immoral
life,
 lasciviousness

or
attempted
against
their
virtue;
 4. Attempt
against
the
life
of
a
parent
by
another

(2)
When
the
parent
or
ascendant
has
been
convicted
of
 • Includes
all
stages
of
consummation.
No

an
attempt
against
the
life
of
the
testator,
his
or
her
 conviction
is
required.

spouse,
descendants,
or
ascendants;
 

(3)
When
the
parent
or
ascendant
has
accused
the
testator
 Class
Notes:

of
a
crime
for
which
the
law
prescribes
imprisonment
for
 • Accusation

six
years
or
more,
if
the
accusation
has
been
found
to
be
 

false;
 Art.
921.
The
following
shall
be
sufficient
causes
for

(4)
When
the
parent
or
ascendant
has
been
convicted
of
 disinheriting
a
spouse:

adultery
or
concubinage
with
the
spouse
of
the
testator;
 (1)
When
the
spouse
has
been
convicted
of
an
attempt

(5)
When
the
parent
or
ascendant
by
fraud,
violence,
 against
the
life
of
the
testator,
his
or
her
descendants,
or

intimidation,
or
undue
influence
causes
the
testator
to
 ascendants;

make
a
will
or
to
change
one
already
made;
 (2)
When
the
spouse
has
accused
the
testator
of
a
crime

(6)
The
loss
of
parental
authority
for
causes
specified
in
 for
which
the
law
prescribes
imprisonment
of
six
years
or

this
Code;
 more,
and
the
accusation
has
been
found
to
be
false;

(7)
The
refusal
to
support
the
children
or
descendants
 (3)
When
the
spouse
by
fraud,
violence,
intimidation,
or

without
justifiable
cause;
 undue
influence
cause
the
testator
to
make
a
will
or
to

(8)
An
attempt
by
one
of
the
parents
against
the
life
of
the
 change
one
already
made;

other,
unless
there
has
been
a
reconciliation
between
 (4)
When
the
spouse
has
given
cause
for
legal
separation;

them.
(756,
854,
674a)
 (5)
When
the
spouse
has
given
grounds
for
the
loss
of


 parental
authority;

Balane:
 (6)
Unjustifiable
refusal
to
support
the
children
or
the

• Number
2,
3,
4,
5
and
7
are
the
same
ground
 other
spouse.
(756,
855,
674a)

under
Article
919.
 


 Balane:

Other
grounds
for
disinheritance
of
parents
or
 • The
only
new
ground
is
number
four.
A
decree
of

ascendants:
(CIA)
 legal
separation
is
not
required.
There
are
ten

1. Abandonment
by
parent
of
his
children
 causes
of
legal
separation
given
in
Article
55
of

• This
is
not
restricted
to
those
instances
of
 the
Family
Code.

abandonment
penalized
by
law.
 • Art.
55.
A
petition
for
legal
separation
may
be

2. Inducement
to
live
a
corrupt
or
immoral
life.

 filed
on
any
of
the
following
grounds:

• Applies
only
to
daughters
 o (1)
Repeated
physical
violence
or

• It
includes
grandparents
to
granddaughters
 grossly
abusive
conduct
directed

as
the
provision
contemplates
ascendants
 against
the
petitioner,
a
common
child,

vis‐à‐vis
descendants.
 or
a
child
of
the
petitioner;

• Mere
attempt
against
their
virtue
is
enough
 o (2)
Physical
violence
or
moral
pressure

as
long
as
it
can
be
proven.
 to
compel
the
petitioner
to
change

• No
conviction
is
required
in
all
three
cases
 religious
or
political
affiliation;

provided
in
the
provision.
 o (3)
Attempt
of
respondent
to
corrupt
or

3. Loss
of
parental
authority
 induce
the
petitioner,
a
common
child,

• Not
all
causes
for
loss
of
parental
authority
 or
a
child
of
the
petitioner,
to
engage
in

are
grounds
for
disinheritance;
for
instance,
 prostitution,
or
connivance
in
such

attainment
of
majority.
 corruption
or
inducement;

• Only
those
causes
which
involve
culpability
 o (4)
Final
judgment
sentencing
the

on
the
part
of
the
parents
will
provide
 respondent
to
imprisonment
of
more

grounds
for
disinheritance:
 than
six
years,
even
if
pardoned;

o Judicial
deprivation
of
parental
 o (5)
Drug
addiction
or
habitual

authority
on
the
ground
of
sexual
 alcoholism
of
the
respondent;

abuse
 o (6)
Lesbianism
or
homosexuality
of
the

o Loss
of
parental
authority
as
a
 respondent;

result
of
judicial
declaration
of
 o (7)
Contracting
by
the
respondent
of
a

abandonment
of
the
child
 subsequent
bigamous
marriage,

o Judicial
deprivation
of
parental
 whether
in
the
Philippines
or
abroad;

authority
on
the
grounds
of
 o (8)
Sexual
infidelity
or
perversion;

 Excessively
harsh
or
 o (9)
Attempt
by
the
respondent
against

cruel
treatment
of
the
 the
life
of
the
petitioner;
or

child
 o (10)
Abandonment
of
petitioner
by

 Giving
the
child
 respondent
without
justifiable
cause

corrupting
orders,
 for
more
than
one
year.

counsel
or
example


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 46 of 73
 o For
purposes
of
this
Article,
the
term
 Art.
924.
All
things
and
rights
which
are
within
the

"child"
shall
include
a
child
by
nature
or
 commerce
of
man
be
bequeathed
or
devised.
(865a)

by
adoption.
(9a)
 

• Unlike
in
Art.
920
where
actual
loss
of
parental
 Balane:

authority
is
required,
here
giving
grounds
 • What
can
be
devised
or
bequethed:
anything

therefor
is
sufficient.
 within
the
commerce
of
man.
It
is
not
required


 that
the
thing
devised
or
bequethed
belong
to

Art.
922.
A
subsequent
reconciliation
between
the
 the
testator.

offender
and
the
offended
person
deprives
the
latter
of
the
 • Limitations
on
legacy
or
devise
–
it
should
not

right
to
disinherit,
and
renders
ineffectual
any
 impair
the
legitime.

disinheritance
that
may
have
been
made.
(856)
 


 Art.
925.
A
testator
may
charge
with
legacies
and
devises

Balane:

 not
only
his
compulsory
heirs
but
also
the
legatees
and

Reconciliation
is
either:
 devisees.

1. An
express
pardon
–
which
must
be
expressly
 The
latter
shall
be
liable
for
the
charge
only
to
the
extent

and
concretely
extended
to
the
offender
who
 of
the
value
of
the
legacy
or
the
devise
received
by
them.

accepts
it.
A
general
pardon
extended
by
the
 The
compulsory
heirs
shall
not
be
liable
for
the
charge

testator
on
his
deatbed
to
all
who
have
offended
 beyond
the
amount
of
the
free
portion
given
them.
(858a)

him
will
not
suffice.
 

2. An
unequivocal
conduct
–
wherein
the
intent
to
 Balane:

forgive
must
be
clear.
This
is
ultimately

a
 • The
wording
of
this
provision
is
erroneous.
A

question
of
facts
which
must
be
resolved
by
the
 compulsory
heir
as
such
cannot
be
burdened

courts.
 with
a
legacy
or
devise
because
that
would


 impair
his
legitime.
Only
a
testamentary
heir
can

Effects
of
reconciliation:
 be
so
burdened.

1. If
it
occurs
before
disinheritance
is
made
–
right
 

to
disinherit
is
distinguished.
 Art.
926.
When
the
testator
charges
one
of
the
heirs
with

2. If
it
occurs
after
the
disinheritance
is
made,
 a
legacy
or
devise,
he
alone
shall
be
bound.

disinheritance
is
set
aside.
 Should
he
not
charge
anyone
in
particular,
all
shall
be


 liable
in
the
same
proportion
in
which
they
may
inherit.

Effects
of
setting
aside
disinheritance:
 (859)

1. Disinherited
heir
is
restored
to
his
legitime.
 

2. If
the
disinheriting
will
did
not
dispose
of
the
 Balane:

disposable
protion,
the
disinherited
heir
is
 • General
rule
is
that
the
estate
is
charged
with
the

entitled
to
his
proportionate
share,
if
any,
of
the
 legacy.

disposable
portion.
 • Exception
is
that
the
testator
may
impose
the

3. If
the
disposable
will
or
any
of
the
subsequent
 burden
on
a
testamentary
heir
or
a
legatee
or

will
disposed
of
the
disposable
portion
(or
any
 devisee.
If
he
does
so,
then
the
heir,
legatee,
or

part
thereof)
in
favor
of
testamentary
heirs,
 devisee
charged
will,
if
he
accepts
the
disposition

legatees,
or
devisees,
such
dispositions
remain
 in
his
favor,
be
bound
to
deliver
the
legacy
or

valid.
 devise
to
the
person
specified.



 

Art.
923.
The
children
and
descendants
of
the
person
 Art.
927.
If
two
or
more
heirs
take
possession
of
the

disinherited
shall
take
his
or
her
place
and
shall
preserve
 estate,
they
shall
be
solidarily
liable
for
the
loss
or

the
rights
of
compulsory
heirs
with
respect
to
the
legitime;
 destruction
of
a
thing
devised
or
bequeathed,
even
though

but
the
disinherited
parent
shall
not
have
the
usufruct
or
 only
one
of
them
should
have
been
negligent.
(n)

administration
of
the
property
which
constitutes
the
 

legitime.
(857)
 Balane:


 • The
liability
imposed
gere
is
based
on
malice,

Balane:

 fault
or
negligence.
The
liability
will
also
attach

• The
right
of
representation
is
granted
only
to
 to
the
executor
or
administrator
in
the
proper

descendants
of
disinherited
descendants.
 cases.

However
if
the
heir
disinherited
is
a
 

parent/ascendant
or
spouse,
the
children
or
 Art.
928.
The
heir
who
is
bound
to
deliver
the
legacy
or

descendants
of
the
disinherited
heir
do
not
have
 devise
shall
be
liable
in
case
of
eviction,
if
the
thing
is

any
right
of
representation.
 indeterminate
and
is
indicated
only
by
its
kind.
(860)

• The
representative
takes
the
place
of
the
 

disinherited
heir
not
only
with
respect
to
the
 Balane:

legitime,
but
also
to
any
intestate
portion
the
 • General
rule,
the
estate
is
liable
in
case
of

disinherited
heir
would
have
inherited.
 eviction.

Representation
therefore,
occurs
in
compulsory
 • Exception
is
in
the
case
of
a
subsidiary
legacy
or

and
intestate
succession
but
not
in
testamentary
 devise,
the
heir,
legatee
or
devisee
charged
shall

succession.
 be
liable.



8. Legacies and Devises Art.
929.
If
the
testator,
heir,
or
legatee
owns
only
a
part




SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 47 of 73
of,
or
an
interest
in
the
thing
bequeathed,
the
legacy
or
 at
the
time
of
his
death.

devise
shall
be
understood
limited
to
such
part
or
interest,
 The
legacy
to
the
debtor
of
the
thing
pledged
by
him
is

unless
the
testator
expressly
declares
that
he
gives
the
 understood
to
discharge
only
the
right
of
pledge.
(871)

thing
in
its
entirety.
(864a)
 


 Art.
937.
A
generic
legacy
of
release
or
remission
of
debts

Art.
930.
The
legacy
or
devise
of
a
thing
belonging
to
 comprises
those
existing
at
the
time
of
the
execution
of

another
person
is
void,
if
the
testator
erroneously
 the
will,
but
not
subsequent
ones.
(872)

believed
that
the
thing
pertained
to
him.
But
if
the
thing
 

bequeathed,
though
not
belonging
to
the
testator
when
he
 Balane:

made
the
will,
afterwards
becomes
his,
by
whatever
title,
 • Legacy/Devise
of
a
thing
owned
in
part
by
the

the
disposition
shall
take
effect.
(862a)
 testator:


 o General
Rule:
conveys
only
the
interest

Art.
931.
If
the
testator
orders
that
a
thing
belonging
to
 or
part
owned
by
the
testator.

another
be
acquired
in
order
that
it
be
given
to
a
legatee
 o Exception:
if
the
testator
provides

or
devisee,
the
heir
upon
whom
the
obligation
is
imposed
 otherwise.

or
the
estate
must
acquire
it
and
give
the
same
to
the
  He
may
convey
more
than
he

legatee
or
devisee;
but
if
the
owner
of
the
thing
refuses
to
 owns.
The
estate
should
try
to

alienate
the
same,
or
demands
an
excessive
price
therefor,
 acquire
the
part
of
interest

the
heir
or
the
estate
shall
only
be
obliged
to
give
the
just
 owned
by
other
parties.
If
the

value
of
the
thing.
(861a)
 other
parties
are
unwilling
to


 alienate,
the
estate
should

Art.
932.
The
legacy
or
devise
of
a
thing
which
at
the
time
 give
the
legatee/devisee
the

of
the
execution
of
the
will
already
belonged
to
the
legatee
 monetary
equivalent.

or
devisee
shall
be
ineffective,
even
though
another
  He
may
convey
less
than
he

person
may
have
some
interest
therein.
 owns.

If
the
testator
expressly
orders
that
the
thing
be
freed
 • Legacy/Devise
of
a
thing
belonging
to
another:

from
such
interest
or
encumbrance,
the
legacy
or
devise
 o If
the
testator
ordered
the
acquisition

shall
be
valid
to
that
extent.
(866a)
 of
the
thing
–
the
order
should
be


 complied
with.
If
the
owner
is
unwilling

Art.
933.
If
the
thing
bequeathed
belonged
to
the
legatee
 to
part
with
the
thing,
the

or
devisee
at
the
time
of
the
execution
of
the
will,
the
 legatee/devisee
should
be
given
the

legacy
or
devise
shall
be
without
effect,
even
though
it
 monetary
equivalent.

may
have
subsequently
alienated
by
him.
 o If
the
testator
erroneously
believed
that

If
the
legatee
or
devisee
acquires
it
gratuitously
after
such
 the
thing
belonged
to
him
–

time,
he
can
claim
nothing
by
virtue
of
the
legacy
or
 legacy/devise
void.

devise;
but
if
it
has
been
acquired
by
onerous
title
he
can
  Exception:
if
subsequent
to

demand
reimbursement
from
the
heir
or
the
estate.
 the
making
of
the
disposition,

(878a)
 the
thing
is
acquired
by
the


 testator
onerously
or

Art.
934.
If
the
testator
should
bequeath
or
devise
 gratuitously,
the
disposition
is

something
pledged
or
mortgaged
to
secure
a
recoverable
 validated.

debt
before
the
execution
of
the
will,
the
estate
is
obliged
 o If
the
testator
knew
that
the
thing
did

to
pay
the
debt,
unless
the
contrary
intention
appears.
 not
belong
to
him
but
did
not
order
its

The
same
rule
applies
when
the
thing
is
pledged
or
 acquisition,
the
Code
is
silent
on
this.

mortgaged
after
the
execution
of
the
will.
 • Legacy/Devise
of
thing
belonging
to
the

Any
other
charge,
perpetual
or
temporary,
with
which
the
 legatee/devisee
or
subsequently
acquired
by

thing
bequeathed
is
burdened,
passes
with
it
to
the
legatee
 him:

or
devisee.
(867a)
 o If
the
thing
already
belonged
to
the


 legate/devisee
at
the
time
of
the

Art.
935.
The
legacy
of
a
credit
against
a
third
person
or
of
 execution
of
the
will
–
legacy/devise

the
remission
or
release
of
a
debt
of
the
legatee
shall
be
 void.
It
is
not
validated
by
an
alienation

effective
only
as
regards
that
part
of
the
credit
or
debt
 by
the
legatee/devisee
subsequent
to

existing
at
the
time
of
the
death
of
the
testator.
 the
making
of
the
will,
unless
the

In
the
first
case,
the
estate
shall
comply
with
the
legacy
by
 acquirer
is
the
testator
himself.

assigning
to
the
legatee
all
rights
of
action
it
may
have
 o If
the
thing
was
owned
by
another

against
the
debtor.
In
the
second
case,
by
giving
the
 person
at
the
time
of
the
making
of
the

legatee
an
acquittance,
should
he
request
one.
 will
and
acquired
thereafter
by
the

In
both
cases,
the
legacy
shall
comprise
all
interests
on
the
 legatee/devisee:

credit
or
debt
which
may
be
due
the
testator
at
the
time
of
  If
the
testator
erroneously

his
death.
(870a)
 believed
that
it
belonged
to

him
–
legacy/devise
void.



 If
the
testator
was
not
in

Art.
936.
The
legacy
referred
to
in
the
preceding
article

error.

shall
lapse
if
the
testator,
after
having
made
it,
should

• If
the
thing
was

bring
an
action
against
the
debtor
for
the
payment
of
his

acquired
onerously

debt,
even
if
such
payment
should
not
have
been
effected

by
legatee/devisee
–


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 48 of 73
 the
legatee/devisee
 heir
is
so
obliged.

is
entitled
to
 If
the
heir,
legatee
or
devisee,
who
may
have
been
given

reimbursement
 the
choice,
dies
before
making
it,
this
right
shall
pass
to

• If
the
thing
was
 the
respective
heirs.

acquired
 Once
made,
the
choice
is
irrevocable.

gratuitously
by
 In
the
alternative
legacies
or
devises,
except
as
herein

legatee/devisee,
 provided,
the
provisions
of
this
Code
regulating

nothing
more
is
due.
 obligations
of
the
same
kind
shall
be
observed,
save
such

o If
the
thing
was
owned
by
the
testator
 modifications
as
may
appear
from
the
intention
expressed

at
the
time
of
making
the
will
and
 by
the
testator.
(874a)

acquired
thereafter
from
him
by
the
 

legatee/devisee
–
Art
932
and
933
are
 Balane:

silent
on
this
but
Art.
957
par.
2
can
be
 To
whom
the
right
of
choice
(one
made
is
irrevoacble)

applied
and
the
legacy/devise
should
 is
to
be
given:

be
deemed
revoked.
 • General
rule

• Legacy/Devise
to
remove
an
encumbrance
over
 o The
estate
through
the
executor
or

a
thing
belonging
to
the
legatee/devisee:
 administrator
–
in
a
direct

o Valid
if
the
encumbrance
can
be
 legacy/devise

removed
for
a
consideration.
 o The
heir,
legatee,
or
devisee
charged
–

• Legacy/Devise
of
a
thing
pledged:
 in
a
subsidiary
legacy/devise

o The
encumbrance
must
be
removed
by
 • Exception:

paying
the
debt,
unless
the
testator
 o The
legatee/devisee
(or
indeed
any

intended
otherwise.
 other
person),
if
the
testator
so

o A
charge
other
than
a
pledge
or
 provides

mortgage
(as
a
usufruct
or
easement)
 

passes
to
the
legatee
or
devisee
 If
the
person
who
is
to
choose
dies
before
the
choice
is

together
with
the
thing
 made:

• Legacy
of
credit
or
remission:
 • If
the
choice
belonged
to
executor
or

o Applies
only
to
amount
still
unpaid
at
 administrator
–
the
right
is
transmitted
to
his

the
time
of
the
testator’s
death
 successor
in
office.

o Revoked
if
testator
subsequently
sues
 • If
the
choice
belongs
to
an
heir,
legatee
or

the
debtor
for
collection
 devisee
–
the
right
is
transmitted
to
his
own

o If
generic,
applies
only
to
those
existing
 heirs.

at
the
time
of
execution
of
the
will,
 

unless
otherwise
provided
 Art.
941.
A
legacy
of
generic
personal
property
shall
be


 valid
even
if
there
be
no
things
of
the
same
kind
in
the

Art.
938.
A
legacy
or
devise
made
to
a
creditor
shall
not
 estate.

be
applied
to
his
credit,
unless
the
testator
so
expressly
 A
devise
of
indeterminate
real
property
shall
be
valid
only

declares.
 if
there
be
immovable
property
of
its
kind
in
the
estate.

