CIVIL LAW REVIEW I – ATTY.

LEGARDA

Florentino v Florentino AUTHOR: Tan, Louis

[G.R. No. L-14856; November 15, 1919] NOTES:
TOPIC: Reserva Troncal
PONENTE: J. Torres
CASE LAW/ DOCTRINE: Reservable property neither comes, nor falls under, the absolute dominion of the
ascendant who inherits and receives same from his descendant, therefore it does not form part of his own property nor
become the legitimate of his forced heirs. It becomes his own property only in case that all the relatives of his
descendant shall have died (reservista) in which case said reservable property losses such character.
FACTS:
 Apolonio Florentino II married Antonia de Leon, with whom he begot 9 children.
 After he was widowed, he married the second time Severina de Leon with whom he had 2 children.
 Apolonio II died and was survived by his second wife and 10 children, the 11 th son being born thereafter.
 In his will, Apolonio II instituted as universal heirs, the said 10 children, the posthumous child Apolonio III, and
his widow.
 In the partition of the estate, several personal properties were given to Apolonio III.
 Apolonio III died and his mother Severina succeeded to all his property
 Severina later died, leaving a will instituting as her universal heir, her only living daughter, Mercedes, who took
the property as reservable property.
 Petitioners herein, children from the first marriage, filed a complaint against Mercedes, claiming that she has been
gathering for herself alone the fruits of the lands, claiming that they are entitled thereto.
 Mercedes alleged as defense that the object of Art. 811 of the Civil Code is to avoid the transfer of reservable
property to those extraneous to the family of the owners; but since the property has passed to Mercedes, who is a
daughter of the common ancestor’s second marriage, the property was not transferred to a stranger. And that when
the property lost its reservable property in the hands of her mother, Severina, since Mercado is a legitimate
daughter and is thus a compulsory heir, reasoning that the obligation to reserve is secondary to the duty to respect
the legitime.
 The trial dismissed the complaint.
ISSUE(S): WON the children from a previous marriage are entitled to properties inherited by the wife from the
subsequent marriage from a child of such subsequent marriage who in turn, inherited such properties from his father.

HELD: Yes.

RATIO:
 When Apolonio II died, Apolonios III inherited the subject properties as his share in the inheritance, when
Apolonio III died, Severina inherited the said properties as the legitimate mother. And lastly, when Severina
died, she instituted Mercedes as her sole heir.

Reservatarios:
 Even If Severina left in her will said property, together with her own, to her only daughter and forced heiress,
the property does not lose its reservable nature inasmuch as it originated from the common ancestor of the
litigants.
 Although said property was inherited by his mother, Severina Faz de Leon, nevertheless, she was duty bound,
according to article 811 of the Civil Code, to reserve the property thus acquired for the benefit of the relatives,
within the third degree, of the line from which such property came.
 According to the provisions of law, ascendants do not inherit the reservable property, but its enjoyment, use or
trust, merely for the reason that said law imposes the obligation to reserve and preserve same for certain
designated persons who, on the death of the said ascendants reservists, acquire the ownership of said property
in fact and by operation of law in the same manner as forced heirs — said property reverts to said line as long
as the aforementioned persons who, from the death of the ascendant-reservists, acquire in fact the right of
reservatarios (person for whom property is reserved), and are relatives, within the third degree, of the
descendant from whom the reservable property came.
CIVIL LAW REVIEW I – ATTY. LEGARDA

 Following the order prescribed by law in legitimate succession, when there are relatives of the descendant
within the third degree, the right of the nearest relative, called reservatario, over the property which the
reservista (person holding it subject to reservation) should return to him, excludes that of the one more remote.
The right of representation cannot be alleged when the one claiming same as a reservatario of the reservable
property is not among the relatives within the third degree belonging to the line from which such property
came. Therefore, relatives of the fourth and the succeeding degrees can never be considered as reservatarios,
since the law does not recognize them as such.
 However, there is right of representation on the part of reservatarios who are within the third degree mentioned
by law, as in the case of nephews of the deceased person from whom the reservable property came. These
reservatarios have the right to represent their ascendants (fathers and mothers) who are the brothers of the said
deceased person and relatives within the third degree in accordance with article 811 of the Civil Code.
 In this case, the plaintiffs (1) Encarnacion, Gabriel and Magdalena are legitimate children of the first marriage
of Apolonio II; (2) Ramon, Miguel, Ceferino, Antonio, and Rosari are his grandchildren, who has the right to
represent their father. (3) Similarly, Emilia, Jesus, lourdes, Caridad, and Dolores are his grandchildren, who has
the right to represent their mother; and (4) Jose and Ascunsion are also his grandchildren who has the right to
represent to represent their father, another child of Apolonio II.
 Therefore, there are 7 reservatarios who are entitled to the reservable property left at the death of Apolonio III:
The 6 children from the first marriage of Apolonio II, although other are represented by their respective
children; and Mercedes, his daughter from the second marriage. All of the petitioners are Apolonio III’s
relatives within the third degree, as half-brothers and nephews.

Reservable character of the property

 The property subject of the dispute came from the common ancestor of Apolonio II, and when, on the death of
Apolonio III without issue, it passed to his mother, Severina, it became reservable property in accordance with
Art. 811.
 If this property was in fact clothed with the character and condition of reservable property when Severina Faz
de Leon inherited same from her son Apolonio III, she did not thereby acquire the dominion or right of
ownership but only the right of usufruct or of fiduciary with the necessary obligation to preserve and to deliver
or return it as such reservable property to her deceased son's relatives within the third degree, among whom is
her daughter, Mercedes Florentino.
 Reservable property neither comes, nor falls under, the absolute dominion of the ascendant who inherits and
receives same from his descendant, therefore it does not form part of his own property nor become the
legitimate of his forced heirs. It becomes his own property only in case that all the relatives of his descendant
shall have died (reservista) in which case said reservable property losses such character.
 With full right Severina Faz de Leon could have disposed in her will of all her own property in favor of her
only living daughter, Mercedes Florentino, as forced heiress. But whatever provision there is in her will
concerning the reservable property received from her son Apolonio III, or rather, whatever provision will
reduce the rights of the other reservatarios, the half brothers and nephews of her daughter Mercedes, is
unlawful, null and void, inasmuch as said property is not her own and she has only the right of usufruct or of
fiduciary, with the obligation to preserve and to deliver same to the reservatarios, one of whom is her own
daughter, Mercedes.
 For the same reason therefore, it cannot be argued that the legitime of Mercedes would be impaired there being
no lawful or just reason which serves as real foundation to disregard the right to Apolonio III's other relatives,
within the third degree, to participate in the reservable property in question.
 It is true that when Mercedes Florentino, the heiress of the reservista Severina, took possession of the property
in question, same did not pass into the hands of strangers. But it is likewise true that the said Mercedes is not
the only reservataria. And there is no reason founded upon law and upon the principle of justice why the other
reservatarios, the other brothers and nephews, relatives within the third degree in accordance with the precept
of article 811 of the Civil Code, should be deprived of portions of the property which, as reservable property,
pertain to them.