3.

HEIRS

3a. KINDS OF HEIRS

I. Compulsory heirs
Art. 887, 902, 992 903 NCC
- There are generally three classes of heirs: voluntary,
legal/intestate and compulsory

1. Legitimate children and legitimate descendants as to the

legitimate parents and legitimate descendants
2. In default of legitimate children, legitimate parents and
ascendants as to the legitimate children and descendants
3. Surviving spouse
4. Illegitimate children
5. Illegitimate parents as to the illegitimate children without
issue
6. Adopted children, for all civil purposes, are also considered
as legitimate children under the family code (Sec 18, Domestic
Adoption Law).
Note: adoption creates a personal legal relation only between the adopter and
the adopted. The law on representation requires the representative to be a
legal heir of the person he is representing and also of the person from whom
the person being represented was supposed to inherit.

Under 887(2) ascendants are considered compulsory heirs, hence

they will have interest in the estate, ONLY in the absence of
legitimate children and descendants.

Necessity of being legitimate - Article 992 provides a bar between

the legitimate and illegitimate line of the family, thus preventing one
from inheriting from the other by legal succession. The
discrimination against the illegitimate child arises from his inability to
inherit from the other relatives of his father and mother. An
illegitimate child has successional rights ONLY with respect to this
own parents.

Fractional combination of legitimate - when concurring with other

compulsory heirs, fractional shares are adjusted in accordance to
pertinent provisions of intestate succession. The portion of the
estate that does not pertain to legitimate is properly termed as free
disposal.

Right of representation: Rights of illegitimate children are

transmitted to their descendants, regardless of filiation. In contrast,
rights of legitimate children are transmitted only to their legitimate
descendants.

Rationale of Iron Curtain Rule (992): Article 992 provides an iron

curtain. This article under a presumed antagonistic rs, prohibits
absolutely a succession ab intestato b/in illegitimate child and
legitimate children and relatives of the mother or father. The
illegitimate child is seen as nothing but the product of sin and
disgracefully looked down upon by the legitimate family.
NOTE: The iron curtain rule only applies in intestate succession.

Application of iron curtain rule and right of representation

distinguished
IRON CURTAIN RULE RIGHT OF
REPRESENTATION

Prohibits absolutely Right created by

a succession ab fiction of law where
intestato between the representative is
the illegitimate raised to the place
child and the and degree of the
legitimate children person represented,
and relatives of the and acquires the
father or mother of rights which the
said illegitimate latter would
child.

Material to the determination as to whether article 992 applies are:

1. Whose estate is in question
2. Point of death where right were transferred

The rule in Art. 992 of the NCC has consistently been applied by the
Court in several other cases. Thus, it has ruled that:
a. where the illegitimate child had half brothers who were
legitimate, the latter had no right to the former’s inheritance;
b. the legitimate collateral relatives of the mother cannot succeed
from her illegitimate child;
c. a natural child cannot represent his natural father in the
succession to the estate of the legitimate grandparent;
d. the natural daughter cannot succeed to the estate of her
deceased uncle who is a legitimate brother of her natural father;
and
e. an illegitimate child has no right to inherit ab intestato from the
legitimate children and relatives of his father (Manuel vs. Ferrer,
August 21, 1995).

Relationship
Arts. 963-967 NCC
Article 963. Proximity of relationship is determined by the
number of generations. Each generation forms a degree.
 Determination of Proximity of Relationship

Article 964. A series of degrees forms a line, which may be

either direct or collateral.

A direct line is that constituted by the series of degrees

among ascendants and descendants.

A collateral line is that constituted by the series of degrees

among persons who are not ascendants and descendants,
but who come from a common ancestor.

Direct and Collateral Lines

Article 965. The direct line is either descending or

ascending.

The former unites the head of the family with those who
descend from him.

The latter binds a person with those from whom he

descends. (917)

Descending and Ascending Lines

Article 966. In the line, as many degrees are counted as

there are generations or persons, excluding the progenitor.

In the direct line, ascent is made to the common ancestor.

Thus, the child is one degree removed from the parent, two
from the grandfather, and three from the great-grandparent.

In the collateral line, ascent is made to the common ancestor

and then descent is made to the person with whom the
computation is to be made. Thus, a person is two degrees
removed from his brother, three from his uncle, who is the
brother of his father, four from his first cousin, and so forth.