In
the
latter
case,
the
creditor
shall
have
the
right
to
 The
right
of
choice
shall
belong
to
the
executor
or

collect
the
excess,
if
any,
of
the
credit
or
of
the
legacy
or
 administrator
who
shall
comply
with
the
legacy
by
the

devise.
(837a)
 delivery
of
a
thing
which
is
neither
of
inferior
nor
of


 superior
quality.
(875a

Art.
939.
If
the
testator
orders
the
payment
of
what
he
 

believes
he
owes
but
does
not
in
fact
owe,
the
disposition
 Art.
942.
Whenever
the
testator
expressly
leaves
the
right

shall
be
considered
as
not
written.
If
as
regards
a
specified
 of
choice
to
the
heir,
or
to
the
legatee
or
devisee,
the

debt
more
than
the
amount
thereof
is
ordered
paid,
the
 former
may
give
or
the
latter
may
choose
whichever
he

excess
is
not
due,
unless
a
contrary
intention
appears.
 may
prefer.
(876a)

The
foregoing
provisions
are
without
prejudice
to
the
 

fulfilment
of
natural
obligations.
(n)
 Art.
943.
If
the
heir,
legatee
or
devisee
cannot
make
the


 choice,
in
case
it
has
been
granted
him,
his
right
shall
pass

Balane:
 to
his
heirs;
but
a
choice
once
made
shall
be
irrevocable.

• Legacy/Devise
to
a
creditor
 (877a)

o General
rule:
It
will
be
treated
like
any
 

other
legacy/devise
and
therefore
will
 Balane:

not
be
imputed
to
the
debt.
 Rules
on
validity:

o Exception:
It
will
be
imputed
to
the
 • Generic
legacy
–
valid
even
If
no
such
movable

debt
if
the
testator
so
provides,
and
if
 exist
in
the
testator’s
estate
upon
his
death.
The

the
debt
exceeds
the
legacy/devise,
the
 estate
will
simply
have
to
acquire
what
is
given

excess
may
be
demanded
as
an
 by
legacy.

obligation
of
the
estate.
 • Generic
devise
–
valid
only
if
there
exists
such
an


 immovable
in
the
testator’s
estate
at
the
time
of

Art.
940.
In
alternative
legacies
or
devises,
the
choice
is
 his
death

presumed
to
be
left
to
the
heir
upon
whom
the
obligation
 

to
give
the
legacy
or
devise
may
be
imposed,
or
the
 Rules
on
right
of
choice:

executor
or
administrator
of
the
estate
if
no
particular


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 49 of 73
 • General
rule:
the
executor
or
administrator,
 (ii)
the
value
of
the
disposable
portion

acting
for
the
estate
has
the
right
of
choice.
 of
the
estate.

• Exception:
if
the
testator
gives
the
right
of
choice
 • Legacy
of
a
periodical
pension
can
be
demanded

to
the
legatee/devisee,
or
to
the
heirs
on
whom
 upon
testator’s
death,
and
the
succeeding
ones
at

the
obligation
to
give
the
benefit
is
imposed
(in
a
 the
beginning
of
the
period
without
duty
to

subsidiary
legacy
or
devise)
 reimburse
should
the
legatee
die
before
the


 lapse
of
the
period.

Transmissibility
of
choices:
 

• If
the
choice
belongs
to
the
 Art.
945.
If
a
periodical
pension,
or
a
certain
annual,

executor/administrator
and
he
dies
before
 monthly,
or
weekly
amount
is
bequeathed,
the
legatee

making
the
choice
–
right
is
transmitted
to
his
 may
petition
the
court
for
the
first
installment
upon
the

successor
in
the
position.
 death
of
the
testator,
and
for
the
following
ones
which

• If
the
choice
belongs
to
the
legatee/devisee
and
 shall
be
due
at
the
beginning
of
each
period;
such
payment

he
dies
before
making
the
choice
–
the
right
 shall
not
be
returned,
even
though
the
legatee
should
die

passed
to
his
heirs.
 before
the
expiration
of
the
period
which
has
commenced.


 (880a)

Regarding
choices:
 

• The
choice
must
be
limited
to
something
which
 Art.
946.
If
the
thing
bequeathed
should
be
subject
to
a

is
neither
superior
nor
inferior
in
quality.
This
 usufruct,
the
legatee
or
devisee
shall
respect
such
right

rule
applies
whether
the
choice
belongs
to
the
 until
it
is
legally
extinguished.
(868a)

executor/administrator
or
the
legatee/devisee.
 


 Art.
947.
The
legatee
or
devisee
acquires
a
right
to
the

Art.
944.
A
legacy
for
education
lasts
until
the
legatee
is
of
 pure
and
simple
legacies
or
devises
from
the
death
of
the

age,
or
beyond
the
age
of
majority
in
order
that
the
legatee
 testator,
and
transmits
it
to
his
heirs.
(881a)

may
finish
some
professional,
vocational
or
general
 

course,
provided
he
pursues
his
course
diligently.
 Art.
948.
If
the
legacy
or
device
is
of
a
specific
and

A
legacy
for
support
lasts
during
the
lifetime
of
the
 determinate
thing
pertaining
to
the
testator,
the
legatee
or

legatee,
if
the
testator
has
not
otherwise
provided.
 devisee
acquires
the
ownership
thereof
upon
the
death
of

If
the
testator
has
not
fixed
the
amount
of
such
legacies,
it
 the
testator,
as
well
as
any
growing
fruits,
or
unborn

shall
be
fixed
in
accordance
with
the
social
standing
and
 offspring
of
animals,
or
uncollected
income;
but
not
the

the
circumstances
of
the
legatee
and
the
value
of
the
 income
which
was
due
and
unpaid
before
the
latter's

estate.
 death.

If
the
testator
or
during
his
lifetime
used
to
give
the
 From
the
moment
of
the
testator's
death,
the
thing

legatee
a
certain
sum
of
money
or
other
things
by
way
of
 bequeathed
shall
be
at
the
risk
of
the
legatee
or
devisee,

support,
the
same
amount
shall
be
deemed
bequeathed,
 who
shall,
therefore,
bear
its
loss
or
deterioration,
and

unless
it
be
markedly
disproportionate
to
the
value
of
the
 shall
be
benefited
by
its
increase
or
improvement,
without

estate.
(879a)
 prejudice
to
the
responsibility
of
the
executor
or


 administrator.
(882a)

Balane:

 

• On
legacy
for
education:
 Art.
949.
If
the
bequest
should
not
be
of
a
specific
and

o The
duration
is
the
age
of
majority
or
 determinate
thing,
but
is
generic
or
of
quantity,
its
fruits

the
completion
of
a
professional,
 and
interests
from
the
time
of
the
death
of
the
testator

vocational,
or
general
course,
 shall
pertain
to
the
legatee
or
devisee
if
the
testator
has

whichever
comes
later
[in
the
latter
 expressly
so
ordered.
(884a)

instance
only
if
the
legatee
pursues
his
 

studies
diligently.]
 Balane:

o On
the
amount,
it
is
primarily
fixed
by
 Rules
on
demandability,
ownership
and
fruits
of

the
testator.
Secodarily
is
that
which
is
 legacies/devises:

proper
as
determined
by
two
variables:
 • Demandability:

(i)
the
social
standing
and
 o pure
–
upon
testator’s
death

circumstances
of
the
legatee,
and
(ii)
 o with
a

(suspensive)
term
–
upon

the
value
of
the
disposable
portion
of
 arrival
of
the
term

the
estate.
 o conditional
–
upon
the
happening
of
the

• On
legacy
for
support:
 condition

o The
duration
must
be
the
legatee’s
 • When
ownership
vests:

lifetime
unless
the
testator
provides
 o pure
and
determinate
–
upon
testator’s

otherwise.
 death

o The
amount
is
primarily
fixed
by
the
 o pure
and
generic
–

testator.
Secondarily
is
that
which
the
  if
from
testator’s
estate
‐


testator
during
his
lifetime
used
to
give
 upon
testator’s
death

the
legatee
by
way
of
support,
unless
  if
acquired
from
a
third

markedly
disproportionate
to
the
value
 person
–
upon
acquisition

of
the
disposable
portion.
Tertiarily
is
 o with
a
(suspensive)
term
–
upon
arrival

that
which
reasonable,
on
the
basis
of
 of
the
term,
but
the
right
to
it
vests

two
variables:
(i)
the
social
standing
 upon
the
testator’s
death

and
circumstances
of
the
legatee,
and


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 50 of 73
 o conditional
(suspensive)
–
upon
the
 

testator’s
death,
if
the
condition
is
 Balane:

fulfilled
 Rules
on
acceptance
and
repudiation
of

• Fruits:
 legacies/devises:

o pure
and
determinate
–
upon
testator’s
 1. Aceptance
maybe
total
or
partial
(as
implied

death
 from
Art.
954,
par.1)

o pure
and
generic
‐

upon
determination,
 • Exception:
If
the
legacy/devise
is
partly

unless
the
testator
provides
otherwise
 onerous
and
partly
gratuitous,
the
recipient

o with
a
term
–
upon
arrival
of
the
term
 cannot
accept
the
gratuitous
part
and
the

o with
a
condition
–
upon
the
happening
 renounce
the
onerous
part.
Any
other

of
such
condition,
unless
the
testator
 combination
however
is
permitted.

provides
otherwise
 • If
the
legatee
or
devisee
dies
before


 accepting
or
renouncing,
his
heirs
shall

Art.
950.
If
the
estate
should
not
be
sufficient
to
cover
all
 exercise
such
right
as
to
their
pro‐indiviso

the
legacies
or
devises,
their
payment
shall
be
made
in
the
 share,
and
in
the
same
manner
as
outlined

following
order:
 above.

(1)
Remuneratory
legacies
or
devises;
 2. When
there
is
two
legacies/devises
to
the
same

(2)
Legacies
or
devises
declared
by
the
testator
to
be
 recipient:

preferential;
 • If
both
gratuitous
–
the
recipient
may
accept

(3)
Legacies
for
support;
 or
renounce
either
or
both

(4)
Legacies
for
education;
 • If
both
onerous
–
same
rule
as
above

(5)
Legacies
or
devises
of
a
specific,
determinate
thing
 • If
one
is
gratuitous
and
the
other
is
onerous

which
forms
a
part
of
the
estate;
 –
the
recipient
cannot
accept
the
gratuitous

(6)
All
others
pro
rata.
(887a)
 part
and
the
renounce
the
onerous
part.
Any


 other
combination
however
is
permitted.

Art.
951.
The
thing
bequeathed
shall
be
delivered
with
all
 3. When
legacy
or
devise
is
also
given
to
one
who
is

its
accessories
and
accessories
and
in
the
condition
in
 a
compulsory
heir

which
it
may
be
upon
the
death
of
the
testator.
(883a)
 • The
recipient
may
accept
either
or
both


 4. Effect
if
will
provide
otherwise
–
all
the
rules

Art.
952.
The
heir,
charged
with
a
legacy
or
devise,
or
the
 above
outlined
apply
in
the
absence
of
a

executor
or
administrator
of
the
estate,
must
deliver
the
 stipulation

in
the
will
providing
otherwise.

very
thing
bequeathed
if
he
is
able
to
do
so
and
cannot
 

discharge
this
obligation
by
paying
its
value.
 Art.
956.
If
the
legatee
or
devisee
cannot
or
is
unwilling
to

Legacies
of
money
must
be
paid
in
cash,
even
though
the
 accept
the
legacy
or
devise,
or
if
the
legacy
or
devise
for

heir
or
the
estate
may
not
have
any.
 any
reason
should
become
ineffective,
it
shall
be
merged

The
expenses
necessary
for
the
delivery
of
the
thing
 into
the
mass
of
the
estate,
except
in
cases
of
substitution

bequeathed
shall
be
for
the
account
of
the
heir
or
the
 and
of
the
right
of
accretion.
(888a)

estate,
but
without
prejudice
to
the
legitime.
(886a)
 


 Balane:

Art.
953.
The
legatee
or
devisee
cannot
take
possession
of
 Rules
in
case
of
repudiation
by
or
incapacity
of

the
thing
bequeathed
upon
his
own
authority,
but
shall
 legatee/devisee:

request
its
delivery
and
possession
of
the
heir
charged
 1. Primarily
–
substitution

with
the
legacy
or
devise,
or
of
the
executor
or
 2. Secondarily
–
accretion

administrator
of
the
estate
should
he
be
authorized
by
the
 3. Tertiarily
–
intestacy

court
to
deliver
it.
(885a)
 


 Art.
957.
The
legacy
or
devise
shall
be
without
effect:

Art.
954.
The
legatee
or
devisee
cannot
accept
a
part
of
 (1)
If
the
testator
transforms
the
thing
bequeathed
in
such

the
legacy
or
devise
and
repudiate
the
other,
if
the
latter
 a
manner
that
it
does
not
retain
either
the
form
or
the

be
onerous.
 denomination
it
had;

Should
he
die
before
having
accepted
the
legacy
or
devise,
 (2)
If
the
testator
by
any
title
or
for
any
cause
alienates
the

leaving
several
heirs,
some
of
the
latter
may
accept
and
 thing
bequeathed
or
any
part
thereof,
it
being
understood

the
others
may
repudiate
the
share
respectively
belonging
 that
in
the
latter
case
the
legacy
or
devise
shall
be
without

to
them
in
the
legacy
or
devise.
(889a)
 effect
only
with
respect
to
the
part
thus
alienated.
If
after


 the
alienation
the
thing
should
again
belong
to
the

Art.
955.
The
legatee
or
devisee
of
two
legacies
or
devises,
 testator,
even
if
it
be
by
reason
of
nullity
of
the
contract,

one
of
which
is
onerous,
cannot
renounce
the
onerous
one
 the
legacy
or
devise
shall
not
thereafter
be
valid,
unless

and
accept
the
other.
If
both
are
onerous
or
gratuitous,
he
 the
reacquisition
shall
have
been
effected
by
virtue
of
the

shall
be
free
to
accept
or
renounce
both,
or
to
renounce
 exercise
of
the
right
of
repurchase;

either.
But
if
the
testator
intended
that
the
two
legacies
or
 (3)
If
the
thing
bequeathed
is
totally
lost
during
the

devises
should
be
inseparable
from
each
other,
the
legatee
 lifetime
of
the
testator,
or
after
his
death
without
the

or
devisee
must
either
accept
or
renounce
both.
 heir's
fault.
Nevertheless,
the
person
obliged
to
pay
the

Any
compulsory
heir
who
is
at
the
same
time
a
legatee
or
 legacy
or
devise
shall
be
liable
for
eviction
if
the
thing

devisee
may
waive
the
inheritance
and
accept
the
legacy
 bequeathed
should
not
have
been
determinate
as
to
its

or
devise,
or
renounce
the
latter
and
accept
the
former,
or
 kind,
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
Article
928.

waive
or
accept
both.
(890a)
 (869a)




SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 51 of 73
Balane:
 2. Partial
–
A
will
that
disposes
of
part
of
the
free

Instances
when
legacy/devise
is
revoked
by
operation
of
 portion;
insofar
as
it
does
not
impair

law:
 

1. transformation
–
the
testator
converts
a
 Instances
when
legal
or
intestate
succession
operates:

plantation
into
a
fishpond
 (WISE­PIR)

2. alienation
–
the
alienation
by
the
testator
may
be
 1. If
a
person
dies
without
a
will,
or
with
a
void
will,

onerous
or
gratuitous.

 or
one
which
has
subsequently
lost
its
validity;

• The
alienation
revokes
the
legacy/devise
 • Sir:
The
will
does
not
lose
its

even
if
for
any
reason
the
thing
reverts
to
 validity.


the
testator.
 2. When
the
will
does
not
institute
an
heir
to,
or

• Exceptions:
 dispose
of
all
the
property
belonging
to
the

o If
the
reversion
is
caused
by
the
 testator.
In
such
case,
legal
succession
shall
take

annulment
of
the
alienation
and
 place
only
with
respect
to
the
property
of
which

the
cause
for
annulment
was
 the
testator
has
not
disposed;

vitiation
of
consent
on
the
 3. If
the
suspensive
condition
attached
to
the

grantor’s
part,
either
by
reason
of
 institution
of
heir
does
not
happen
or
is
not

incapacity
or
of
duress.
 fulfilled,
or
if
the
heir
does
not
happen
or
is
not

o If
the
reversion
is
by
virtue
of
 fulfilled,
or
if
the
heir
dies
before
the
testator
or

redemption
in
a
sale
with
pacto
de
 repudiates
the
inheritance,
there
being
no

retro.
 substitution,
and
no
right
of
accretion
takes

3. total
loss
–
this
will
be
a
cause
for
revocation
 place.

only
if
it
takes
place
before
the
testator’s
death.
 4. When
the
heir
instituted
is
incapable
of

Fortuitous
loss
after
the
testator’s
death
will
not
 succeeding,
except
in
cases
provided
in
this

constitute
revocation.
 Code.


 5. happening
of
resolutory
condition

Art.
958.
A
mistake
as
to
the
name
of
the
thing
 6. expiration
of
resolutory
term

bequeathed
or
devised,
is
of
no
consequence,
if
it
is
 7. preterition

possible
to
identify
the
thing
which
the
testator
intended
 

to
bequeath
or
devise.
(n)
 Art.
961.
In
default
of
testamentary
heirs,
the
law
vests


 the
inheritance,
in
accordance
with
the
rules
hereinafter

Art.
959.
A
disposition
made
in
general
terms
in
favor
of
 set
forth,
in
the
legitimate
and
illegitimate
relatives
of
the

the
testator's
relatives
shall
be
understood
to
be
in
favor
 deceased,
in
the
surviving
spouse,
and
in
the
State.
(913a)

of
those
nearest
in
degree.
(751)
 


 Art.
962.
In
every
inheritance,
the
relative
nearest
in

III. Legal or Intestate Succession degree
excludes
the
more
distant
ones,
saving
the
right
of

1. General Provisions representation
when
it
properly
takes
place.


 Relatives
in
the
same
degree
shall
inherit
in
equal
shares,

Art.
960.
Legal
or
intestate
succession
takes
place:
 subject
to
the
provisions
of
article
1006
with
respect
to

(1)
If
a
person
dies
without
a
will,
or
with
a
void
will,
or
 relatives
of
the
full
and
half
blood,
and
of
Article
987,

one
which
has
subsequently
lost
its
validity;
 paragraph
2,
concerning
division
between
the
paternal

(2)
When
the
will
does
not
institute
an
heir
to,
or
dispose
 and
maternal
lines.
(912a)

of
all
the
property
belonging
to
the
testator.
In
such
case,
 

legal
succession
shall
take
place
only
with
respect
to
the
 Balane:

property
of
which
the
testator
has
not
disposed;
 Basis
of
Instate
Succession:

(3)
If
the
suspensive
condition
attached
to
the
institution
 • The
presumed
will
of
the
decedent,
which
would

of
heir
does
not
happen
or
is
not
fulfilled,
or
if
the
heir
 distribute
the
estate
in
accordance
with
the
love

dies
before
the
testator,
or
repudiates
the
inheritance,
 and
affection
he
has
for
his
family
and
close

there
being
no
substitution,
and
no
right
of
accretion
takes
 relatives,
and
in
default
of
these
persons,
the

place;
 presumed
desire
of
the
decedent
to
promote

(4)
When
the
heir
instituted
is
incapable
of
succeeding,
 charitable
and
humanitarian.

except
in
cases
provided
in
this
Code.
(912a)
 


 Basic
Rules
of
Intestacy:

Balane:
 • The
rule
of
preference
of
lines

Intestacy:
 o The
three
lines
of
relationship
are:

• That
which
takes
place
by
operation
of
law
in
  the
descending

default
of
compulsory
and
testamentary
  the
ascending

succession.
It
is
the
least
preferred
among
the
  the
collateral

three
modes
of
succession,
but
is
the
most
 o The
law
lays
down
an
order
of

common.

 preference
among
these
lines,
such
that

• It
applies
the
principle
of
exclusion
and
 the
descending
excludes
the
ascending

concurrence
(the
same
principle
as
in
 and
the
collateral,
and
the
ascending

compulsory
succession).
 excludes
the
collateral.


 • The
rule
of
proximity
of
degree

Kinds:
 o The
nearer
exclude
the
more
remote

1. Total
–
no
testamentary
disposition;
only
if
there
 without
prejudice
to
representation.

is
no
will
disposing
of
the
property.


