SUCCESSION 11/12/21

10/29/21

PRETERITION

The preterition or omission of one, some,

or all of the compulsory heirs in the
direct line, whether living at the time of
the execution of the will or born after the
death of the testator, shall annul the
institution of heir; but the devisees and
legacies shall be valid insofar as they are not
inofficious. (Article 854)

10/29/21

• Whether living at the time of the execution of the will or

born after the death of the testator;
• Who can be preterited?
1. Legitimate children
2. Illegitimate children
3. Parents, whether legitimate or illegitimate
4. Grandparents
PRETERITION 5. Adopted child
• Occurs if the heir receives nothing from the inheritance
by way of testamentary disposition, devise, legacy,
intestacy, or donation inter vivos.
• Effect of preterition.-- "Annul the institution of heir but
devises and legacies shall be valid insofar as they are not
inofficious."

by: Judge Karla Funtila-Abugan 1

SUCCESSION 11/12/21

10/29/21

1. I have a son, A. The will states "I give

1/2 to B." A is not preterited bec. he
gets the other half.
2. I have a son, A. The will states "I give
1/3 to B and 1/3 to C." A is not
PRETERITION preterited bec. he gets the other 1/3.
ILLUSTRATIONS His legitime, however, is impaired.
3. I have a son, A. The will states "I give
1/2 to B, 1/2 to B, and to A, all my
love." A, even if mentioned in the will,
was preterited.

10/29/21

A has 3 children, X,Y and Z. His will

states:

"I give X - 1/3 of my estate; Z - 1/12 of my

PRETERITION estate; and B -1/2."
PROBLEM
The estate is worth P600,000.00

Is Y preterited? NO.

by: Judge Karla Funtila-Abugan 2

SUCCESSION 11/12/21

10/29/21

PRETERITION PROBLEM

The three children of A are

entitled to their legitimes as Children Legitime
follows: (1/2 of P600,000)
X 100,000
Y 100,000
Z 100,000
Total 300,000
Legitimes

Heirs per Will of A Shares

PRETERITION X 200,000

PROBLEM Z
B
50,000
300,000
PER WILL OF A, HE GAVE THE Total Distribution of 550,000
FOLLOWING SHARES TO THESE the Estate
HEIRS:

10/29/21

by: Judge Karla Funtila-Abugan 3

SUCCESSION 11/12/21

10/29/21

PRETERITION PROBLEM

• Thus, there remains an

Heirs of A Shares from the Legitimes per Impairment undistributed portion of
Estate of A per his Law
Will the estate amounting to
P50,000.00 (P600,000-
X 200,000 100,000 100,000 550,000) which may cover
Y 50,000 100,000 (50,000)
Y’s legitime. It, therefore,
Z 50,000 100,000 (50,000)
B 300,000 300,000 appears that Y’s legitime is
Total 600,000 merely impaired and he is
Distribution of
the Estate not totally omitted from
the estate of A, to wit:

10/29/21

PRETERITION PROBLEM

• It also shows that Z’s legitime is impaired if the distribution of A’s estate
will be followed. Hence, proportionate deductions should be made on
the shares of the other heirs (X and B) so that the legitimes of Y and Z
will be completed, to wit:

Heirs of A Shares Legitimes Impairmen Proportiona Final Shares

from the per Law t te
Estate of A Deductions
per his Will
X 200,000 100,000 (25,000) 175,000
Y 50,000 100,000 (50,000) 100,000
Z 50,000 100,000 (50,000) 100,000
B 300,000 (75,000) 225,000
Total 600,000 (100,000) 600,000
Distribution of
the Estate

by: Judge Karla Funtila-Abugan 4

SUCCESSION 11/12/21

10/29/21

CASES

• Neri v. Akutin, G.R. No. 47799, May 21, 1943

• Reyes v. Barretto-Datu, 19 SCRA 85, January 25,
1967
• Solano v. Court of Appeals, L-41971, November
29, 1983
• Acain v. Acain, October 27, 1987, G.R. No.
72706
• Dy Yieng Seangio v. Reyes, November 27, 2006,
G.R. No. 140371-72
• Morales v. Olondriz, G.R. No. 198994, February
3, 2016

10/29/21

RESERVA TRONCAL

The ascendant who inherits from his descendant

any property which the latter may have acquired by
gratuitous title from another ascendant, or a
brother or sister, is obliged to reserve such
property as he may have acquired by operation of
law for the benefit of relatives who are within the
third degree and who belong to the line from
which said property came. (Article 891)

by: Judge Karla Funtila-Abugan 5

SUCCESSION
Requisites:
1.
RESERVA 2.
TRONCAL 3.
4.
RESERVA TRONCAL: NATURE
Of right of the reservista over the
reserved property
(Edroso v. Sablan)
• that of ownership
• subject to a resolutory condition
which is that the reservatorios exist at
the time of the reservista's death. If
there are, the reservista's right
terminates and the property will pass
to the reservatorios.
• ownership is alienable but subject to
the same resolutory condition. The
buyer's ownership is subject to the
same resolutory condition.
• right of ownership is registrable.
by: Judge Karla Funtila-Abugan
11/12/21
10/29/21
The property was acquired by a person from
an ascendant of from a brother or sister by
gratuitous title.
Said person died without legitimate issue.
The property is inherited by another
ascendant by operation of law.
There are relatives w/in the third degree
belonging to the line from w/c said property
came.
10/29/21
Of right of the reservatorios over the
reserved property
(Sienes v. Esparcia)
• right over the property during the life
of the reservista is a mere expectancy.
• the expectancy is subject to a
suspensive condition which is that the
reservatorio is alive at the time the
reservista dies
• the right of expectancy can be
alienated but it will be subject to the
same suspensive condition
• the right of expectancy is registrable. It
must be annotated at the back of the
title to protect the reservatorios from
innocent purchasers for value.
6
SUCCESSION 11/12/21

10/29/21

RESERVA TRONCAL:
EXTINGUISHMENT

Death of reservista Cano v. Director of Lands Death of all the reservatorios

Registration of the property

Waiver by all the reservatorios
Fortuitous loss of the provided no reservatorio is
reserved property subsequently born
under the Torrens system by
an innocent purchaser for
value wherein the reservable
character of the prop. is not
annotated on the title

Reservista adversely occupies

the property or openly
denies the reserva. (extinctive Merger
prescription)

10/29/21

CASES

• Gonzales v. CFI, 104 SCRA • Mendoza v. Delos Santos,

161, May 19, 1981
• Chua v. CFI, 78 SCRA 406,
August 31, 1977
• Edroso v. Sablan, 25 Phil.
295
• Sienes v. Esparcia, 111 Phil.
349 or 1 SCRA 750
• Florentino v. Florentino, 40
Phil. 480
• Cano v. Director of Lands,
January 16, 1959, L-10701
March 20, 2013, G.R. No.
176422
• Sumaya v. Intermediate
Appellate Court, G.R. No.
68843-44, September 2,
1991
• Solivio v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 83484, February
12, 1990

by: Judge Karla Funtila-Abugan 7