Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ruben Balane Succession Reviewer
Ruben Balane Succession Reviewer
Ruben Balane Succession Reviewer
• accdg
to
extent
of
rights
and
obligations
transmitted:
1) universal
–
entire
patrimony
or
an
aliquot
part
2) particular
–
devise,
legacy
• accdg
to
importance:
1)
2)
compulsory
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
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
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
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
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
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:
• 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
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
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
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
‐ 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
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
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
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
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
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:
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.
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
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:
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
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)
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
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)
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
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
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
‐ 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
‐ 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?
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
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
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
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
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:
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.
‐ 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
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
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.
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.
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
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
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
execution
of
the
will
–
legacy/devise
Art.
935.
The
legacy
of
a
credit
against
a
third
person
or
of
void.
It
is
not
validated
by
an
alienation
the
remission
or
release
of
a
debt
of
the
legatee
shall
be
by
the
legatee/devisee
subsequent
to
effective
only
as
regards
that
part
of
the
credit
or
debt
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.
o If
the
thing
was
owned
by
another
assigning
to
the
legatee
all
rights
of
action
it
may
have
person
at
the
time
of
the
making
of
the
against
the
debtor.
In
the
second
case,
by
giving
the
will
and
acquired
thereafter
by
the
legatee
an
acquittance,
should
he
request
one.
legatee/devisee:
In
both
cases,
the
legacy
shall
comprise
all
interests
on
the
If
the
testator
erroneously
credit
or
debt
which
may
be
due
the
testator
at
the
time
of
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
–
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
• 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
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)
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.
• 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
• 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.
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
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
• 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
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)
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
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
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
If
institution
is
subject
to
a
suspensive
condition:
Must
Art.
1021.
Among
the
compulsory
heirs
the
right
of
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
living
when
decedent
dies
Should
the
part
repudiated
be
the
legitime,
the
other
co‐
heirs
shall
succeed
to
it
in
their
own
right,
and
not
by
the
Exception:
None
right
of
accretion.
(985)
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
(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)
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
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.
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
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:
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
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
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
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