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 52 of 73
 • The
rule
of
equality
among
relatives
of
the
same
 Balane:

degree
 Line:

o If
the
nearer
exlucde
the
more
remote,
 • Direct

logically
those
of
equal
degree
should
 o Descending

inherit
in
equal
shares
 o Ascending

o Exceptions
to
rule
of
equality
in
the
 • Collateral

same
degree:
 o Direct
and
Collateral
–
Importance
of

 the
rule
of
preference
of
lines,
 distinction:
the
direct
is
preferred
over

supra
 the
collateral.

 the
distinction
between
the
 o Descending
direct
and
ascending
direct

legitimate
and
illegitmate
 –
Importance
of
distinction:
The
desce

filiation
 

 the
rule
of
division
by
line
in
 Computation
of
degrees:

the
ascending
line
 • Direct
line
–
there
is
no
legal
limit
to
the
number

 the
distinction
between
full‐ of
degrees
for
entitlement
to
intestate

blood
and
half‐blood
 succession.
The
practical
limit,
of
course,
is

relationships
among
brothers
 human
mortality.

and
sisters,
as
well
as
 o Mode
of
counting
degrees
in
the
direct

nephews
and
nieces
 line:

 representation
  one
generation
=
one
degree


  parent‐child
=
one
degree

Class
Notes:
  grandparent‐grandchild
=
two

Additional
rule
of
intestacy
(not
found
in
the
book):
 degrees

• The
rule
of
relationship
(there
are
four
kinds):
  great‐grandparents‐great‐
(FaBSS)
 grandchild
=
third
degrees;

a. Family
–
Jus
familial,
ascendants
and
 and
so
forth

descendants
in
the
direct
line
 • Collateral
line
–
Computation
of
degrees
is

b. Blood
–
Jus
sanguinis,
collaterals
up
to
 particularly
important
in
the
collateral
line

the
fifth
degree
 because
intestate
succession
extends
only
to
the

c. Spouse
–
Jus
conjugis
 5th
of
collateral
relationship.

d. State
–
Jus
imperii,
the
right
of
 o Modes
of
counting
degrees
in
the

sovereignty
 collateral
line:


  From
one
reference
point,

1.1. Relationship ascend
to
nearest
common


 ancestor
[If
there
are
more

Art.
963.
Proximity
of
relationship
is
determined
by
the
 than
one
nearest
common

number
of
generations.
Each
generation
forms
a
degree.
 ancestor,
choose
any
one]

(915)
  Then
descend
to
the
other


 reference
point

Art.
964.
A
series
of
degrees
forms
a
line,
which
may
be
  Number
of
generations

either
direct
or
collateral.
 constituting
the
ascent
and

A
direct
line
is
that
constituted
by
the
series
of
degrees
 the
descent
is
the
degree
of

among
ascendants
and
descendants.
 collateral
relationship

A
collateral
line
is
that
constituted
by
the
series
of
degrees
 o Collateral
by
Degrees

among
persons
who
are
not
ascendants
and
descendants,
  First
degree
–
none

but
who
come
from
a
common
ancestor.
(916a)
  Second
degree
–


 brothers/sisters

Art.
965.
The
direct
line
is
either
descending
or
ascending.
  Third
degree

The
former
unites
the
head
of
the
family
with
those
who
 • Uncles/Aunts

descend
from
him.
 • Nephews/Nieces

The
latter
binds
a
person
with
those
from
whom
he
  Fourth
degree

descends.
(917)
 • First
cousins


 • Brothers/Sisters
of
a

Art.
966.
In
the
line,
as
many
degrees
are
counted
as
there
 grandparent

are
generations
or
persons,
excluding
the
progenitor.
 (granduncles/grand
In
the
direct
line,
ascent
is
made
to
the
common
ancestor.
 aunts)

Thus,
the
child
is
one
degree
removed
from
the
parent,
 • Grandchildren
of
a

two
from
the
grandfather,
and
three
from
the
great‐ brother/sister

grandparent.
 (grand‐
In
the
collateral
line,
ascent
is
made
to
the
common
 nephews/grand‐
ancestor
and
then
descent
is
made
to
the
person
with
 nieces)

whom
the
computation
is
to
be
made.
Thus,
a
person
is
  Fifth
degree

two
degrees
removed
from
his
brother,
three
from
his
 • Children
of
a
first

uncle,
who
is
the
brother
of
his
father,
four
from
his
first
 cousin

cousin,
and
so
forth.
(918a)
 • First
cousins
of
a


 parent


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 53 of 73
 • Brothers/sisters
of
a
 • The
ascending
line
next
–
Should
no
one
be
left
in

great‐grandparent
 the
descending
line,
the
heirs
in
the
ascending

• Great
grandchildren
 acquire
the
right
of
succession,
again
in
order
of

of
a
brother/sister
 degrees
of
proximity;


 • The
collateral
line
last
–
Only
if
all
the

Art.
967.
Full
blood
relationship
is
that
existing
between
 descendants
and
ascendants
renounce
will
the

persons
who
have
the
same
father
and
the
same
mother.
 collateral
relatives
acquire
the
right
to
succeed.

Half
blood
relationship
is
that
existing
between
persons
 

who
have
the
same
father,
but
not
the
same
mother,
or
the
 Predecease
or
Incapacity
by
All
in
the
Same
Degree:

same
mother,
but
not
the
same
father.
(920a)
 • This
eventuality
is
not
provided
for
by
this


 article.
The
rules
above
are
equally
applicable
to

Balane:
 such
a
situation
except
in
cases
where

Importance
of
rules
on
relationships:
 representation
is
proper,
i.e.,
in
the
descending

• The
nearer
excludes
the
more
remote
 line.

• Direct
line
is
preferred
over
the
collateral
 • Representation
does
not
apply
in
cases
of

• Descending
line
is
preferred
over
the
ascending
 universal
renunciation
outlined
above.


 

Two
basic
concepts
in
relationship:
 1.2. Right of Representation
• Concept
of
degree
–
This
method
of
computing
 

the
proximity
of
relationship.
Every
degree
is
 Art.
970.
Representation
is
a
right
created
by
fiction
of

one
generation.
 law,
by
virtue
of
which
the
representative
is
raised
to
the

• Concept
of
lines
–
These
are
relative
positions
in
 place
and
the
degree
of
the
person
represented,
and

the
family
between
2
persons.
 acquires
the
rights
which
the
latter
would
have
if
he
were

o In
intestacy:
 living
or
if
he
could
have
inherited.
(942a)

 There
is
no
limit
in
the
direct
 

line
either
ascending
or
 Art.
971.
The
representative
is
called
to
the
succession
by

descending.
 the
law
and
not
by
the
person
represented.
The

 There
is
a
limit
of
five
degrees
 representative
does
not
succeed
the
person
represented

in
the
collateral
line
(2
 but
the
one
whom
the
person
represented
would
have

persons
having
a
common
 succeeded.
(n)

ancestor)
 


 Art.
972.
The
right
of
representation
takes
place
in
the

Art.
968.
If
there
are
several
relatives
of
the
same
degree,
 direct
descending
line,
but
never
in
the
ascending.

and
one
or
some
of
them
are
unwilling
or
incapacitated
to
 In
the
collateral
line,
it
takes
place
only
in
favor
of
the

succeed,
his
portion
shall
accrue
to
the
others
of
the
same
 children
of
brothers
or
sisters,
whether
they
be
of
the
full

degree,
save
the
right
of
representation
when
it
should
 or
half
blood.
(925)

take
place.
(922)
 


 Art.
973.
In
order
that
representation
may
take
place,
it
is

Balane:

 necessary
that
the
representative
himself
be
capable
of

• There
is
accretion
in
intestacy
among
heirs
of
the
 succeeding
the
decedent.
(n)

same
degree,
in
case
of
predecease,
incapacity
or
 

renunciation
of
any
of
them.
 Art.
974.
Whenever
there
is
succession
by
representation,

• In
case
of
predecease
or
incapacity,
 the
division
of
the
estate
shall
be
made
per
stirpes,
in
such

representation,
if
proper,
will
prevent
accretion
 manner
that
the
representative
or
representatives
shall

from
occurring.
 not
inherit
more
than
what
the
person
they
represent

• Relatives
must
be
in
the
same
kind
of
 would
inherit,
if
he
were
living
or
could
inherit.
(926a)

relationship.
For
accretion
to
take
place
the
heirs
 

involved
must
be
in
the
same
kind
of
 Art.
975.
When
children
of
one
or
more
brothers
or

relationship
to
the
decedent.
Thus,
there
can
be
 sisters
of
the
deceased
survive,
they
shall
inherit
from
the

no
accretion
among
a
grandchild,
a
grandparent
 latter
by
representation,
if
they
survive
with
their
uncles

and
a
brother
of
the
decedent
because
they
are
 or
aunts.
But
if
they
alone
survive,
they
shall
inherit
in

not
inheriting
together
in
the
first
place.
 equal
portions.
(927)


 

Art.
969.
If
the
inheritance
should
be
repudiated
by
the
 Art.
976.
A
person
may
represent
him
whose
inheritance

nearest
relative,
should
there
be
one
only,
or
by
all
the
 he
has
renounced.
(928a)

nearest
relatives
called
by
law
to
succeed,
should
there
be
 

several,
those
of
the
following
degree
shall
inherit
in
their

Art.
977.
Heirs
who
repudiate
their
share
may
not
be

own
right
and
cannot
represent
the
person
or
persons

represented.
(929a)

repudiating
the
inheritance.
(923)





Balane:

Balane:

Instances
when
representation
operates:
(DIP)

Effect
of
Renunciation
by
All
in
the
Same
Degree:

• Predecease

• The
descending
line
first
–
if
all
the
descendants

• Incapacity
or
Unworthiness

of
a
certain
degree
renounce,
succession
passes

• Disinheritance

to
the
descendants
of
the
next
degree,
and
so
on,



ad
indefinitum.


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 54 of 73
In
what
kind
of
succession
representation
operates:
 represented
is
not
qualified,
because
of

• The
legitime
–
there
is
no
express
provision
on
 predecease,
or
in
capacity
or
disinheritance.

representation
in
legitime,
except
in
Article
923,
 

in
case
of
disinheritance.
 Representation
by
grandchildren
and
Representation

• Intestacy
–
there
is
no
representation
in
 by
nephews/nieces:
Difference
Rule

testamentary
succession.
 • If
all
the
children
are
disqualified
–
the


 grandchildren
still
inherit
by
representation.

In
what
lines
does
representation
obtain:
 • If
all
the
brothers/sisters
are
disqualified
–
the

• With
respect
to
the
legitime
–
in
the
direct
 nephews/nieces
inherit
per
capita.

descending
line
only
 • Note:
If
only
some,
not
all
children
or

• With
respect
to
intestacy
 brothers/sisters
are
disqualifed
the
rule
is
the

o In
the
direct
descending
line
 same.

o In
one
instance
in
the
collateral;
i.e.
 

nephews
and
nieces
representing
 2. Order of Intestate Succession
brothers
and
sisters
of
the
deceased.


 Intestate Heirs
Representation
by
illegitimate
children:
 

• If
the
child
to
be
represented
is
legitimate
–
only
 I. Legitimate
Children/Descendants

legitimate
children/descendants
can
represent
 II. Illegitimate
Children/Descendants

him
 III. Legitimate
Parents/Ascendants

• If
the
child
to
be
represented
is
illegitimate
‐

 IV. Illegitimate
Parents

both
legitimate
and
illegitimate
 V. Surviving
Spouse

children/descendants
can
represent
him
 VI. Brothers,
Sisters,
Nephews,
Nieces


 VII. Other
Collaterals
–
to
the
5th
degree

Representation
of
and
by
an
adopted
child:

 VIII. State

• An
adopted
can
neither
represent
or
be

represented.
 Class
Notes:


 • It
is
correct
to
say
that
a
compulsory
heir
is
an

Teotico
vs.
Del
Val
(1965)
 intestate
heir.
But
it
is
not
correct
to
say
that
an


 intestate
heir
is
not
a
compulsory
heir.

F:
Oppositor
claims
to
be
an
adopted
daughter
of
 

Francisca
Mortera,
a
deceased
sister
of
the
testatrix.
SC
 Intestacy
ruled
that
the
oppositor
has
no
right
to
intervene
either
as
 

testamentary
or
as
legal
heir
in
the
probate
proceeding
of
 Balane:

the
deceased
sister
of
her
adopted
mother.
 Rules
of
Exclusion
and
Concurrence:


 (Note:
Children
include,
in
proper
cases,
other

H:
Relationship
of
adoption
is
limited
solely
to
the
adopter
 descendants;
and
parents,
other
ascendants.)

and
the
adopted
and
does
not
extend
to
the
relatives
of
 1. legitimate
children

the
adopting
parents
or
of
the
adopted
child
except
only
as
 a. exclude
parents,
collaterals
&
State

expressly
provided
for
by
law.
As
a
consequence,
the
 b. concur
with
surviving
spouse
&

adopted
is
an
heir
of
the
adopter
but
not
of
the
relatives
of
 illegitimate
children

the
adopter.
 c. are
excluded
by
no
one


 2. illegitimate
children

Represenation
by
a
renouncer:
 a. exclude
illegitimate
parents,
collaterals

• Although
a
renouncer
cannot
be
represented,
he
 &
State

can
represent
the
person
whose
inheritance
he
 b. concur
with
surviving
spouse,

has
renounced.
 legitimate
children,
and
legitimate


 parents

How
representation
operates:
 c. are
excluded
by
no
one

• Per
stirpes
–
the
representative
or
 3. legitimate
parents

representatives
receive
only
what
the
person
 a. exclude
collaterals
&
state

represented
would
have
received.
If
there
are
 b. concur
with
illegitimate
children
&

more
than
one
representative
in
the
same
 surviving
spouse

degree,
then
divide
the
portion
equally,
without
 c. are
excluded
by
legitimate
children

prejudice
to
the
distinction
between
legitimate
 4. illegitimate
parents
[only,
not
ascendants]

and
illegitimate
children,
when
applicable.
 a. exclude
collaterals
&
State


 b. concur
with
surviving
spouse

Rules
on
Qualification:
 c. are
excluded
by
legitimate
children
and

• The
representative
must
be
qualified
to
succeed
 illegitimate
children

the
decedent.
 5. surviving
spouse

• The
representative
need
not
be
qualified
to
 a. excludes
collaterals
other
than

succeed
the
person
represented.
 brothers,
sisters,
nephews
&
nieces,
&

• The
person
represented
need
not
be
qualified
to
 State

succeed
the
decedent
–
in
fact,
the
reason
why
 b. concur
with
legitimate
children,

representation
is
taking
place
is
that
the
person
 illegitimate
children,
legitimate


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 55 of 73
 parents,
illegitimate
parents,
brothers
 • illegitimate
children
–
½
of
the
estate

sisters,
nephews
&
nieces
 • surviving
spouse
–
½
of
the
estate

c. is
excluded
by
no
one
 12. surviving
spouse
alone

6. brothers
&
sisters,
nephews
&
nieces
 • the
whole
estate

a. exclude
all
other
collaterals
&
the
State
 13. surviving
spouse
&
illegitimate
parents
(no

b. concur
with
surviving
spouse
 article
governing,
combination
applied
by

c. are
excluded
by
legitimate
children,
 analogy
with
Art.
997)*

illegitimate
children,
legitimate
 • surviving
spouse
–
½
of
the
estate

parents,
and
illegitimate
parents
 • illegitimate
parents
–
½
of
the
estate

7. Other
collaterals
 14. surviving
spouse
&
legitimate
brothers
&
sisters,

a. exclude
collaterals
in
remoter
degrees
 nephews
&
nieces*

&
the
State
 • surviving
spouse
–
½
of
the
estate

b. concur
with
collaterals
in
the
same
 • legitimate
brothers,
sisters,
nephews,

degree
 nieces
–
½
of
the
estate
(the
nephews
&

c. are
excluded
by
legitimate
children,
 nieces
inheriting
by
representation,
in

illegitimate
children,
legitimate
 the
proper
cases)

parents,
illegitimate
parents,
surviving
 15. surviving
spouse
&
illegitimate
brothers
&

spouse,
brothers
&
sisters,
and
 sisters,
nephews
&
nieces*

nephews
&
nieces
 • surviving
spouse
–
½
of
the
estate

8. State
 • illegitimate
brothers,
sisters,
nephews,

a. excludes
no
one
 nieces
–
½
of
the
estate
(the
nephews
&

b. concurs
with
no
one
 nieces
inheriting
by
representation,
in

c. is
excluded
by
everyone
 the
proper
cases)


 • the
illegitimate
brothers
&
sisters
are

Class
Notes:
 those
mentioned
in
Art.
994.

• Number
5
surviving
spouse
does
not
exclude
the
 16. illegitimate
parents
alone

group
in
number
6.
 • the
whole
estate


 17. illegitimate
parents
&
children
of
any
kind

Balane:
 • illegitimate
parents
–
excluded

Combinations
in
Intestate
Succession
(found
passim
in
 • children
inherit
in
accordance
with

Art.
978):
 Nos.
1,
2
&
10.

1. legitimate
children
alone
 18. legitimate
brothers
&
sisters
alone

• the
whole
estate
divided
equally
 • the
whole
estate,
with
a
brother/sister

2. legitimate
children
&
illegitimate
children
 of
the
half‐blood
inheriting
½
of
the

• the
whole
estate,
each
illegitimate
child
 estate
the
share
of
a
brother/sister
of

getting
½
the
share
of
one
legitimate
 the
full
blood

child
 19. legitimate
brothers
&
sisters,
nephews
&
nieces

3. legitimate
children
&
surviving
spouse
 • the
whole
estate,
observing
the
2:1

• the
whole
estate,
divided
equally
(the
 proportion
of
the
full‐and
half‐blood

surviving
spouse
counted
as
one
 fraternity
(No.
18
supra)
and
the

legitimate
child)
 nephews
and
nieces
inheriting
by

4. legitimate
children,
surviving
spouse
&
 representation
in
the
proper
cases

illegitimate
children
 20. nephew
&
nieces
with
uncles
&
aunts

• the
whole
estate,
the
surviving
spouse
 • by

inference
uncles
and
aunts
–

being
counted
as
one
legitimate
child
 excluded
(accdg.
to
Bacayo
v.

• each
illegitimate
child
getting
½
the
 Borromeo)
nephews
and
nieces

share
of
one
legitimate
 inheriting
in
accordance
with
No.
23

5. legitimate
parents
alone
 infra

• the
whole
estate
divided
equally
 21. illegitimate
brothers
and
sisters
alone
–
no

6. legitimate
ascendants
(other
than
parents)
alone
 article
governing

• the
whole
estate,
observing,
in
proper
 • the
whole
estate,
observing
the
2:1

cases,
the
rule
of
division
by
line
 proportion
of
full‐
and
half‐
blood

7. legitimate
parents
&
illegitimate
children*
 fraternity
–
by
analogy
with
No.
18

• legitimate
parents
–
½
of
the
estate
 supra

• illegitimate
children
–
½
of
the
estate
 22. illegitimate
brothers,
sisters,
nephews
and

8. legitimate
parents
&
suriving
spouse*
 nieces
‐
no
article
governing

• legitimate
parents
–
½
of
the
estate
 • the
whole
estate,
as
in
No.
19
supra,
by

• surviving
spouse
–
½
of
the
estate
 analogy

9. legitimate
parents,
surviving
spouse,
illegitimate
 23. nephews
&
nieces
alone

children*
 • the
whole
estate,
per
capita,
but

• legitimate
parents
–
½
of
the
estate
 observing
the
2:1
proportion
for
the

• surviving
spouse
–
¼
of
the
estate
 full‐
and
the
half‐
blood

• illegitimate
children
–
¼
of
the
estate
 24. other
collaterals

10. illegitimate
children
alone
 • the
whole
estate,
per
capita,
the
nearer

• the
whole
estate
divided
equally
 in
degree
excluding
the
more
remote

11. illegitimate
children
&
surviving
spouse*
 25. State


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 56 of 73
 • the
whole
estate
 The
total
is
P2,025,000.
The
estate
is
only
P1,800,000.