Computation of Degrees
The Article illustrates how degrees of generation are
computed. Stated otherwise, Art. 966 gives direction
in the determination of the degree of relationship of
the collateral relatives to the decedent

Article 967. Full blood relationship is that existing between

persons who have the same father and the same mother.

Half blood relationship is that existing between persons who

have the same father, but not the same mother, or the same
mother, but not the same father.
Definition of relationship, degrees and lines: As contemplated in
succession, relationships are limited to those by consanguinity. Proximity is
determined by the number of generations (first, second, third) which in turn
forms a degree. Degrees form lines, which can either be direct or
collateral. A direct line is one formed by a series of degrees between
ascendants and descendants whereas a collateral line is formed between
relatives, not in the ascending or descending lines. (963-965)

Blood Relationship: In general, a rs is a legal tie uniting a person to

another person. When this tie or connection is established by persons
related by blood, the relationship is called by consanguinity. When this tie
or connection is established by persons related by marriage, the
relationship is called by affinity. Relationships by consanguinity may be
legitimate or illegitimate depending on whether the progenitor forming the
common trunk may have been legitimately united by marriage or by an
illicit relationship.

Rules of Exclusion and Concurrence

Rules on Exclusion and Concurrence in Intestate Succession

1. Legitimate children
a. Exclude parents, collaterals and State
b. Concur with surviving spouse and illegitimate children
c. Excluded by no one

2. Illegitimate children
a. Exclude illegitimate parents, collaterals and State
b. Concur with surviving spouse, legitimate children, and legitimate
parents
c. Excluded by no one

3. Legitimate parents
a. Exclude collaterals and the State
b. Concur with illegitimate children and surviving spouse
c. Excluded by legitimate children

4. Illegitimate parents
a. Exclude collaterals and State
b. Concur with surviving spouse
c. Excluded by legitimate children and illegitimate children

5. Surviving spouse
a. Excludes collaterals other than brothers, sister, nephews and
nieces, and State
b. Concurs with legitimate children, illegitimate children, legitimate
parents, illegitimate parents, brothers, sisters, nephews and
nieces
c. Excluded by no one

6. Brothers and Sister, nephews and nieces

a. Exclude all other collaterals and the State
 b. Concur with surviving spouse
c. Excluded by legitimate children, illegitimate children, legitimate
parents and illegitimate parents

7. Other collaterals
a. Exclude collaterals in remoter degrees and the State
b. Concur with collaterals in the same degree
c. Excluded by legitimate children, illegitimate children, legitimate
parents, illegitimate parents, surviving spouse, brothers and
sisters, and nephews and nieces

8. State
a. Excludes no one
b. Concurs with no one
c. Excluded by everyone (Balane, 2010)

Ii. Voluntary Heirs

- Those called upon to succeed by virtue of the will of a
person expressed in his last will and testament

There is a voluntary heir because the testator said so. There is a

voluntary heir because there is a will. In other words, the existence
of a voluntary heir depends on the existence of a will.

Iii. Legatees
(782)
- Those called to succeed by operation of law
- which means that a person was given the gift of
personal property in a will

Iv. Devisees
(782)
- a person was given a gift of real property in a will

Devisees and legatees are persons to whom gifts of real and

personal property are respectively given by virtue of a will.

Voluntary - called upon to succeed the disposable free portion

L and D - occupied a preferred status
V - alliquote portion

3b. CAPACITY TO SUCCEED

i. Law and Time applicable to determine capacity
- Arts. 1034, 1039, 16 (2) NCC

Period to determine incapacity: As a general rule, the incapacity of

an heir is determined at the time of death of the decedent since it is
only upon death when rights accrue to the heir.

Final Judgement: In cases of 2, 3 or 5 of Article 1032, there is a

need to wait for final judgement. Pending final judgement, the
properties supposed to be given to the incapacitated heir shall be
placed under administration until such time the conviction becomes
final. When found guilty by final judgement, such share will be
distributed by way of the remedies given by law (substitution,
representation, accretion). In case of acquittal, then the incapacity is
removed and supposed incapacitated heir gets his share in the
estate.