• Assignment
&
disposition
of
decedent’s
 There
is
a
deficit
of
P225,000.
The
solution
is
to
reduce
the

assets
 shares
of
illegitimate
children
pro‐rata.

o If
the
decedent
was
a
resident
 

of
the
Philippines
at
any
time:
 Reduction
of
share
of
each
illegitimate
child:

 Personal
property
–
 225,000
(deficit)
/
5
(illegitimate
children)
=
P45,000.

to
municipality
of
 

last
residence
 The
share
of
each
illegitimate
child
should
be
reduced
by

 Real
property
–
 P45,000.
Thus
from
P225,000,
each
illegitimate
child
will

where
situated
 now
get
P180,000
each.

o If
the
decedent
never
a
 

resident
of
the
Philippines:
 Class
Notes:

 Personal
and
real
 • Number
1
illustrated
total
intestacy.

property
–
where
 • Number
15
will
only
happen
in
one
case.


respectively
situated
 o In
a
case
where
X
has
three
children,
A

• How
property
is
to
be
used
 (legitimate),
B
(illegitimate)
and
C

o For
the
benefit
of
public
 (illegitimate),
when
B
dies,
A
cannot

educational
and
charitable
 inherit
from
him
(and
B
cannot
inherit

institutions
in
the
respective
 from
him)
but
C
can.



municipalities/cities
 o This
is
not
prohibited
by
Article
992.


o Alternatively,
at
the
instance
 o In
Manuel
v.
Ferrer:
“When
the
law

of
an
interested
party,
or
 speaks
of
‘brothers
and
sisters,

motu
propio,
court
may
order
 nephews
and
nieces’
as
legal
heirs
of
an

creation
of
a
permanent
trust
 illegitimate
child,
it
refers
to

for
the
benefit
of
the
 illegitimate
brothers
and
sisters
as
well

institutions
concerned
 as
to
the
children,
whether
legitimate
of



 illegitimate
of
such
brothers
and

Class
Notes:
 sisters.”

• Follow
the
rules
except
for
number
2
and
 • In
number
20,
if
there
are
nephews
and
nieces,

number
4.
Both
have
different
steps
from
the
 they
exclude
uncles
and
aunts.

step.
Be
careful
because
you
might
end
up
 

impairing
the
legitime.
 Sample
Problems:

• Just
follow
the
rules
on
intestacy,
the
legitimes
 1. Patrick,
illegitimate
child
of
the
late
Don
Ruben

will
never
be
impaired.
They
are
automatically
 by
his
late
mistress
Evelyn
dies
in
a
vehicular

covered
by
the
rules.
 accident
while
riding
his
Harley
because
he
hates

• But
Art.
983
(which
covers
number
2
also)
might
 wearing
a
helmet.
He
did
not
leave
a
will
and
his

impair
the
legitime.
 estate
is
worth
P25,000,000.
His
spouse
Amirah


 and
his
full
sister
Cielo
were
devastated
by
his

Illustration
on
how
Art.
983
can
impair
the
legitime:
 abrupt
death.
Meanwhile
Robert,
Don
Ruben’s


 child
by
his
wife
Araceli,
is
also
maddened
with

X’s
estate
is
worth
P1,800,000
 grief
as
he
was
not
able
to
make
peace
with
his


 estranged
brother.
How
should
Mr.
Patrick’s

X
(decedent)
 estate
be
distributed?

|

 |
 :
 :
 :
 :
 :
 2. Serafin,
a
notorious
womanizer
and
self‐
A
 B
 C
 D
 E
 F
 G
 proclaimed
Cassanova,
was
killed
in
flagrante

4M
 4M
 2M
 2M
 2M







2M






2M
 delicto
with
his
current
mistress
Danica.
He
was


 shot
by
John
Mark,
Danica’s
ex‐boyfriend
when

Here
the
legitime
of
A
and
B
is
impaired
because
their
 he
caught
them
together.
This
scandalized
his

legitime
is
P900,000
and
their
share
together
is
P800,000.
 wife
Lorie
to
no
end.
To
compound
the
wife’s

There
is
a
deficit
of
P100,000
in
their
legitime.
 grief,
Danica’s
children
with
Serafin:
Auring,


 Koring,
Kristina,
Paula,
Ogie
and
Joselit
are

Since
Art.
983
impairs
the
legitime
as
shown
in
the
 fighting
with
Lorie’s
twin
children
Jess
and

illustration,
two
steps
must
be
followed
to
avoid
such:
 Roslene
over
their
late
father’s
estate
which
is

1. Give
the
legitime
first
–
legitimate
before
 worth
only
P500,000.
How
should
the
estate
be

illegitimate.
 apportioned?

2. If
there
is
an
excess
divided
it
to
a
ratio
of
2:1.

 

3. If
lacking,
reduce
the
share
of
illegitimate
 2.1. Descending Direct Line
children
pro‐rata.
 


 Art.
978.
Succession
pertains,
in
the
first
place,
to
the

Illustration:
 descending
direct
line.
(930)


 

X
(decedent)
 Art.
979.
Legitimate
children
and
their
descendants

|

 |
 :
 :
 :
 :
 :
 succeed
the
parents
and
other
ascendants,
without

A
 B
 C
 D
 E
 F
 G
 distinction
as
to
sex
or
age,
and
even
if
they
should
come

4.5
 4.5







2.25






2.25






2.25






2.25





2.25
 from
different
marriages.


 An
adopted
child
succeeds
to
the
property
of
the
adopting


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 57 of 73
parents
in
the
same
manner
as
a
legitimate
child.
(931a)
 the
entire
estate
of
the
child.
(936)


 

Balane:
 Art.
987.
In
default
of
the
father
and
mother,
the

• The
right
of
an
adopted
child
in
relation
to
his
 ascendants
nearest
in
degree
shall
inherit.

adopter
is
now
governed
by
Secs.
17
and
18
of
 Should
there
be
more
than
one
of
equal
degree
belonging

R.A.
8552,
which
lays
down
the
same
rule
as
the
 to
the
same
line
they
shall
divide
the
inheritance
per

second
paragraph
of
this
article.
 capita;
should
they
be
of
different
lines
but
of
equal


 degree,
one‐half
shall
go
to
the
paternal
and
the
other
half

Sayson
vs.
Court
of
Appeals
(1992)
 to
the
maternal
ascendants.
In
each
line
the
division
shall


 be
made
per
capita.
(937)

F:
Private
respondents
who
are
adopted
children
of
 

Teodoro
and
Isabel,
filed
a
claim
in
the
estate
of
the
 2.3. Illegitimate Children
parents
of
their
adopters.
 


 Art.
988.
In
the
absence
of
legitimate
descendants
or

H:
SC
held
that
the
private
respondents
exclusive
heirs
of
 ascendants,
the
illegitimate
children
shall
succeed
to
the

their
parents
and
deemed
to
as
total
strangers
to
their
 entire
estate
of
the
deceased.
(939a)

grandparents.
The
adopted
child
shall
be
deemed
to
be
a
 

legitimate
child
and
have
the
same
right
as
the
latter,
but
 Art.
989.
If,
together
with
illegitimate
children,
there

these
rights
do
not
include
the
right
of
representation.
 should
survive
descendants
of
another
illegitimate
child


 who
is
dead,
the
former
shall
succeed
in
their
own
right

Art.
980.
The
children
of
the
deceased
shall
always
inherit
 and
the
latter
by
right
of
representation.
(940a)

from
him
in
their
own
right,
dividing
the
inheritance
in
 

equal
shares.
(932)
 Art.
990.
The
hereditary
rights
granted
by
the
two


 preceding
articles
to
illegitimate
children
shall
be

Art.
981.
Should
children
of
the
deceased
and
 transmitted
upon
their
death
to
their
descendants,
who

descendants
of
other
children
who
are
dead,
survive,
the
 shall
inherit
by
right
of
representation
from
their

former
shall
inherit
in
their
own
right,
and
the
latter
by
 deceased
grandparent.
(941a)

right
of
representation.
(934a)
 


 Art.
991.
If
legitimate
ascendants
are
left,
the
illegitimate

Art.
982.
The
grandchildren
and
other
descendants
shall
 children
shall
divide
the
inheritance
with
them,
taking

inherit
by
right
of
representation,
and
if
any
one
of
them
 one‐half
of
the
estate,
whatever
be
the
number
of
the

should
have
died,
leaving
several
heirs,
the
portion
 ascendants
or
of
the
illegitimate
children.
(942‐841a)

pertaining
to
him
shall
be
divided
among
the
latter
in
 

equal
portions.
(933)
 Art.
992.
An
illegitimate
child
has
no
right
to
inherit
ab


 intestato
from
the
legitimate
children
and
relatives
of
his

Art.
983.
If
illegitimate
children
survive
with
legitimate
 father
or
mother;
nor
shall
such
children
or
relatives

children,
the
shares
of
the
former
shall
be
in
the
 inherit
in
the
same
manner
from
the
illegitimate
child.

proportions
prescribed
by
Article
895.
(n)
 (943a)


 

Balane:
 Corpuz
vs
Administrator
(1978)

• Segregate
the
legitimes
of
the
children
–
both
 

legitimate
and
illegitimate.

 F:
Deceased
Teodoro
has
no
forced
heirs.
His
closest

• If
any
residue
is
left,
apportion
it
in
proportion
of
 relatives
were
half‐siblings.
Tomas,
the
son,
of
Juanita,

2:1
 who
is
in
turn
the
daughter
of
Teodoro’s
half‐brother
Jose,

• If
the
estate
may
not
be
sufficient
to
satisfy
the
 filed
an
action
to
recover
her
mother’s
supposed
share
in

legitimes,
the
legitimes
of
the
illegitimates
will
 the
intestate
estate
of
the
decedent.

have
to
be
reduced
pro
rata.
 


 H:
Juanita
is
not
a
legal
heir
of
Teodoro
since
there
is
no

Art.
984.
In
case
of
the
death
of
an
adopted
child,
leaving
 reciprocal
succession
between
legitimate
and
illegitimate

no
children
or
descendants,
his
parents
and
relatives
by
 relatives.
The
rule
is
based
on
the
theory
that
the

consanguinity
and
not
by
adoption,
shall
be
his
legal
heirs.
 illegitimate
child
is
disgracefully
looked
upon
by
the

(n)
 legitimate
family,
while
the
latter
is,
in
turn,
hated
by
the


 illegitimate
child.

Balane:
 

• Repealed
by
Secs.
17
and
18
of
R.A.
8552.
 Leonardo
vs
Court
of
Appeals
(1983)


 

2.2. Ascending Direct Line F:
Petitioner
Cresenciano,
claiming
to
be
the
son
of
the
late


 Sotero,
sought
to
be
declared
one
of
the
lawful
heirs
of

Art.
985.
In
default
of
legitimate
children
and
descendants
 decedent
who
is
the
grandfather
of
Sotero.

of
the
deceased,
his
parents
and
ascendants
shall
inherit
 

from
him,
to
the
exclusion
of
collateral
relatives.
(935a)
 H:
At
most,
petitioner
would
be
an
illegitimate
child
who


 has
no
right
to
inherit
in
ab
intestato
from
the
legitimate

Art.
986.
The
father
and
mother,
if
living,
shall
inherit
in
 children
and
relatives
of
his
father,
like
the
deceased.

equal
shares.
 

Should
one
only
of
them
survive,
he
or
she
shall
succeed
to
 Diaz
vs.
IAC
(1987)


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 58 of 73

 Balane:

F:
The
case
involves
a
dispute
between
the
petitioners,
the
 • This
rule
holds
even
if
there
is
only
one

illegitimate
children
of
decedent’s
son
Pablo
Santero,
and
 legitimate
child,
in
which
case
the
child
and
the

the
decedent’s
niece
Felisa
Pamuti
Jardin,
as
to
who
could
 surviving
spouse
will
divide
the
estate
equally.

legally
inherit
from
the
decedent.
Petitioners
allege
that
 

they
could
inherit
by
right
of
representation
of
their
 Santillon
vs.
Miranda
(1965)

father,
who
is
a
legitimate
child
of
the
decedent.
 


 F:
How
shall
the
estate
of
a
person
who
dies
intestate
be

H:

SC
held
the
legal
heir
to
be
the
niece.
The
New
Civil
 divided
when
the
only
survivors
are
the
spouse
and
one

Code
still
does
not
confer
to
illegitimate
children
the
right
 legitimate
child?
The
son
is
claiming
that
Art.
892
should

to
represent
their
parents
in
the
inheritance
of
their
 be
applied
while
the
wife
states
that
the
division
is
½

legitimate
grandparents,
even
if
the
New
Civil
Code
have
 between
them.

made
illegitimate
children
as
compulsory
primary
heirs
 

under
Art.
887.
 H:
SC
ruled
for
the
wife.
Art.
996
which
applies
in


 intestacy
should
be
read:
“If
the
widow
or
widower
and
a

Diaz
vs.
IAC
(1990)
 legitimate
child
are
left,
the
surviving
spouse
has
the
same


 share
as
that
of
the
child.”

F:
A
second
MR
from
the
earlier
1987
case.
Issue
here
is
 

does
the
term
“relatives”
in
Art.
992
include
the
legitimate
 Art.
997.
When
the
widow
or
widower
survives
with

parents
of
the
father
or
mother
of
the
illegitimate
 legitimate
parents
or
ascendants,
the
surviving
spouse

children?
May
these
illegitimate
children
of
Pablo
(father)
 shall
be
entitled
to
one‐half
of
the
estate,
and
the

inherit
from
Simona
(grandmother),
by
right
of
 legitimate
parents
or
ascendants
to
the
other
half.
(836a)

representation
of
their
father
Pablo
who
was
a
legitimate
 

son?
 Art.
998.
If
a
widow
or
widower
survives
with
illegitimate


 children,
such
widow
or
widower
shall
be
entitled
to
one‐
H:
Art.
992
prohibits
absolutely
a
succession
ab
intestato
 half
of
the
inheritance,
and
the
illegitimate
children
or

between
an
illegitimate
child
and
the
legitimate
children
 their
descendants,
whether
legitimate
or
illegitimate,
to

and
“relatives”
of
the
father
or
mother
of
said
legitimate
 the
other
half.
(n)

child.
 


 Art.
999.
When
the
widow
or
widower
survives
with

Art.
993.
If
an
illegitimate
child
should
die
without
issue,
 legitimate
children
or
their
descendants
and
illegitimate

either
legitimate
or
illegitimate,
his
father
or
mother
shall
 children
or
their
descendants,
whether
legitimate
or

succeed
to
his
entire
estate;
and
if
the
child's
filiation
is
 illegitimate,
such
widow
or
widower
shall
be
entitled
to

duly
proved
as
to
both
parents,
who
are
both
living,
they
 the
same
share
as
that
of
a
legitimate
child.
(n)

shall
inherit
from
him
share
and
share
alike.
(944)
 


 Art.
1000.
If
legitimate
ascendants,
the
surviving
spouse,

Art.
994.
In
default
of
the
father
or
mother,
an
illegitimate
 and
illegitimate
children
are
left,
the
ascendants
shall
be

child
shall
be
succeeded
by
his
or
her
surviving
spouse
 entitled
to
one‐half
of
the
inheritance,
and
the
other
half

who
shall
be
entitled
to
the
entire
estate.
 shall
be
divided
between
the
surviving
spouse
and
the

If
the
widow
or
widower
should
survive
with
brothers
and
 illegitimate
children
so
that
such
widow
or
widower
shall

sisters,
nephews
and
nieces,
she
or
he
shall
inheritt
one‐ have
one‐fourth
of
the
estate,
and
the
illegitimate
children

half
of
the
estate,
and
the
latter
the
other
half.
(945a)
 the
other
fourth.
(841a)


 

Balane:
 Art.
1001.
Should
brothers
and
sisters
or
their
children

• According
to
jurisprudence,
when
the
law
speaks
 survive
with
the
widow
or
widower,
the
latter
shall
be

of
brothers
and
sisters,
nephews
and
nieces
as
 entitled
to
one‐half
of
the
inheritance
and
the
brothers

legal
heirs
of
an
illegitimate
child,
it
refers
to
 and
sisters
or
their
children
to
the
other
half.
(953,
837a)

illegitimate
brothers
and
sisters
as
well
as
the
 

children,
whether
legitimate
or
illegitimate,
of
 Art.
1002.
In
case
of
a
legal
separation,
if
the
surviving

such
brothers
and
sisters.
 spouse
gave
cause
for
the
separation,
he
or
she
shall
not


 have
any
of
the
rights
granted
in
the
preceding
articles.
(n)

2.4. Surviving Spouse 


 2.5. Collateral Relatives
Art.
995.
In
the
absence
of
legitimate
descendants
and
 

ascendants,
and
illegitimate
children
and
their
 Art.
1003.
If
there
are
no
descendants,
ascendants,

descendants,
whether
legitimate
or
illegitimate,
the
 illegitimate
children,
or
a
surviving
spouse,
the
collateral

surviving
spouse
shall
inherit
the
entire
estate,
without
 relatives
shall
succeed
to
the
entire
estate
of
the
deceased

prejudice
to
the
rights
of
brothers
and
sisters,
nephews
 in
accordance
with
the
following
articles.
(946a)

and
nieces,
should
there
be
any,
under
article
1001.
 

(946a)

Art.
1004.
Should
the
only
survivors
be
brothers
and


 sisters
of
the
full
blood,
they
shall
inherit
in
equal
shares.

Art.
996.
If
a
widow
or
widower
and
legitimate
children
 (947)

or
descendants
are
left,
the
surviving
spouse
has
in
the
 

succession
the
same
share
as
that
of
each
of
the
children.

Art.
1005.
Should
brothers
and
sisters
survive
together

(834a)

with
nephews
and
nieces,
who
are
the
children
of
the




SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 59 of 73
descendant's
brothers
and
sisters
of
the
full
blood,
the
 two
 or
 more
 persons
 are
 called
 to
 the
 same
 inheritance,

former
shall
inherit
per
capita,
and
the
latter
per
stirpes.
 devise
 or
 legacy,
 the
 part
 assigned
 to
 the
 one
 who

(948)
 renounces
or
cannot
receive
his
share,
or
who
died
before


 the
 testator,
 is
 added
 or
 incorporated
 to
 that
 of
 his
 co‐
Art.
1006.
Should
brother
and
sisters
of
the
full
blood
 heirs,
co‐devisees,
or
co‐legatees.
(n)


survive
together
with
brothers
and
sisters
of
the
half
 

blood,
the
former
shall
be
entitled
to
a
share
double
that
 Art.
 1016.
 In
 order
 that
 the
 right
 of
 accretion
 may
 take

of
the
latter.
(949)
 place
in
a
testamentary
succession,
it
shall
be
necessary:



 

Art.
1007.
In
case
brothers
and
sisters
of
the
half
blood,
 (1)
 That
 two
 or
 more
 persons
 be
 called
 to
 the
 same

some
on
the
father's
and
some
on
the
mother's
side,
are
 inheritance,
 or
 to
 the
 same
 portion
 thereof,
 pro
 indiviso;

the
only
survivors,
all
shall
inherit
in
equal
shares
without
 and


distinction
as
to
the
origin
of
the
property.
(950)
 


 (2)
 That
 one
 of
 the
 persons
 thus
 called
 die
 before
 the

Art.
1008.
Children
of
brothers
and
sisters
of
the
half
 testator,
or
renounce
the
inheritance,
or
be
incapacitated

blood
shall
succeed
per
capita
or
per
stirpes,
in
 to
receive
it.
(928a)

accordance
with
the
rules
laid
down
for
the
brothers
and



sisters
of
the
full
blood.
(915)

Accretion




a. Definition
(Art.
1015)

Art.
1009.
Should
there
be
neither
brothers
nor
sisters
 

nor
children
of
brothers
or
sisters,
the
other
collateral
 Occasions
for
the
operation
of
accretion:

relatives
shall
succeed
to
the
estate.
 • Renunciation

The
latter
shall
succeed
without
distinction
of
lines
or
 • Predecease

preference
among
them
by
reason
of
relationship
by
the
 • Incapacity

whole
blood.
(954a)
 


 b. Elements
(Art.
1016)

Art.
1010.
The
right
to
inherit
ab
intestato
shall
not
 

extend
beyond
the
fifth
degree
of
relationship
in
the
 Pro
indiviso
–
“as
undivided”
or
“in
common”;
does
not

collateral
line.
(955a)
 import
equality


 

2.6. The State Ex:

 I
give
my
portion
to
A,
B
and
C


 
 I
give
1/8
of
my
estate
to
A,
B
and
C

Art.
1011.
In
default
of
persons
entitled
to
succeed
in
 

accordance
with
the
provisions
of
the
preceding
Sections,
 Can
there
be
accretion
if
the
shares
are
not
equal?

the
State
shall
inherit
the
whole
estate.
(956a)
 Ex:
A
to
get
½,
B
to
get
1/3,
and
C
to
get
1/6


 • Tolentino:
NO.
Must
be
equal.

Art.
1012.
In
order
that
the
State
may
take
possession
of
 • Sir:
Yes,
it
is
possible.
See
Art.
1019,
which

the
property
mentioned
in
the
preceding
article,
the
 contemplates
unequal
shares.

pertinent
provisions
of
the
Rules
of
Court
must
be
 

observed.
(958a)

Art.
 1017.
 The
 words
 "one‐half
 for
 each"
 or
 "in
 equal



shares"
 or
 any
 others
 which,
 though
 designating
 an

Art.
1013.
After
the
payment
of
debts
and
charges,
the
 aliquot
part,
do
not
identify
it
by
such
description
as
shall

personal
property
shall
be
assigned
to
the
municipality
or
 make
 each
 heir
 the
 exclusive
 owner
 of
 determinate

city
where
the
deceased
last
resided
in
the
Philippines,
 property,
shall
not
exclude
the
right
of
accretion.


and
the
real
estate
to
the
municipalities
or
cities,
 

respectively,
in
which
the
same
is
situated.
 In
 case
 of
 money
 or
 fungible
 goods,
 if
 the
 share
 of
 each

If
the
deceased
never
resided
in
the
Philippines,
the
whole
 heir
 is
 not
 earmarked,
 there
 shall
 be
 a
 right
 of
 accretion.

estate
shall
be
assigned
to
the
respective
municipalities
or
 (983a)


cities
where
the
same
is
located.

Such
estate
shall
be
for
the
benefit
of
public
schools,
and
 

public
charitable
institutions
and
centers,
in
such
 
Art.
 1018.
 In
 legal
 succession
 the
 share
 of
 the
 person

municipalities
or
cities.
The
court
shall
distribute
the
 who
repudiates
the
inheritance
shall
always
accrue
to
his

estate
as
the
respective
needs
of
each
beneficiary
may
 co‐heirs.
(981)

warrant.

The
court,
at
the
instance
of
an
interested
party,
or
on
its
 

own
motion,
may
order
the
establishment
of
a
permanent
 In
intestacy,
accretion
occurs:
(RIP)

trust,
so
that
only
the
income
from
the
property
shall
be
 a. In
repudiation
or
renunciation

used.
(956a)
 b. In
predecease,
only
if
representation
does
not

take
place



c. In
incapacity
or
unworthiness,
only
if

IV. Provisions Common to Testate and
representation
does
not
take
place

Intestate Succession


The
co‐heirs
in
whose
favor
accretion
occurs
must
be
co‐
1. Right of Accretion
heirs
in
the
same
category
as
the
excluded
heir.



Art.
 1015.
 Accretion
 is
 a
 right
 by
 virtue
 of
 which,
 when


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 60 of 73
Art.
 1019.
 The
 heirs
 to
 whom
 the
 portion
 goes
 by
 the
 succession
opens,
except
in
case
of
representation,
when
it

right
of
accretion
take
it
in
the
same
proportion
that
they
 is
proper.


inherit.
(n)

 

A
 child
 already
 conceived
 at
 the
 time
 of
 the
 death
 of
 the


 decedent
 is
 capable
 of
 succeeding
 provided
 it
 be
 born

later
under
the
conditions
prescribed
in
article
41.
(n)


Art.
 1020.
 The
 heirs
 to
 whom
 the
 inheritance
 accrues
 

shall
 succeed
 to
 all
 the
 rights
 and
 obligations
 which
 the
 Par.
1
is
wrong;
there
is
no
exception.

heir
 who
 renounced
 or
 could
 not
 receive
 it
 would
 have
 

had.
(984)

 Natural
Persons:
Requirement
for
capacity
to
succeed:


 Must
be
living
when
succession
opens

Exceptions:
 See
Arts.
40
and
41
of
the
Civil
Code

a. In
testamentary
succession,
if
the
testator
 

provides
otherwise
 • Living:
already
conceived
when
decedent
dies,

b. If
the
obligation
is
purely
personal,
and
hence,
 provided
it
be
born
later

intransmissible
 • When
succession
opens:
Decedent’s
death


 

Art.
 1021.
 Among
 the
 compulsory
 heirs
 the
 right
 of
 If
institution
is
subject
to
a
suspensive
condition:
Must

accretion
shall
take
place
only
when
the
free
portion
is
left
 be
living
both
when
decedent
dies
and
when
the
condition

to
 two
 or
 more
 of
 them,
 or
 to
 any
 one
 of
 them
 and
 to
 a
 happens.

stranger.

 


 If
institution
is
subject
to
a
suspensive
term:
Must
be

Should
the
part
repudiated
be
the
legitime,
the
other
co‐ living
when
decedent
dies

heirs
shall
succeed
to
it
in
their
own
right,
and
not
by
the
 

right
of
accretion.
(985)
 Exception:
None




 Parish
Priest
of
Roman
Catholic
Church
of
Victoria,

In
what
kinds
of
succession
does
accretion
take
place?
 Tarlac
vs.
Rigor
(1979)

1) Testamentary
succession
 

2) Intestate
succession
 F:
Testator
intended
to
devise
his
riceland
to
his
“nearest

Not
compulsory
(refer
to
par.
2,
Art.
1021)
 male
relative
who
would
become
a
priest
after
his
death”.


 There
 was
 an
 ambiguity
 as
 to
 whether
 he
 contemplated

Art.
 1022.
 In
 testamentary
 succession,
 when
 the
 right
 of
 only
 his
 nearest
 male
 relative
 at
 the
 time
 of
 his
 death
 or

accretion
 does
 not
 take
 place,
 the
 vacant
 portion
 of
 the
 any
 of
 his
 nearest
 male
 relatives
 at
 any
 time
 after
 the

instituted
heirs,
if
no
substitute
has
been
designated,
shall
 same.

pass
to
the
legal
heirs
of
the
testator,
who
shall
receive
it
 

with
the
same
charges
and
obligations.
(986)
 H:
 The
 bequest
 refers
 to
 the
 testator’s
 nearest
 male

relative
 living
 at
 the
 time
 of
 his
 death
 and
 not
 to
 any



indefinite
time
thereafter.

In
testamentary
succession,
accretion
is
subordinate
to



substitution,
if
the
testator
has
so
provided.

• Substitution
–
express
intent
 
Art.
 1026.
 A
 testamentary
 disposition
 may
 be
 made
 to

• Accretion
–
implied
intent
 the
 State,
 provinces,
 municipal
 corporations,
 private


 corporations,
 organizations,
 or
 associations
 for
 religious,

No
substitution,
No
accretion:
Vacant
part
will
lapse
into
 scientific,
cultural,
educational,
or
charitable
purposes.


intestacy
and
be
disposed
of
accordingly
 


 All
 other
 corporations
 or
 entities
 may
 succeed
 under
 a


 will,
 unless
 there
 is
 a
 provision
 to
 the
 contrary
 in
 their

2. Capacity to Succeed by Will or by Intestacy charter
or
the
laws
of
their
creation,
and
always
subject
to

the
same.
(746a)


Art.
1024.
Persons
not
incapacitated
by
law
may
succeed
 

by
will
or
ab
intestato.

 Juridical
Persons:
Requirement
for
capacity
to
succeed:


 Must
exist
as
a
juridical
person
when
the
decedent
dies.

The
 provisions
 relating
 to
 incapacity
 by
 will
 are
 equally
 

applicable
to
intestate
succession.
(744,
914)

 (1)
The
State
and
its
political
subdivisions

• State:
must
have
acquired
the
4
elements
–


 territory,
people,
government,
sovereignty

Gen.
Rule:
In
favor
of
capacity
to
succeed,
as
long
as
 • Local
government
unit:
must
have
been
created

successor
has
juridical
personality
 by
law


 

To
prove
incapacity:
Legal
ground;
Must
be
shown
 (2)
Other
corporations,
institutions
and
entities
for
public


 interest
or
purpose,
created
by
law

Par.
2
is
wrong.
 • their
personality
begins
as
soon
as
they
have


 been
constituted
according
to
law;

Art.
 1025.
 In
 order
 to
 be
 capacitated
 to
 inherit,
 the
 heir,
 

devisee
 or
 legatee
 must
 be
 living
 at
 the
 moment
 the


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 61 of 73
(3)
Corporations,
partnerships
and
associations
for
 A
makes
a
will
in
favor
of
his
pastor.
Later,
he
becomes

private
interest
or
purpose
 seriously
 ill,
 and
 calls
 the
 pastor
 for
 spiritual

• Corporation:
must
have
been
created
in
 ministration.
A
dies.
Is
the
pastor
disqualified?
No.

accordance
with
the
Corporation
Code
 

• Partnership:
partners
must
have
agreed
(except
 Proper
 sequence:
 A
 is
 dying
 
 Summons
 pastor
 

when
real
property
is
contributed,
where
you’ll
 Spiritual
 ministration
 
 During
 or
 After
 spiritual

need
a
public
instrument
 ministration,
he
makes
a
will,
with
a
disposition
in
favor
of


 the
pastor

A
dies

Except
for
the
State,
Juridical
persons
cannot
succeed
by
 

legitime
or
intestacy.
 Does
 the
 prohibition
 apply
 to
 ministers
 of
 religions


 other
than
the
Christian
denomination?

Art.
1027.
The
following
are
incapable
of
succeeding:

 Yes,
if
such
religion
has
a
counterpart
(someone
who
gives


 spiritual
ministration)

(1)
 The
 priest
 who
 heard
 the
 confession
 of
 the
 testator
 

during
 his
 last
 illness,
 or
 the
 minister
 of
 the
 gospel
 who
 Par.
2
 Purpose:
 To
 prevent
 indirect


extended
spiritual
aid
to
him
during
the
same
period;

 violations
or
circumventions
of
Par.
1


 

(2)
 The
 relatives
 of
 such
 priest
 or
 minister
 of
 the
 gospel
 Suppose
B
summons
a
priest,
who
is
also
his
son,
and
he

within
 the
 fourth
 degree,
 the
 church,
 order,
 chapter,
 makes
a
disposition
in
his
will,
in
his
son’s
favor.
B’s
son

community,
 organization,
 or
 institution
 to
 which
 such
 is
 disqualified
 from
 receiving
 the
 terstamentary

priest
or
minister
may
belong;

 disposition,
but
not
to
his
legitime.


 

(3)
 A
 guardian
 with
 respect
 to
 testamentary
 dispositions
 Par.
3

given
 by
 a
 ward
 in
 his
 favor
 before
 the
 final
 accounts
 of
 • Requisite:
Will
must
have
been
executed
by

the
guardianship
have
been
approved,
even
if
the
testator
 the
 ward
 during
 the
 effectivity
 of
 the

should
 die
 after
 the
 approval
 thereof;
 nevertheless,
 any
 guardianship

provision
made
by
the
ward
in
favor
of
the
guardian
when
 

the
 latter
 is
 his
 ascendant,
 descendant,
 brother,
 sister,
 or
 • To
whom
applicable:
Guardians
of
persons

spouse,
shall
be
valid;

 and
property


 

(4)
 Any
 attesting
 witness
 to
 the
 execution
 of
 a
 will,
 the
 Exception:
 Guardian
 who
 is
 also
 an

spouse,
 parents,
 or
 children,
 or
 any
 one
 claiming
 under
 ascendant,
 descendant,
 brother,
 sister
 or

such
witness,
spouse,
parents,
or
children;

 spouse
of
ward‐testator


 

(5)
 Any
 physician,
 surgeon,
 nurse,
 health
 officer
 or
 Note:
 the
 provision
 does
 not
 exclude
 the
 relatives
 of
 the

druggist
 who
 took
 care
 of
 the
 testator
 during
 his
 last
 guardian,
unlike
the
rule
for
priests

illness;

 


 Par.
4

(6)
 Individuals,
 associations
 and
 corporations
 not
 • There
 is
 an
 exception.
 See
 Art.
 823,
 where

permitted
by
law
to
inherit.
(745,
752,
753,
754a)
 the
 witness
 may
 be
 qualified
 if
 there
 are
 3

other
witnesses


 

Par.
1­5:
 Par.
5

• Apply
only
to
natural
persons
 • Scope
 of
 prohibition:
 Person
 must
 have

• Applicable
 in
 testamentary
 succession,
 not
 to
 taken
care
of
the
testator
during
the
latter’s

legitime
or
intestacy
 final
illness

• Rationale:
 The
 law
 seeks
 to
 prevent
 possible
 

abuse
of
moral
or
spiritual
ascendancy
 “Taking
 care”
 means
 medical
 attendance

• Duress
 or
 influence
 is
 conclusively
 presumed;
 with
some
regularity
or
continuity

need
not
be
proved
 


 Par.
6:
 Total
 disqualification;
 Should
 be
 a
 separate


Par.
1

 article

• To
 whom
 applicable:
 priests,
 pastors,
 

ministers
etc.
belonging
to
religions,
sects
or
 Art.
 1028.
 The
 prohibitions
 mentioned
 in
 article
 739,

cults,
whose
office
or
function
it
is
to
extend
 concerning
 donations
 inter
 vivos
 shall
 apply
 to

the
 peculiar
 spiritual
 ministrations
 of
 their
 testamentary
provisions.
(n)


creed
 


 Art.
 1029.
 Should
 the
 testator
 dispose
 of
 the
 whole
 or

• Requisites:
 part
 of
 his
 property
 for
 prayers
 and
 pious
 works
 for
 the

a. Will
 must
 have
 been
 executed
 during
 benefit
of
his
soul,
in
general
terms
and
without
specifying

the
testator’s
last
illness
 its
 application,
 the
 executor,
 with
 the
 court's
 approval

b. Spiritual
 ministration
 must
 have
 shall
deliver
one‐half
thereof
or
its
proceeds
to
the
church

extended
during
the
last
illness
 or
 denomination
 to
 which
 the
 testator
 may
 belong,
 to
 be

c. Will
must
have
been
executed
during
or
 used
for
such
prayers
and
pious
works,
and
the
other
half

after
the
spiritual
ministration
 to
 the
 State,
 for
 the
 purposes
 mentioned
 in
 Article
 1013.


 (747a)



SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 62 of 73

 against
 the
 life
 of
 the
 testator,
 his
 or
 her
 spouse,

Requisites:
 descendants,
or
ascendants;


a. Disposition
 for
 prayers
 and
 pious
 works
 for
 the
 

benefit
of
the
testator’s
soul
 (3)
Any
person
who
has
accused
the
testator
of
a
crime
for

b. No
specification
of
application
of
disposition
 which
 the
 law
 prescribes
 imprisonment
 for
 six
 years
 or


 more,
if
the
accusation
has
been
found
groundless;


Apportionment
of
disposition
or
its
proceeds:
 

• ½
 to
 the
 church
 or
 denomination
 to
 which
 the
 (4)
 Any
 heir
 of
 full
 age
 who,
 having
 knowledge
 of
 the

testator
belonged
 violent
death
of
the
testator,
should
fail
to
report
it
to
an

• ½
to
the
State
(see
Art.
1013)
 officer
 of
 the
 law
 within
 a
 month,
 unless
 the
 authorities


 have
already
taken
action;
this
prohibition
shall
not
apply

Art.
1030.
Testamentary
provisions
in
favor
of
the
poor
in
 to
 cases
 wherein,
 according
 to
 law,
 there
 is
 no
 obligation

general,
 without
 designation
 of
 particular
 persons
 or
 of
 to
make
an
accusation;


any
community,
shall
be
deemed
limited
to
the
poor
living
 

in
 the
 domicile
 of
 the
 testator
 at
 the
 time
 of
 his
 death,
 (5)
Any
person
convicted
of
adultery
or
concubinage
with

unless
 it
 should
 clearly
 appear
 that
 his
 intention
 was
 the
spouse
of
the
testator;


otherwise.

 


 (6)
 Any
 person
 who
 by
 fraud,
 violence,
 intimidation,
 or

The
designation
of
the
persons
who
are
to
be
considered
 undue
 influence
 should
 cause
 the
 testator
 to
 make
 a
 will

as
poor
and
the
distribution
of
the
property
shall
be
made
 or
to
change
one
already
made;


by
 the
 person
 appointed
 by
 the
 testator
 for
 the
 purpose;
 

in
 default
 of
 such
 person,
 by
 the
 executor,
 and
 should
 (7)
Any
person
who
by
the
same
means
prevents
another

there
 be
 no
 executor,
 by
 the
 justice
 of
 the
 peace,
 the
 from
making
a
will,
or
from
revoking
one
already
made,
or

mayor,
and
the
municipal
treasurer,
who
shall
decide
by
a
 who
supplants,
conceals,
or
alters
the
latter's
will;


majority
of
votes
all
questions
that
may
arise.
In
all
these
 

cases,
 the
 approval
 of
 the
 Court
 of
 First
 Instance
 shall
 be
 (8)
 Any
 person
 who
 falsifies
 or
 forges
 a
 supposed
 will
 of

necessary.

 the
decedent.
(756,
673,
674a)



 

The
 preceding
 paragraph
 shall
 apply
 when
 the
 testator
 Application:
all
kinds
of
succession

has
 disposed
 of
 his
 property
 in
 favor
 of
 the
 poor
 of
 a
 

definite
locality.
(749a)
 Grounds
for
unworthiness:


 Pars.
 1,
 2,
 3,
 5,
 6:
 see
 discussion
 under
 Art.
 919
 (as

Beneficiaries:
The
poor
 grounds
for
disinheritance)

Par.
1
refers
to
the
poor
of
the
testator’s
domicile,
unless
 

excluded
by
the
testator
in
his
will.
 Par.
4:



 a. Heir
 has
 knowledge
 of
 violent
 death
 of
 the

Who
 determines
 the
 individual
 beneficiaries
 within
 the
 decedent

class
designated
by
the
testator?
AEA
 b. Heir
is
of
legal
age

a. Person
 authorized
 by
 the
 testator,
 or
 in
 his
 c. Heir
 fails
 to
 report
 it
 to
 all
 officer
 of
 the
 law

default
 within
a
month
after
learning
of
it

b. Executor,
or
in
his
default
 d. Authorities
have
not
yet
taken
action

c. Administator
 e. Legal
 obligation
 for
 the
 heir
 to
 make
 an


 accusation


 


 Effect
 of
 Unworthiness:
 Total
 disqualification
 by
 any


 form
of
succession

Art.
 1031.
 A
 testamentary
 provision
 in
 favor
 of
 a
 

disqualified
person,
even
though
made
under
the
guise
of
 Art.
 1033.
 The
 cause
 of
 unworthiness
 shall
 be
 without

an
 onerous
 contract,
 or
 made
 through
 an
 intermediary,
 effect
if
the
testator
had
knowledge
thereof
at
the
time
he

shall
be
void.
(755)
 made
 the
 will,
 or
 if,
 having
 known
 of
 them
 subsequently,


 he
should
condone
them
in
writing.
(757a)

Effect
 of
 simulation
 or
 circumvention:
 Disposition
 is
 

void,
 hence
 ineffective
 as
 to
 the
 intended
 beneficiary
 and
 2
ways
to
restore
capacity:

the
intermediary.
 a. Written
condonation


 b. Execution
 by
 the
 offended
 party
 of
 a
 will
 with

Intestate
heirs,
to
whom
the
property
would
go,
have
the
 knowledge
of
the
cause
of
unworthiness
(the
will

right
to
claim
the
nullity.
 must
also
institute
the
unworthy
heir
or
restore


 him
to
capacity)

Art.
 1032.
 The
 following
 are
 incapable
 of
 succeeding
 by
 

reason
of
unworthiness:

 How
 to
 reconcile
 common
 grounds
 for
 Unworthiness


 and
Disinheritance
(Arts.
1033
and
922):

(1)
 Parents
 who
 have
 abandoned
 their
 children
 or
 a. If
 offended
 party
 does
 not
 make
 a
 will

induced
their
daughters
to
lead
a
corrupt
or
immoral
life,
 subsequent
 to
 the
 occurrence
 of
 the
 common

or
attempted
against
their
virtue;

 cause:
Art.
1033
applies


 

(2)
 Any
 person
 who
 has
 been
 convicted
 of
 an
 attempt


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 63 of 73
 b. If
offended
party
makes
a
will
subsequent
to
the
 This
 article
 grants
 a
 right
 of
 reimbursement
 of
 necessary

occurrence
of
the
common
cause:
 expenses
to
the
excluded
heir.


 

If
he
knew
of
the
cause
 Art.
 1038.
 Any
 person
 incapable
 of
 succession,
 who,

1) If
he
disinherits
–
apply
Art.
922
 disregarding
 the
 prohibition
 stated
 in
 the
 preceding

2) If
 he
 institutes
 or
 pardons
 the
 offender
 –
 articles,
 entered
 into
 the
 possession
 of
 the
 hereditary

restored
to
capacity
 property,
 shall
 be
 obliged
 to
 return
 it
 together
 it
 its

3) If
will
is
silent
–
unworthiness
stays
 accessions.



 

If
 he
 did
 not
 know
 of
 the
 cause
 –
 unworthiness
 He
shall
be
liable
for
all
the
fruits
and
rents
he
may
have

stays
 received,
 or
 could
 have
 received
 through
 the
 exercise
 of


 due
diligence.
(760a)

Art.
 1034.
 In
 order
 to
 judge
 the
 capacity
 of
 the
 heir,
 Disqualified
heir
here
is
a
possessor
in
bad
faith.

devisee
 or
 legatee,
 his
 qualification
 at
 the
 time
 of
 the
 a. Obligation
to
return,
with
accessions

death
of
the
decedent
shall
be
the
criterion.

 b. Liability
for
fruits
which
were
received
and
could


 have
been
received

In
cases
falling
under
Nos.
2,
3,
or
5
of
Article
1032,
it
shall
 

be
necessary
to
wait
until
final
judgment
is
rendered,
and
 Art.
 1039.
 Capacity
 to
 succeed
 is
 governed
 by
 the
 law
 of

in
the
case
falling
under
No.
4,
the
expiration
of
the
month
 the
nation
of
the
decedent.
(n)

allowed
for
the
report.

 


 Art.
 1040.
 The
 action
 for
 a
 declaration
 of
 incapacity
 and

If
 the
 institution,
 devise
 or
 legacy
 should
 be
 conditional,
 for
 the
 recovery
 of
 the
 inheritance,
 devise
 or
 legacy
 shall

the
time
of
the
compliance
with
the
condition
shall
also
be
 be
brought
within
five
years
from
the
time
the
disqualified

considered.
(758a)
 person
took
possession
thereof.
It
may
be
brought
by
any


 one
who
may
have
an
interest
in
the
succession.
(762a)

When
capacity
is
to
be
determined:

 

Gen.
Rule:
Time
of
decedent’s
death
 The
 right
 of
 heir
 to
 recover
 the
 inheritance
 must
 be


 exercised
within
5
years.

If
institution
is
subject
to
a
suspensive
condition:
 

a. Time
of
decedent’s
death,
and
 5‐year
prescriptive
period
applies
to:


b. Time
of
happening
of
condition
 a. the
declaration
of
incapacity
of
the
heir



 b. the
 recovery
 of
 the
 inheritance
 or
 portion

If
 final
 judgment
 is
 a
 requisite
 of
 unworthiness:
 Time
 thereof
wrongfully
possessed
by
the
disqualified

of
final
judgment
 heir.


 

Art.
1035.
If
the
person
excluded
from
the
inheritance
by
 3. Acceptance and Repudiation of the
reason
of
incapacity
should
be
a
child
or
descendant
of
the
 Inheritance
decedent
 and
 should
 have
 children
 or
 descendants,
 the
 

latter
shall
acquire
his
right
to
the
legitime.

 Art.
 1041.
 The
 acceptance
 or
 repudiation
 of
 the


 inheritance
 is
 an
 act
 which
 is
 purely
 voluntary
 and
 free.

The
 person
 so
 excluded
 shall
 not
 enjoy
 the
 usufruct
 and
 (988)

administration
 of
 the
 property
 thus
 inherited
 by
 his
 

children.
(761a)
 Art.
 1042.
 The
 effects
 of
 the
 acceptance
 or
 repudiation


 shall
 always
 retroact
 to
 the
 moment
 of
 the
 death
 of
 the

Extent
of
Representation:
Legitime
and
intestacy
 decedent.
(989)


 

Representation
 in
 the
 collateral
 line:
 If
 the
 unworthy
 Retroactivity:

heir
 is
 a
 brother
 or
 sister,
 his
 children
 (nephews
 and
 a. Of
 acceptance
 –
 successor
 will
 be
 deemed
 to

nieces
of
the
decedent)
will
represent
 have
 owned
 and
 possessed
 the
 property
 from



 the
moment
of
decedent’s
death

Art.
1036.
Alienations
of
hereditary
property,
and
acts
of
 

administration
performed
by
the
excluded
heir,
before
the
 b. Of
renunciation
–
substitute,
co‐heir
or
intestate

judicial
order
of
exclusion,
are
valid
as
to
the
third
persons
 heir
 who
 gets
 the
 property
 in
 default
 of
 the

who
acted
in
good
faith;
but
the
co‐heirs
shall
have
a
right
 renouncer,
 is
 deemed
 to
 have
 owned
 and

to
recover
damages
from
the
disqualified
heir.
(n)
 possessed
 it
 from
 the
 moment
 of
 decedent’s


 death

This
applies
the
Doctrine
of
Innocent
Purchaser
for
Value
 

without
 prejudice
 to
 the
 right
 to
 damages
 of
 the
 c. Conditional
institutions

prejudiced
heirs
against
the
incapacitated
heir.
 1) Condition
 happens
 –
 Property
 passes
 with


 retroactive
effect

Art.
 1037.
 The
 unworthy
 heir
 who
 is
 excluded
 from
 the
 2) Condition
 does
 not
 happen
 –
 Property
 goes

succession
 has
 a
 right
 to
 demand
 indemnity
 or
 any
 to
the
appropriate
successor,
with
the
same

expenses
 incurred
 in
 the
 preservation
 of
 the
 hereditary
 retroactive
effect

property,
 and
 to
 enforce
 such
 credits
 as
 he
 may
 have
 

against
the
estate.
(n)

 Art.
 1043.
 No
 person
 may
 accept
 or
 repudiate
 an




SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 64 of 73
 inheritance
unless
he
is
certain
of
the
death
of
the
person
 Acts
 of
 mere
 preservation
 or
 provisional
 administration

from
 whom
 he
 is
 to
 inherit,
 and
 of
 his
 right
 to
 the
 do
 not
 imply
 an
 acceptance
 of
 the
 inheritance
 if,
 through

inheritance.
(991)
 such
 acts,
 the
 title
 or
 capacity
 of
 an
 heir
 has
 not
 been

Article
requires:
 assumed.
(999a)

a. Certainty
of
death
 

b. Established
right
to
inherit
 Kinds
of
acceptance:


 a. Express

Art.
 1044.
 Any
 person
 having
 the
 free
 disposal
 of
 his
 1) Public
document

property
may
accept
or
repudiate
an
inheritance.

 2) Private
writing


 b. Tacit

Any
 inheritance
 left
 to
 minors
 or
 incapacitated
 persons
 c. Implied

may
be
accepted
by
their
parents
or
guardians.
Parents
or
 

guardians
 may
 repudiate
 the
 inheritance
 left
 to
 their
 Art.
1050.
An
inheritance
is
deemed
accepted:


wards
only
by
judicial
authorization.

 


 (1)
 If
 the
 heirs
 sells,
 donates,
 or
 assigns
 his
 right
 to
 a

The
 right
 to
 accept
 an
 inheritance
 left
 to
 the
 poor
 shall
 stranger,
or
to
his
co‐heirs,
or
to
any
of
them;


belong
 to
 the
 persons
 designated
 by
 the
 testator
 to
 

determine
the
beneficiaries
and
distribute
the
property,
or
 (2)
 If
 the
 heir
 renounces
 the
 same,
 even
 though

in
their
default,
to
those
mentioned
in
Article
1030.
(992a)
 gratuitously,
for
the
benefit
of
one
or
more
of
his
co‐heirs;



 

Art.
 1045.
 The
 lawful
 representatives
 of
 corporations,
 (3)
If
he
renounces
it
for
a
price
in
favor
of
all
his
co‐heirs

associations,
 institutions
 and
 entities
 qualified
 to
 acquire
 indiscriminately;
 but
 if
 this
 renunciation
 should
 be

property
may
accept
any
inheritance
left
to
the
latter,
but
 gratuitous,
and
the
co‐heirs
in
whose
favor
it
is
made
are

in
order
to
repudiate
it,
the
approval
of
the
court
shall
be
 those
 upon
 whom
 the
 portion
 renounced
 should
 devolve

necessary.
(993a)
 by
virtue
of
accretion,
the
inheritance
shall
not
be
deemed


 as
accepted.
(1000)

Art.
 1046.
 Public
 official
 establishments
 can
 neither
 

accept
nor
repudiate
an
inheritance
without
the
approval
 Tacit
 acceptance
 is
 inferred
 from
 acts
 of
 ownership

of
the
government.
(994)
 performed
by
the
heir
over
the
property.


 

Art.
 1047.
 A
 married
 woman
 of
 age
 may
 repudiate
 an
 Art.
 1051.
 The
 repudiation
 of
 an
 inheritance
 shall
 be

inheritance
without
the
consent
of
her
husband.
(995a)
 made
 in
 a
 public
 or
 authentic
 instrument,
 or
 by
 petition


 presented
 to
 the
 court
 having
 jurisdiction
 over
 the

Art.
1048.
Deaf‐mutes
who
can
read
and
write
may
accept
 testamentary
or
intestate
proceedings.
(1008)

or
 repudiate
 the
 inheritance
 personally
 or
 through
 an
 

agent.
 Should
 they
 not
 be
 able
 to
 read
 and
 write,
 the
 Form
of
renunciation:

inheritance
 shall
 be
 accepted
 by
 their
 guardians.
 These
 a. Public
or
authentic
(genuine)
instrument

guardians
may
repudiate
the
same
with
judicial
approval.
 b. Petition
filed
in
the
settlement
proceedings

(996a)
 


 Art.
 1052.
 If
 the
 heir
 repudiates
 the
 inheritance
 to
 the


 Accept
 Repudiate
 prejudice
of
his
own
creditors,
the
latter
may
petition
the

Parents
or
guardians
 Yes
 Yes*
 court
 to
 authorize
 them
 to
 accept
 it
 in
 the
 name
 of
 the

Authorized
person
 Yes
 No
 heir.


Lawful
 Yes
 Yes*
 

representatives
 The
 acceptance
 shall
 benefit
 the
 creditors
 only
 to
 an

extent
sufficient
to
cover
the
amount
of
their
credits.
The

Public
official
 Yes,
but
only
with
approval
of

excess,
should
there
be
any,
shall
in
no
case
pertain
to
the

establishments
 government

renouncer,
 but
 shall
 be
 adjudicated
 to
 the
 persons
 to

Married
person
(w/o
 Yes
 Yes

whom,
 in
 accordance
 with
 the
 rules
 established
 in
 this

spouse’s
consent)

Code,
it
may
belong.
(1001)

Deaf‐mutes
who
can
 Yes,
personally
or
through
an



read
and
write
 agent

This
 is
 an
 instance
 of
 accion
 pauliana,
 which
 is
 the
 right

Deaf‐mutes
who
 Yes,
through
 Yes,
through

given
 to
 creditors
 to
 impugn
 or
 set
 aside
 contracts,

cannot
read
and
 their
guardians
 their

transactions
 or
 dispositions
 of
 their
 debtors
 which
 will

write
 guardians*

prejudice
or
defraud
them.

*Requires
judicial
authorization
 


 Extent
of
right
of
creditor
to
accept
the
inheritance
in

Art.
1049.
Acceptance
may
be
express
or
tacit.

 the
 name
 of
 the
 debtor:
 Only
 to
 the
 amount
 or
 value


 necessary
to
satisfy
the
credit

An
express
acceptance
must
be
made
in
a
public
or
private
 

document.

 Art.
1053.
If
the
heir
should
die
without
having
accepted


 or
 repudiated
 the
 inheritance
 his
 right
 shall
 be

A
tacit
acceptance
is
one
resulting
from
acts
by
which
the
 transmitted
to
his
heirs.
(1006)

intention
 to
 accept
 is
 necessarily
 implied,
 or
 which
 one



would
have
no
right
to
do
except
in
the
capacity
of
an
heir.


Art.
 1054.
 Should
 there
 be
 several
 heirs
 called
 to
 the




SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 65 of 73
inheritance,
some
of
them
may
accept
and
the
others
may
 Art.
 1060.
 A
 corporation
 or
 association
 authorized
 to

repudiate
it.
(1007a)
 conduct
the
business
of
a
trust
company
in
the
Philippines


 may
be
appointed
as
an
executor,
administrator,
guardian

Their
 right
 to
 accept
 or
 repudiate
 corresponds
 to
 the
 of
an
estate,
or
trustee,
in
like
manner
as
an
individual;
but

aliquot
share
to
which
they
are
entitled.
 it
shall
not
be
appointed
guardian
of
the
person
of
a
ward.


 (n)

Art.
 1055.
 If
 a
 person,
 who
 is
 called
 to
 the
 same
 

inheritance
as
an
heir
by
will
and
ab
intestato,
repudiates
 See
Rules
78‐90
of
the
Rules
of
Court

the
inheritance
in
his
capacity
as
a
testamentary
heir,
he
is
 

understood
to
have
repudiated
it
in
both
capacities.

 5. Collation

 

Should
 he
 repudiate
 it
 as
 an
 intestate
 heir,
 without
 3
meanings
of
collation:

knowledge
 of
 his
 being
 a
 testamentary
 heir,
 he
 may
 still
 1. As
computation
–
add
all
available
assets,
deduct

accept
it
in
the
latter
capacity.
(1009)
 debts,
 and
 add
 the
 donations
 to
 get
 the
 net


 hereditary
estate

Rationale:
 The
 testamentary
 disposition
 is
 the
 express
 






Arts.
1061,
1067,
1071,
1072

will
 of
 the
 testator,
 whereas
 intestacy
 is
 only
 his
 implied
 

will.
 One
 who
 renounces
 the
 express
 will
 is
 deemed
 to
 2. As
 imputation
 –
 determine
 if
 the
 donation
 is

have
 renounced
 the
 implied
 also,
 but
 not
 the
 other
 way
 chargeable/imputable
 to
 the
 legitime
 or
 free

around.
 portion


 







Arts.
1062
–1066,
1068,
1069,
1071–1073


Rule
does
not
apply
to
legitime.
 


 3. As
return
–
If
donation
to
a
stranger
exceeds
the

Art.
 1056.
 The
 acceptance
 or
 repudiation
 of
 an
 free
 portion,
 he
 would
 have
 to
 give
 back
 to
 the

inheritance,
 once
 made,
 is
 irrevocable,
 and
 cannot
 be
 estate
 as
 much
 as
 is
 needed
 to
 complete
 the

impugned,
 except
 when
 it
 was
 made
 through
 any
 of
 the
 legitimes

causes
 that
 vitiate
 consent,
 or
 when
 an
 unknown
 will
 






Arts.
1075,
1076

appears.
(997)
 


 Art.
 1061.
 Every
 compulsory
 heir,
 who
 succeeds
 with

Gen.
 Rule:
 Acceptance
 or
 repudiation
 of
 inheritance
 is
 other
 compulsory
 heirs,
 must
 bring
 into
 the
 mass
 of
 the

irrevocable
 estate
 any
 property
 or
 right
 which
 he
 may
 have
 received


 from
the
decedent,
during
the
lifetime
of
the
latter,
by
way

Exceptions:

 of
 donation,
 or
 any
 other
 gratuitous
 title,
 in
 order
 that
 it

a. Factors
 vitiating
 consent
 are
 present
 –FIVUM
 may
 be
 computed
 in
 the
 determination
 of
 the
 legitime
 of

(fraud,
 intimidation,
 undue
 influence,
 mistake,
 each
heir,
and
in
the
account
of
the
partition.
(1035a)

fraud)
 

b. Appearance
 of
 an
 unknown
 will
 (which
 is
 valid
 Donations
 inter
 vivos
 –
 made
 to
 compulsory
 heirs
 AND

and
admitted
to
probate)
 strangers


 Value
of
donation:
At
the
time
donation
was
made

Art.
1057.
Within
thirty
days
after
the
court
has
issued
an
 

order
for
the
distribution
of
the
estate
in
accordance
with
 Art.
 1062.
 Collation
 shall
 not
 take
 place
 among

the
 Rules
 of
 Court,
 the
 heirs,
 devisees
 and
 legatees
 shall
 compulsory
 heirs
 if
 the
 donor
 should
 have
 so
 expressly

signify
 to
 the
 court
 having
 jurisdiction
 whether
 they
 provided,
or
if
the
donee
should
repudiate
the
inheritance,

accept
or
repudiate
the
inheritance.

 unless
 the
 donation
 should
 be
 reduced
 as
 inofficious.


 (1036)

If
they
do
not
do
so
within
that
time,
they
are
deemed
to
 

have
accepted
the
inheritance.
(n)
 Gen.
 Rule:
 Donations
 inter
 vivos
 to
 compulsory
 heirs


 should
 be
 imputed
 to
 the
 heir’s
 legitime
 (considered
 an

Implied
 acceptance
 –
 failure
 to
 signify
 acceptance
 or
 advance
to
the
legitime)

renunciation
within
the
30‐day
period
 


 Exceptions:


4. Executors and Administrators a. Donor
provides
otherwise


 b. Donee
renounces
the
inheritance

Art.
 1058.
 All
 matters
 relating
 to
 the
 appointment,
 

powers
 and
 duties
 of
 executors
 and
 administrators
 and
 Instances
 when
 donations
 inter
 vivos
 are
 to
 be

concerning
 the
 administration
 of
 estates
 of
 deceased
 imputed
to
the
free
portion:

persons
shall
be
governed
by
the
Rules
of
Court.
(n)
 a. When
made
to
strangers


 b. When
 made
 to
 compulsory
 heirs
 and
 the
 donor

Art.
1059.
If
the
assets
of
the
estate
of
a
decedent
which
 so
provides

can
 be
 applied
 to
 the
 payment
 of
 debts
 are
 not
 sufficient
 c. When
 made
 to
 compulsory
 heirs
 who
 renounce

for
 that
 purpose,
 the
 provisions
 of
 Articles
 2239
 to
 2251
 the
inheritance

on
 Preference
 of
 Credits
 shall
 be
 observed,
 provided
that
 d. When
in
excess
of
the
compulsory
heir’s
legitime,

the
 expenses
 referred
 to
 in
 Article
 2244,
 No.
 8,
 shall
 be
 as
to
the
excess

those
 involved
 in
 the
 administration
 of
 the
 decedent's
 

estate.
(n)
 Art.
 1063.
 Property
 left
 by
 will
 is
 not
 deemed
 subject
 to


 collation,
 if
 the
 testator
 has
 not
 otherwise
 provided,
 but


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 66 of 73
the
legitime
shall
in
any
case
remain
unimpaired.
(1037)
 spent
 if
 he
 had
 lived
 in
 the
 house
 and
 company
 of
 his


 parents
shall
be
deducted
therefrom.
(1042a)

Gen.
Rule:
Testamentary
dispostions
to
compulsory
heirs
 

should
 not
 be
 imputed
 to
 the
 legitime,
 but
 to
 the
 free
 Gen.
 Rule:
 Expenses
 for
 the
 child’s
 professional,

portion
 vocational,
or
other
career,
are
not
inofficious;
should
not


 be
charged
against
the
recipient’s
legitime,
but
against
the

Exception:
If
the
testator
provides
otherwise
 free
portion


 

Art.
 1064.
 When
 the
 grandchildren,
 who
 survive
 with
 Exception:
If
the
parents
provide
otherwise

their
 uncles,
 aunts,
 or
 cousins,
 inherit
 from
 their
 

grandparents
in
representation
of
their
father
or
mother,
 Art.
1069.
Any
sums
paid
by
a
parent
in
satisfaction
of
the

they
shall
bring
to
collation
all
that
their
parents,
if
alive,
 debts
of
his
children,
election
expenses,
fines,
and
similar

would
 have
 been
 obliged
 to
 bring,
 even
 though
 such
 expenses
shall
be
brought
to
collation.
(1043a)

grandchildren
have
not
inherited
the
property.

 


 Donations
by
the
parent
to
the
child
should
be
treated
like

They
 shall
 also
 bring
 to
 collation
 all
 that
 they
 may
 have
 other
donations
to
compulsory
heirs
under
Art.
1062.

received
from
the
decedent
during
his
lifetime,
unless
the
 

testator
has
provided
otherwise,
in
which
case
his
wishes
 Art.
 1070.
 Wedding
 gifts
 by
 parents
 and
 ascendants

must
 be
 respected,
 if
 the
 legitime
 of
 the
 co‐heirs
 is
 not
 consisting
 of
 jewelry,
 clothing,
 and
 outfit,
 shall
 not
 be

prejudiced.
(1038)
 reduced
 as
 inofficious
 except
 insofar
 as
 they
 may
 exceed


 one‐tenth
of
the
sum
which
is
disposable
by
will.
(1044)

Grandchildren
have
to
impute
to
their
legitime:
 

a. Whatever
 the
 parent
 whom
 they
 are
 Wedding
 gifts
 in
 excess
 of
 1/10
 of
 the
 free
 portion
 are

representing
would
have
been
obliged
to
collate;
 inofficious.


and
 

b. Whatever
 they
 themselves
 have
 received
 from
 Art.
1071.
The
same
things
donated
are
not
to
be
brought

the
 grandparent
 by
 gratuitous
 title
 (subject
 to
 to
collation
and
partition,
but
only
their
value
at
the
time

the
rules
and
exceptions
under
Art.
1062)
 of
the
donation,
even
though
their
just
value
may
not
then


 have
been
assessed.


Art.
1065.
Parents
are
not
obliged
to
bring
to
collation
in
 

the
 inheritance
 of
 their
 ascendants
 any
 property
 which
 Their
subsequent
increase
or
deterioration
and
even
their

may
 have
 been
 donated
 by
 the
 latter
 to
 their
 children.
 total
loss
or
destruction,
be
it
accidental
or
culpable,
shall

(1039)
 be
 for
 the
 benefit
 or
 account
 and
 risk
 of
 the
 donee.


 (1045a)

Donation
to
the
grandchild
should
be
imputed
to
the
free
 

portion,
since
it
is
a
donation
to
a
stranger.
 Value
 to
 be
 computed
 and
 imputed:
 the
 value
 of
 thing


 donated
at
the
time
donation
was
made

Art.
 1066.
 Neither
 shall
 donations
 to
 the
 spouse
 of
 the
 

child
 be
 brought
 to
 collation;
 but
 if
 they
 have
 been
 given
 Reason:
 Any
 appreciation
 or
 depreciation
 of
 the
 thing

by
 the
 parent
 to
 the
 spouses
 jointly,
 the
 child
 shall
 be
 after
 that
 time
 should
 be
 for
 the
 donee’s
 account,
 since

obliged
to
bring
to
collation
one‐half
of
the
thing
donated.
 donation
transfers
ownership
to
him

(1040)
 


 Art.
 1072.
 In
 the
 collation
 of
 a
 donation
 made
 by
 both

Donation
given
to
the
child’s
spouse
will
not
be
imputed
to
 parents,
one‐half
shall
be
brought
to
the
inheritance
of
the

the
child’s
legitime,
as
it
is
a
donation
made
to
a
stranger.
 father,
and
the
other
half,
to
that
of
the
mother.
That
given


 by
 one
 alone
 shall
 be
 brought
 to
 collation
 in
 his
 or
 her

Treatment
of
donations
made
to
the
spouses
jointly:
 inheritance.
(1046a)

• ½
belongs
to
the
donor’s
child
(Art.
1062)
 

• ½
 belongs
 to
 the
 child’s
 spouse
 (donation
 to
 Joint
 donation:
 Pertaining
 to
 equal
 shares
 to
 the
 estates

stranger)
 of
the
father
and
mother


 

Art.
 1067.
 Expenses
 for
 support,
 education,
 medical
 Donation
by
one
parent:
Treated
separately

attendance,
 even
 in
 extraordinary
 illness,
 apprenticeship,
 Art.
 1073.
 The
 donee's
 share
 of
 the
 estate
 shall
 be

ordinary
equipment,
or
customary
gifts
are
not
subject
to
 reduced
 by
 an
 amount
 equal
 to
 that
 already
 received
 by

collation.
(1041)
 him;
and
his
co‐heirs
shall
receive
an
equivalent,
as
much


 as
 possible,
 in
 property
 of
 the
 same
 nature,
 class
 and

Support
 –
 defined
 in
 Art.
 194,
 Family
 Code;
 does
 not
 quality.
(1047)

include
 expenses
 for
 the
 recipient’s
 professional,
 

vocational
or
other
career
 Art.
 1074.
 Should
 the
 provisions
 of
 the
 preceding
 article


 be
impracticable,
if
the
property
donated
was
immovable,

Art.
 1068.
 Expenses
 incurred
 by
 the
 parents
 in
 giving
 the
 co‐heirs
 shall
 be
 entitled
 to
 receive
 its
 equivalent
 in

their
 children
 a
 professional,
 vocational
 or
 other
 career
 cash
 or
 securities,
 at
 the
 rate
 of
 quotation;
 and
 should

shall
 not
 be
 brought
 to
 collation
 unless
 the
 parents
 so
 there
 be
 neither
 cash
 or
 marketable
 securities
 in
 the

provide,
or
unless
they
impair
the
legitime;
but
when
their
 estate,
so
much
of
the
other
property
as
may
be
necessary

collation
is
required,
the
sum
which
the
child
would
have
 shall
be
sold
at
public
auction.



SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 67 of 73

 adequate
security
is
given.
(1050)

If
 the
 property
 donated
 was
 movable,
 the
 co‐heirs
 shall
 

only
have
a
right
to
select
an
equivalent
of
other
personal
 6. Partition and Distribution of Estate
property
of
the
inheritance
at
its
just
price.
(1048)
 


 6.1. Partition
Applies
if
Art.
1073
is
not
possible.
 

a. Immovables
 –
 co‐heirs
 entitled
 to
 cash
 or
 Partition
 is
 a
 judicial
 proceeding
 that
 comprises
 the

securities
 entire
 settlement
 of
 the
 decedent’s
 estate,
 covered
 by

b. Movables
 –
 co‐heirs
 entitled
 to
 similarly‐valued
 Rules
73
to
90
of
the
Rules
of
Court.

movable
 


 1

Art.
1075.
The
fruits
and
interest
of
the
property
subject
 Decedent
dies

to
collation
shall
not
pertain
to
the
estate
except
from
the
 

day
on
which
the
succession
is
opened.

 2


 Co­ownership
of
heirs


For
 the
 purpose
 of
 ascertaining
 their
 amount,
 the
 fruits
 over
net
hereditary
estate


and
interest
of
the
property
of
the
estate
of
the
same
kind
 or
partible
estate

and
 quality
 as
 that
 subject
 to
 collation
 shall
 be
 made
 the
 

standard
of
assessment.
(1049)
 3


 Subsequent
partition
by:

Rationale:
 The
 obligation
 to
 return
 inofficious
 donations
 ‐
extrajudicial
agreement


to
 the
 estate
 arises
 at
 the
 time
 succession
 vests
 (Rule
74,
Sec.
1,
Rules
of
Court),


(decedent’s
death).
From
that
time,
the
compulsory
heir
is
 OR

entitled
to
the
fruits.
 ‐
through
judicial
order



 in
appropriate
settlement


Extent
of
compulsory
heir’s
right
to
fruits:
 proceedings


a. Entirety
 of
 fruits
 –
 if
 donation
 was
 totally
 (Rule
90,
Rules
of
Court)

inofficious
 

b. Prorated
 between
 heir
 and
 donee
 –
 if
 partially
 Art.
1078.
Where
there
are
two
or
more
heirs,
the
whole

inofficious
 estate
 of
 the
 decedent
 is,
 before
 its
 partition,
 owned
 in


 common
by
such
heirs,
subject
to
the
payment
of
debts
of

Art.
 1076.
 The
 co‐heirs
 are
 bound
 to
 reimburse
 to
 the
 the
deceased.
(n)

donee
 the
 necessary
 expenses
 which
 he
 has
 incurred
 for
 

the
 preservation
 of
 the
 property
 donated
 to
 him,
 though
 Art.
1079.
Partition,
in
general,
is
the
separation,
division

they
may
not
have
augmented
its
value.

 and
assignment
of
a
thing
held
in
common
among
those
to


 whom
it
may
belong.
The
thing
itself
may
be
divided,
or
its

The
 donee
 who
 collates
 in
 kind
 an
 immovable
 which
 has
 value.
(n)

been
given
to
him
must
be
reimbursed
by
his
co‐heirs
for
 

the
 improvements
 which
 have
 increased
 the
 value
 of
 the
 Kinds
of
partition:

property,
 and
 which
 exist
 at
 the
 time
 the
 partition
 if
 a. Actual
–
physical
division
of
the
thing
among
the

effected.

 co‐heirs


 b. Constructive
 –
 any
 act,
 other
 than
 physical

As
 to
 works
 made
 on
 the
 estate
 for
 the
 mere
 pleasure
 of
 division,
which
terminates
the
co‐ownership
(ex:

the
donee,
no
reimbursement
is
due
him
for
them;
he
has,
 sale
to
a
3rd
person)

however,
the
right
to
remove
them,
if
he
can
do
so
without
 

injuring
the
estate.
(n)
 Casilang
vs.
Dizon
(2013)


 


 Totally
 Partially
 F:
 The
 decedent’s
 grandchildren
 petitioned
 to
 have
 Jose

inofficious
 inofficious
 evicted
and
executed
a
deed
of
extrajudicial
partition
over

Necessary

 Reimburse
in
full

 Partial
 the
lot.

Useful
 Reimburse
in
full,
 reimbursement
in
 

if
improvement
 proportion
to
the
 H:
 Jose
 is
 the
 lawful
 owner
 of
 the
 lot.
 He
 and
 his
 siblings

still
exists
 value
to
be
 were
able
to
present
sufficient
evidence
that
they
entered

returned
 into
a
verbal
partition,
while
Rosario
was
unable
to
show

Ornamental

 No
reimbursement
 No
reimbursement
 any
proof
that
her
father
inherited
the
lot
from
Liborio.

Only
removal,
if
no
 Only
removal*
if
no
 

injury
to
the
estate
 injury
to
the
estate
 Art.
1080.
Should
a
person
make
partition
of
his
estate
by

*
 If
 the
 property
 is
 physically
 divided,
 and
 the
 ornament
 an
 act
 inter
 vivos,
 or
 by
 will,
 such
 partition
 shall
 be

happens
 to
 be
 located
 in
 the
 donee’s
 portion,
 donee
 will
 respected,
 insofar
 as
 it
 does
 not
 prejudice
 the
 legitime
 of

have
all
rights
of
ownership.
 the
compulsory
heirs.



 

Art.
 1077.
 Should
 any
 question
 arise
 among
 the
 co‐heirs
 A
parent
who,
in
the
interest
of
his
or
her
family,
desires

upon
the
obligation
to
bring
to
collation
or
as
to
the
things
 to
 keep
 any
 agricultural,
 industrial,
 or
 manufacturing

which
 are
 subject
 to
 collation,
 the
 distribution
 of
 the
 enterprise
 intact,
 may
 avail
 himself
 of
 the
 right
 granted

estate
 shall
 not
 be
 interrupted
 for
 this
 reason,
 provided
 him
 in
 this
 article,
 by
 ordering
 that
 the
 legitime
 of
 the

other
 children
 to
 whom
 the
 property
 is
 not
 assigned,
 be


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 68 of 73
paid
in
cash.
(1056a)
 of
indivision
shall
not
exceed
twenty
years
as
provided
in


 article
494.
This
power
of
the
testator
to
prohibit
division

Partition
by
the
Causante
(decedent):
 applies
to
the
legitime.


Characteristics:

 

a. Takes
effect
only
upon
death
 Even
 though
 forbidden
 by
 the
 testator,
 the
 co‐ownership

b. Revocable
as
long
as
the
causante
is
alive
(hence,
 terminates
when
any
of
the
causes
for
which
partnership

can
be
changed,
modified
or
rescinded)
 is
 dissolved
 takes
 place,
 or
 when
 the
 court
 finds
 for


 compelling
reasons
that
division
should
be
ordered,
upon

How
made:
 petition
of
one
of
the
co‐heirs.
(1051a)

a. By
will,
or
 

b. By
act
inter
vivos
 Gen.
Rule:
Any
co‐heir
may
demand
partition
at
any
time

• In
writing
 Exceptions:

• In
a
public
instrument
 a. When
forbidden
by
the
testator
for
a
period
not


 exceeding
20
years

Legasto
vs.
Verzosa
(1930)
 Exceptions
to
the
exception:


 • When
any
of
the
causes
for
dissolution

F:
 During
 the
 testatrix's
 lifetime,
 she
 made
 a
 partition
 of
 of
a
partnership
occurs

the
 parcels
 of
 land
 to
 her
 heirs
 by
 virtue
 of
 deeds
 of
 • When
 the
 court
 finds
 compelling

assignment.
However
probate
of
the
will
was
denied.
 reasons
for
partition


 b. When
 the
 co‐heirs
 agree
 on
 indivision
 for
 a

H:
 Will
 is
 not
 valid
 as
 it
 was
 not
 admitted
 for
 probate.
 period
not
exceeding
10
years
(renewable)

Partition
 of
 the
 testator's
 estate
 inter
 vivos,
 as
 c. When
the
law
prohibits
partition

contemplated
in
the
Civil
Code,
can
only
be
validly
made
in
 

the
 presence
 of
 a
 valid
 will,
 which
 is
 why
 the
 (old)
 Art.
 1084.
 Voluntary
 heirs
 upon
 whom
 some
 condition

provision
speaks
of
a
"testator."
 has
 been
 imposed
 cannot
 demand
 a
 partition
 until
 the


 condition
 has
 been
 fulfilled;
 but
 the
 other
 co‐heirs
 may

Limitation
 on
 partition
 by
 causante:
 Legitimes
 of
 demand
it
by
giving
sufficient
security
for
the
rights
which

compulsory
heirs
cannot
be
impaired
 the
 former
 may
 have
 in
 case
 the
 condition
 should
 be


 complied
with,
and
until
it
is
known
that
the
condition
has

Art.
 1081.
 A
 person
 may,
 by
 an
 act
 inter
 vivos
 or
 mortis
 not
 been
 fulfilled
 or
 can
 never
 be
 complied
 with,
 the

causa,
intrust
the
mere
power
to
make
the
partition
after
 partition
shall
be
understood
to
be
provisional.
(1054a)

his
death
to
any
person
who
is
not
one
of
the
co‐heirs.

 


 Rationale:
 Right
 as
 heir
 vests
 only
 when
 the
 suspensive

The
provisions
of
this
and
of
the
preceding
article
shall
be
 condition
happens.

observed
 even
 should
 there
 be
 among
 the
 co‐heirs
 a
 

minor
 or
 a
 person
 subject
 to
 guardianship;
 but
 the
 Other
heirs
can
demand
parition
after
furnishing
adequate

mandatary,
 in
 such
 case,
 shall
 make
 an
 inventory
 of
 the
 security.

property
 of
 the
 estate,
 after
 notifying
 the
 co‐heirs,
 the
 

creditors,
and
the
legatees
or
devisees.
(1057a)
 Art.
1085.
In
the
partition
of
the
estate,
equality
shall
be


 observed
as
far
as
possible,
dividing
the
property
into
lots,

Mandatary
 cannot
 be
 a
 co‐heir,
 to
 ensure
 fairness
 and
 or
 assigning
 to
 each
 of
 the
 co‐heirs
 things
 of
 the
 same

impartiality.
 nature,
quality
and
kind.
(1061)


 

Art.
 1082.
 Every
 act
 which
 is
 intended
 to
 put
 an
 end
 to
 Equality
among
co­heirs:

indivision
 among
 co‐heirs
 and
 legatees
 or
 devisees
 is
 a. Quantitative
 –
 Shares
 of
 co‐heirs
 are

deemed
to
be
a
partition,
although
it
should
purport
to
be
 determined
by
law
and
by
will

a
 sale,
 and
 exchange,
 a
 compromise,
 or
 any
 other
 

transaction.
(n)
 b. Qualitative
 –
 The
 law
 mandates
 equality
 in


 nature,
kind
and
quality

Tuason
vs.
Tuason
(1951)
 


 Exceptions:

F:

The
share
of
one
of
the
Tuason
siblings
in
a
huge
parcel
 • Causante
has
made
the
partition
himself

of
land
was
sold
 to
 Araneta.
 They
 executed
 a
 MoA
where
 • Co‐heirs
agree
otherwise

they
agreed
that
no
co‐owner
shall
sell
his
interest
in
the
 • Qualitative
 equality
 is
 impossible
 or

land
 w/o
 first
 giving
 preference
 to
 the
 other
 co‐owners.
 impracticable

Angela
 argued
 that
 the
 contract
 is
 null
 and
 void
 for
 

violating
CC400.
 Art.
1086.
Should
a
thing
be
indivisible,
or
would
be
much


 impaired
by
its
being
divided,
it
may
be
adjudicated
to
one

H:
 CC400
 is
 not
 applicable.
 The
 contract’s
 provision
 of
the
heirs,
provided
he
shall
pay
the
others
the
excess
in

preserving
the
co‐ownership
until
all
lots
have
been
sold,
 cash.


is
a
mere
incident
to
the
main
object
of
dissolving
the
co‐ 

ownership.
 Nevertheless,
 if
 any
 of
 the
 heirs
 should
 demand
 that
 the


 thing
 be
 sold
 at
 public
 auction
 and
 that
 strangers
 be

Art.
 1083.
 Every
 co‐heir
 has
 a
 right
 to
 demand
 the
 allowed
to
bid,
this
must
be
done.
(1062)

division
 of
 the
 estate
 unless
 the
 testator
 should
 have
 

expressly
forbidden
its
partition,
in
which
case
the
period
 To
whom
thing
may
be
sold:



SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 69 of 73
 a. To
a
3rd
person,
or
 Obvious
effect:
Termination
of
co‐ownership

b. To
any
of
the
co‐heirs
(if
none
of
them
object)
 


 Art.
1092.
After
the
partition
has
been
made,
the
co‐heirs

Art.
 1087.
 In
 the
 partition
 the
 co‐heirs
 shall
 reimburse
 shall
be
reciprocally
bound
to
warrant
the
title
to,
and
the

one
 another
 for
 the
 income
 and
 fruits
 which
 each
 one
 of
 quality
of,
each
property
adjudicated.
(1069a)

them
may
have
received
from
any
property
of
the
estate,
 

for
 any
 useful
 and
 necessary
 expenses
 made
 upon
 such
 Obligation
of
mutual
warranty:
Liable
for
defects
of
title

property,
 and
 for
 any
 damage
 thereto
 through
 malice
 or
 and
quality
(Art.
501)

neglect.
(1063)
 


 Warranties
are
the
same
as
in
sales:

Upon
 partition,
 the
 co‐heirs
 shall
 render
 a
 mutual
 a. Eviction
(title)

accounting
of
benefits
received
and
necessary
and
useful
 b. Hidden
defects
(quality)

expenses
incurred
by
each
of
them.
 


 Art.
1093.
The
reciprocal
obligation
of
warranty
referred

Art.
 1088.
 Should
 any
 of
 the
 heirs
 sell
 his
 hereditary
 to
 in
 the
 preceding
 article
 shall
 be
 proportionate
 to
 the

rights
 to
 a
 stranger
 before
 the
 partition,
 any
 or
 all
 of
 the
 respective
hereditary
shares
of
the
co‐heirs,
but
if
any
one

co‐heirs
may
be
subrogated
to
the
rights
of
the
purchaser
 of
 them
 should
 be
 insolvent,
 the
 other
 co‐heirs
 shall
 be

by
reimbursing
him
for
the
price
of
the
sale,
provided
they
 liable
 for
 his
 part
 in
 the
 same
 proportion,
 deducting
 the

do
so
within
the
period
of
one
month
from
the
time
they
 part
corresponding
to
the
one
who
should
be
indemnified.


were
notified
in
writing
of
the
sale
by
the
vendor.
(1067a)
 


 Those
who
pay
for
the
insolvent
heir
shall
have
a
right
of

Right
of
redemption
given
to
a
co­heir
 action
against
him
for
reimbursement,
should
his
financial

• Co‐heir
 sold
 his
 undivided
 share
 or
 portion
 in
 condition
improve.
(1071)

the
estate
 

• Share
was
sold
to
a
stranger
 Proportional
liability
of
co­heirs
on
warranty:
Burdens

• Written
notice
by
co‐heirs
to
the
vendor
 should
be
proportional
to
benefits


 

Garcia
vs.
Calaliman
(1989)
 Art.
1094.
An
action
to
enforce
the
warranty
among
heirs


 must
be
brought
within
ten
years
from
the
date
the
right

F:
 
 There
 was
 an
 extrajudicial
 partition
 and
 deed
 of
 sale.
 of
action
accrues.
(n)

Two
 groups
 of
 heirs
 sold
 their
 shares
 to
 Calaliman
 and
 

Trabadillo.
 The
 heirs
 of
 the
 vendors
 filed
 a
 case
 against
 Action
to
enforce
warranty:
10
years


Calaliman
and
Trabadillo
for
legal
redemption.

Heirs
were
 

not
 notified
 of
 the
 sale
 so
 they
 claim
 the
 30
 day
 period
 To
 be
 counted
 from
 the
 time
 the
 portion
 was
 lost
 or
 the

stipulated
in
Art
1088
has
yet
to
begin.
 hidden
defect
was
discovered.


 

H:
 Written
 notice
 is
 required
 before
 the
 period
 of
 one
 Art.
1095.
If
a
credit
should
be
assigned
as
collectible,
the

month
for
the
other
co‐heirs
to
redeem
begins
to
run.
The
 co‐heirs
 shall
 not
 be
 liable
 for
 the
 subsequent
 insolvency

redemptioner
 is
 entitled
 to
 written
 notice
 to
 remove
 all
 of
 the
 debtor
 of
 the
 estate,
 but
 only
 for
 his
 insolvency
 at

uncertainty
as
to
the
sale,
its
terms
and
its
validity,
and
to
 the
time
the
partition
is
made.


quiet
any
doubt
that
the
alienation
is
not
definitive.
 


 The
 warranty
 of
 the
 solvency
 of
 the
 debtor
 can
 only
 be

If
only
1
co­heir
redeems:
he
will
pay
the
purchase
price
 enforced
during
the
five
years
following
the
partition.



 

If
more
than
1
will
redeem:
they
will
pay
proportionally
 Co‐heirs
 do
 not
 warrant
 bad
 debts,
 if
 so
 known
 to,
 and

to
their
share
in
the
property
 accepted
 by,
 the
 distributee.
 But
 if
 such
 debts
 are
 not


 assigned
to
a
co‐heir,
and
should
be
collected,
in
whole
or

Art.
 1089.
 The
 titles
 of
 acquisition
 or
 ownership
 of
 each
 in
 part,
 the
 amount
 collected
 shall
 be
 distributed

property
 shall
 be
 delivered
 to
 the
 co‐heir
 to
 whom
 said
 proportionately
among
the
heirs.
(1072a)

property
has
been
adjudicated.
(1065a)
 


 Credit
assigned
to
a
co­heir
in
partition:

Art.
1090.
When
the
title
comprises
two
or
more
pieces
of
 Warranty
covers
only
insolvency
of
the
decedent’s
debtor

land
which
have
been
assigned
to
two
or
more
co‐heirs,
or
 at
 the
 time
 of
 partition,
 not
 subsequent
 insolvency,
 for

when
 it
 covers
 one
 piece
 of
 land
 which
 has
 been
 divided
 which
the
co‐heir
takes
the
risk.

between
two
or
more
co‐heirs,
the
title
shall
be
delivered
 

to
the
one
having
the
largest
interest,
and
authentic
copies
 Prescriptive
period:
5
years

of
 the
 title
 shall
 be
 furnished
 to
 the
 other
 co‐heirs
 at
 the
 

expense
of
the
estate.
If
the
interest
of
each
co‐heir
should
 Art.
 1096.
 The
 obligation
 of
 warranty
 among
 co‐heirs

be
the
same,
the
oldest
shall
have
the
title.
(1066a)
 shall
cease
in
the
following
cases:




6.2. Effects of Partition
 (1)
 When
 the
 testator
 himself
 has
 made
 the
 partition,


 unless
it
appears,
or
it
may
be
reasonably
presumed,
that

Art.
1091.
A
partition
legally
made
confers
upon
each
heir
 his
intention
was
otherwise,
but
the
legitime
shall
always

the
 exclusive
 ownership
 of
 the
 property
 adjudicated
 to
 remain
unimpaired;


him.
(1068)
 


 (2)
 When
 it
 has
 been
 so
 expressly
 stipulated
 in
 the


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 70 of 73
agreement
of
partition,
unless
there
has
been
bad
faith;

 have
 not
 been
 prejudiced
 nor
 those
 have
 not
 received


 more
than
their
just
share.
(1077a)

(3)
When
the
eviction
is
due
to
a
cause
subsequent
to
the
 

partition,
or
has
been
caused
by
the
fault
of
the
distributee
 Co­heir
who
is
sued
for
rescission
has
two
options:

of
the
property.
(1070a)
 a. Re‐partition,
or


 b. Indemnify
 the
 co‐heir
 the
 amount
 of
 lesion

Instances
when
there
is
no
mutual
warranty:
 suffered

1. Partition
by
the
testator
himself
(save
where
the
 

legitime
has
been
impaired)
 Art.
 1102.
 An
 heir
 who
 has
 alienated
 the
 whole
 or
 a

2. Agreement
 among
 the
 co‐heirs
 to
 suppress
 the
 considerable
part
of
the
real
property
adjudicated
to
him

warranty
 cannot
maintain
an
action
for
rescission
on
the
ground
of

3. Supervening
 events
 causing
 the
 loss
 or
 the
 lesion,
but
he
shall
have
a
right
to
be
indemnified
in
cash.

diminution
in
value
 (1078a)

4. Fault
of
the
co‐heir
 

5. Waiver
 Art.
 1103.
 The
 omission
 of
 one
 or
 more
 objects
 or


 securities
of
the
inheritance
shall
not
cause
the
rescission

6.3. Rescission and Nullity of of
 the
 partition
 on
 the
 ground
 of
 lesion,
 but
 the
 partition

Partition shall
 be
 completed
 by
 the
 distribution
 of
 the
 objects
 or


 securities
which
have
been
omitted.
(1079a)

Art.
 1097.
 A
 partition
 may
 be
 rescinded
 or
 annulled
 for
 

the
same
causes
as
contracts.
(1073a)
 Incompleteness
of
partition
is
not
a
ground
for
rescission.


 

Causes
for
annulment:
Art.
1390
 Remedy:
Supplemental
partition

Causes
for
rescission:
Art.
1381‐1382
 


 Art.
1104.
A
partition
made
with
preterition
of
any
of
the

Art.
 1098.
 A
 partition,
 judicial
 or
 extra‐judicial,
 may
 also
 compulsory
 heirs
 shall
 not
 be
 rescinded,
 unless
 it
 be

be
rescinded
on
account
of
lesion,
when
any
one
of
the
co‐ proved
that
there
was
bad
faith
or
fraud
on
the
part
of
the

heirs
received
things
whose
value
is
less,
by
at
least
one‐ other
 persons
 interested;
 but
 the
 latter
 shall
 be

fourth,
than
the
share
to
which
he
is
entitled,
considering
 proportionately
 obliged
 to
 pay
 to
 the
 person
 omitted
 the

the
value
of
the
things
at
the
time
they
were
adjudicated.
 share
which
belongs
to
him.
(1080)

(1074a)
 


 Heir
is
mistakenly
excluded

Lesion
 is
 economic
 injury,
 where
 thep
 arty
 receives
 less
 • In
 good
 faith
 ‐
 the
 omitted
 heir
 gets
 his
 rightful

than
he
is
entitled
to
receive.
 share


 • In
bad
faith
–
partition
shall
be
annulled

Amount
of
lesion:
Minimum
is
¼

 


 Art.
1105.
A
partition
which
includes
a
person
believed
to

Art.
 1099.
 The
 partition
 made
 by
 the
 testator
 cannot
 be
 be
an
heir,
but
who
is
not,
shall
be
void
only
with
respect

impugned
 on
 the
 ground
 of
 lesion,
 except
 when
 the
 to
such
person.
(1081a)

legitime
of
the
compulsory
heirs
is
thereby
prejudiced,
or
 

when
it
appears
or
may
reasonably
be
presumed,
that
the
 Heir
 is
 mistakenly
 included.
 In
 this
 case
 the
 property

intention
of
the
testator
was
otherwise.
(1075)
 will
be
taken
away
from
him
and
redistributed
among
the


 proper
recipients.

Gen.
 Rule:
 Heirs
 cannot
 demand
 partition
 on
 the
 ground
 

of
lesion,
if
partition
was
done
by
the
testator.
 


 

Exceptions
to
Art.
1098:

 

a. Impairment
of
the
legitime
 

b. Mistake
by
the
testator
or
vitiation
of
his
intent
 Congratulations!
You
are
now
ready
to


 nail
the
exam!

Art.
 1100.
 The
 action
 for
 rescission
 on
 account
 of
 lesion
 A
few
things
to
remember:

shall
prescribe
after
four
years
from
the
time
the
partition
 

was
made.
(1076)
 • Spot
concepts
that
might
apply
(if
there’s
a
will,


 there’s
a
way...for
preterition
to
operate,
or
if

Prescriptive
period
(lesion):
4
years
 there
are
two
transfers—reserva
troncal)


 • What
rules
should
apply?
Legitimes?
Partial

Art.
 1101.
 The
 heir
 who
 is
 sued
 shall
 have
 the
 option
 of
 Intestacy?

indemnifying
 the
 plaintiff
 for
 the
 loss,
 or
 consenting
 to
 a
 • Use
dark
ink.

new
partition.

 


 

Indemnity
 may
 be
 made
 by
 payment
 in
 cash
 or
 by
 the
 

delivery
 of
 a
 thing
 of
 the
 same
 kind
 and
 quality
 as
 that
 You
may
now
proceed
to
test
your
skills.
Try
the
following

awarded
to
the
plaintiff.

 sample
exam
questions.



 

If
a
new
partition
is
made,
it
shall
affect
neither
those
who
 




SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 71 of 73

 


 The
sisters
had
children:


 a.
Claire:
Skull
and
Spike

QUESTIONS:
 b.
Lindsey:
Mahinhin,
Makahiya,
Makisig
and
Maliksi


 c.
Lorely:
Serafin
and
Salvi


 

1. A
final
decree
of
probate
forecloses
objections
to
the
 In
2004,
Shelan
made
a
will
giving
¼
of
his
total

will
on
the
ground
of
preterition.
T
or
F?
 estate
to
her
3
sisters,
with
simple
substitution
of
any

2. Full
and
half‐blood
siblings
instituted
in
a
will
inherit
 of
them
in
favor
of
their
respective
children.

equally
unless
otherwise
provided.
T
or
F?
 

3. It
is
not
necessary
to
institute
an
heir
by
name.
T
or
 All
three
sisters
predeceased
Shelan.

F?
 

4. A
person
without
testamentary
capacity
may
not
 When
Shelan
died
in
2007,
survived
by
her
husband,

revoke
a
will.
T
or
F?
 nephews
and
nieces,
she
had
an
estate
valued
at
24M.

5. An
illiterate
person
does
not
have
testamentary
 How
should
it
be
apportioned?

capacity.
T
or
F?
 28. Jaypee
and
Amirah,
both
natives
of
Surigao,
have

6. In
some
case,
the
testator
is
presumed
insane.
T
or
F?
 been
married
for
30
years.
They
have
one
daughter,

7. A
will
need
not
always
be
witnessed.
T
or
F?
 Jamie,
27
yeasr
old,
single,
no
children
and
a
junior

8. A
holographic
will
cannot
be
probated
on
the
basis
 executive
at
Hope
Cigarettes
Corp.

solely
of
testimonial
evidence.
T
or
F?
 

9. Supervening
Incapacity
does
not
invalidate
a
will
but
 One
day
in
May,
Warla
invites
her
parents
to
spend

deprives
the
testator
the
power
to
revoke
it.
T
or
F?
 the
weekend
with
her
and
her
fiance,
Nick
in
a

10. Republication
of
a
will
that
is
formally
void
cannot
be
 cottage
on
the
beach
of
San
Fabian,
Pangasinan.
The
4

done
by
mere
reference.
T
or
F?
 of
them
leave
Manila
at
dawn
on
Saturday
in
Nick’s

11. The
date
of
a
holographic
will
need
not
be
written
at
 new
car.
In
Tarlac,
they
met
a
terrible
accident:
a

the
bottom.
T
or
F?
 south‐bound
ten‐wheeler
truck
driven
by
Cari
hits

12. The
testator
may
delegate
the
revocation
of
his
will.
T
 them
head
on.

or
F?
 

13. A
deaf‐mute
person
may
execute
a
will
but
cannot
 Nick
dies
on
the
spot.
The
three
others
survived
and


witness
one.
T
or
F?
 were
rushed
to
the
hospital
where,
that
evening,

14. If
there
is
preterition,
all
testamentary
dispositions
 Jaypee
expired.
Amirah
and
Jamie
are
transferred
to

are
considered
not
written.
T
or
F?
 Manila
for
better
treatment.

15. A
will
and
a
codicil
have
identical
formal
 

requirements.
T
or
F?
 Jamie
lingers
on
for
a
week
but
the
trauma
proves
too

16. Preterition
can
never
occur
if
testator
died
without
a
 much
and
she
dies
on
Monday.
Amirah
raliies
and

will.
T
or
F?
 actually
regains
consciousness,
but
unexpected
blood

17. The
attestation
clause
must
be
in
a
language
known
 clot
forms
in
the
brain
three
weeks
after
her

to
the
testator.
T
or
F?
 daughter’s
death
and
she
too
dies
on
Friday.

18. A
blind
man
can
neither
make
nor
witness
a
will.
T
or
 

F?
 The
ill‐starred
family
are
survived
by
Korina
and

19. A
minor
can
neither
make
nor
witness
a
will.
T
or
F?
 Enrique
(Amirah’s
parents),
Rosalyn
and
Karren

20. A
convicted
thief
has
competence
to
witness
a
will.
T
 (Jaypee’s
sisters),
and
Jantzen
and
Jess
(Amirah’s

or
F?
 siblings).

21. A
foreigner
may
witness
a
will.
T
or
F?
 

22. A
testamentary
disposition
in
favour
of
a
witness
 Jaypee
owned
a
piece
of
land
(Surigao
property)

does
not
affect
his
competence
as
a
witness.
T
or
F?
 worth
6M
pesos
–
that
was
his
only
property

23. A
probated
will
may
be
ineffective.
T
or
F?
 inherited
by
him
from
his
parents.
Amirah
owned

24. An
undated
will
is
not
ipso
facto
void.
T
or
F?
 nothing.
Jamie
owned
a
lot
in
Alabang
(Alabang

25. Robert
died
intestate,
with
an
estate
worth
6M.
He
is
 property)
worth
3M
–
he
had
bought
from
his

survived
by
his
wife
Diane,
their
only
child,
Big
Bird,
 bonuses
from
Hope.

and
Robert’s
3
illegitimate
children:
Elmo,
Oscar
and
 

Ernie.
How
should
Robert’s
estate
be
divided?
 To
whom
shall
the
two
pieces
of
property
go?

26. On
his
way
to
the
library,
Ranulfo,
single,
childless,
 

died
when
a
meteorite
fell
on
him.
He
left
a
will
which
 


gave
1/3
of
his
estate
to
his
girlfriend,
Marjorie,
and
a
 ANSWERS:
(The
samplex
did
not
have
answers.
The

legacy
of
P600,000
to
the
UP
Astronomical
Society
 following
aswers
are
not
necessarily
correct.
–Rea)

(UPAS).
He
was
survived
by
his
parents
Cornelio
and
 1. F.
A
decree
of
probate
only
concerns
the

Maiska
who
now
contends
that
the
will
is
ineffective
 extrinsic
validity
of
a
will.

because
they
are
left
with
nothing.
Ranulfo’s
estate
is
 2. T.
Distinction
between
full‐
and
half‐blood
has
no

worth
900,000
 application
in
testamentary
succession.
Unless

a. Is
their
contention
correct?
 the
contrary
clearly
appears,
there
is
a

b. How
much
will
Marjorie
and
UPAS
get?
 presumption
of
equality.

27. John
was
married
to
Shelan
but
after
60
years
of
 3. T.
What
is
essential
is
that
the
heir
be

marriage
the
couple
were
childless.
Shelan
had
3
 identifiable.

sisters:
Claire
(full‐blood),
Lindsey
(half‐blood)
and
 4. T.
A
will
is
revoked
with
the
participation
of
the

Lorely
(half‐blood).
 testator
only
in
two
ways:
by
another


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 72 of 73
 will/codicil
or
by
physical
destruction.
Both
 

require
testamentary
capacity.
 28. First,
Jaypee’s
estate:
6M
Surigao
property

5. F.
 By
intestacy,

6. T.
See
Art.
800
par
2.
 Jamie
=
½
=
3M

7. T.
Holographic
wills.
 Amirah
=
½
=
3M

8. T.
The
will
itself
(or
a
copy)
must
be
presented.
 

9. T.
The
testator
must
have
testamentary
capacity
 Next,
Jamie’s
estate:
Ayala
property
(3M)
plus

to
revoke
a
will.
See
also
Art.
801.
 3M
from
Jaypee
=
6M

10. T.
Art.
835.
 By
intestacy,

11. T.
The
law
does
not
require
a
specific
location
for
 The
whole
estate
goes
to
Amirah

the
date
of
the
holographic
will.
(Labrador
v
CA)
 

12. T.
Physical
destruction.
 Finally,
Amirah’s
estate:
½
of
Surigao
property

13. T.
Art.
820.
 from
Jaypee
+
Ayala
property
(3M)
from
Jamie
+

14. F.
Only
institution
of
heir
is
annulled;
legacies
 second‐half
of
Surigao
property
from
Jamie

and
devises
remain
valid
so
long
as
they
are
not
 which
the
latter
got
from
Jaypee
=
9M

inofficious.
See
Art.
854.
 

15. T.
Art.
826.
 BUT
the
second‐half
of
Surigao
property
is

16. T.
If
there
is
no
testamentary
disposition,

the
 subject
to
reserva
troncal
hence,
will
go
to

compulsory
heir
would
always
receive
 Rosalyn
and
Karren
(1/4
each).

something
through
intestacy.
(But
what
if
the
T
 

disposed
all
properties
by
donation
inter
vivos?
 Remaining
6M
will
pass
on
to
Amirah’s
intestate

My
stand
is
that
there
is
still
no
preterition
 heirs:
Korina
and
Enrique
(3M
each).
Jantzen
and

because
the
donations
impinging
on
the
legitime
 Jess
are
excluded.

will
be
inofficious
per
Art
752.
I’m
not
sure.
 

Really
not
sure.)
 Therefore,

17. F.
The
AC
is
not
the
business
of
the
testator.
 Surigao
property:
Korina,
Enrique,
Rosalyn
and

18. F.
A
blind
man
may
make
a
will!
 Karren
=
¼
undivided
interest
each

19. T.
1)No
testamentary
capacity;
2)
Not
qualified
 Ayala
property:
Korina
and
Enrique
=
½

to
be
a
witness.
 undivided
interest
each.

20. T.
See
Art.
821.
 

21. T.
 

22. T.
The
dispositions
are
void
unless
there
are
3
 

other
witnesses.
 

23. T.
If
the
will
is
intrinsically
invalid.
 

24. T.
Attested
wills
need
ot
be
dated.
 

25. Diane:
1.714M
 

Big
Bird:
1.714M

Elmo:

0.857M

Oscar:
0.857M

Ernie:
0.857M

26. a.
Yes.
They
are
preterited.
(1/3
of
estate
that

will
go
to
Marjorie
=
300,000
plus
legacy
of

600,000
to
UPAS
equals
900,000.
The
parents,

who
are
Oyie’s
compulsory
ehirs
are
left
with

nothing.)

b.
Marjorie
will
get
nothing
because
in

preterition,
the
institution
of
heir
is
annulled
.

Legacy
to
UPAS
remains
valid
but
should
be

reduced
to
450,000
because
it
exceeds
the
free

portion.

27. PARTIAL
INTESTACY

Will:
¼
=
6M

This
will
pass
to
nephews
and
nieces
by

substitution.
(2M
per
set
of
substitutes)

Legitime:

John:
1/2
of
the
estate
as
his
legitime

Remaining
¼
goes
to
nephews
and
nieces
goes

by
intestacy
and
by
virtue
of
their
right
to

representation
(with
distinction
between
full

and
half‐blood—2:1:1=3M:1.5M:1.5M)

Hence,

John
=
12M

Skull
and
Spike
=
2.5
each

Mahinhin,
Makahiya,
Makisig
and
Maliksi
=
875k

each

Serafin
and
Salvi
=
1.75M
each


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

REA.PATRICK.LOR.NAOMI Page 73 of 73