Governing law in incapacity: National law of the decedent shall be

used to determine the validity of the order of succession, the
amount of successional rights, and the capacity to succeed since
capacity is more of an intrinsic requirement than a formal
requirement.

ii. Living
- Arts. 1025, 40, 41, 1024 NCC

Capacity to inherit: Heir, devisee or legatee must either be already

living or at least conceived at the moment of death of the decedent.
In the case of the conceived child, Article 41 of the civil code must
be complied with, that is the fetus is considered born if it is alive at
the time it is completely delivered form the mother’s womb.
However, if the fetus had an intra-uterine life of less than seven
months, it is not deemed born if it dies within 24 hours after its
complete delivery from the maternal womb.

NOTE: This provision has been superseded by Art. 5 of P.D. No. 603 (The
Child and Youth Welfare Code), which declares that the civil personality of
the child shall commence from the time of his conception, for all purposes
favorable to him, subject to the requirements of Art. 41.

Acquisition of personality through birth

GR: Actual/Permanent Personality– Personality begins
at birth, not at conception.

XPN: Presumptive/Temporary – The law considers the

conceived child as born (Conceptus pro natohabetur)
 The provisional personality of a conceived child (conceptus
pro nato habetur) under Article 40, expressly limits such
provisional personality by imposing the condition that the
child should be subsequently born alive: "Provided it be
born later with the condition specified in the following
Article"

“Born later in accordance with law”

A foetus with an intra-uterine life of:
1. Less than 7 months – Must survive for at least 24
hours after its complete delivery from the maternal
womb.
2. At least 7 months – If born alive, it shall be considered
born even if it dies within 24 hours after complete
delivery.
Provisional personality of a conceived child
A conceived child, although as yet unborn, has a limited and
provisional personality. Its personality is provisional
because it depends upon the child being born alive later
Under certain conditions.

Jurist’s views: In case of suspensive conditional institution, the heir

must be capacitated both at the time of the testator’s death and at
the time the condition is fulfilled. This seems to be the better view
since Article 1034 subscribes that the capacity of the heir shall be
reckoned at the time of death of the decedent and in cases of
conditional institutions, capacity at the time of the compliance of
with the condition shall also be considered.

Definition of capacity to succeed: Simply put, “capacity to succeed”

is the sum total of all the qualifications of a person that makes this
person fit to inherit from a particular person. The kinds of incapacity
to succeed are absolute and relative.

Absolute incapacity pertains to those persons who can never inherit

from anybody regardless of circumstances. E.g includes the unborn
person and associations and corporation not authorized by law.

Relative incapacity pertains to those persons who cannot inherit

only from certain persons or certain properties because of possible
undue influence (1027), because of public policy and morality
(1028, 739) and because of unworthiness (1032). Altho
incapacitated persons are incapacitated to enter into contracts or to
make wills or to otherwise dispose of their properties, they are
nevertheless entitled or capacitated to inherit.
iii. Qualified
- Art. 1025 --Incapacity / Disqualification - Art. 1024

Disqualification due to possible Influence - Art. 1027

NCC

Extent of disqualification: The persons enumerated under

this article are disqualified because of the greater likelihood
of undue influence exerted by them on the testator. The
disqualification is only applicable to testamentary succession
since the reason for the law is to prevent undue influence on
the testator in his disposition of properties by will. The
disqualification does not apply to dispositions which do not
extend a testamentary benefit such as the appointment as
an executor or payment of debtors or obligation.

Proof necessary in Article 1027: The disqualification exists

without the necessity of proving actual undue influence since
its exercise is conclusively presumed. Whenever an heir falls
under enumeration in Article 1027, they are conclusively
presumed to have exerted undue influence on the testator.
In contrast, under Article 839, whenever undue influence is
alleged, the burden of proof is imposed upon the person
alleging its existence.

Disqualification not applicable to legitime: The legitime is

given not by virtue of the will but by operation of law.
Therefore, it would be unfair to deprive the compulsory heirs
of their legitimes just because they fall under the persons
disqualified under this article. Article 1027 (4) is similar to the
premise in Article 823 where gifts to persons called by the
testator to act as witnesses to a notarial will are considered
void.

Illustration of extent of disqualification: A testator during his

last illness confessed to a priest who was his only son. In his
will made shortly after the confession, the testator gave his
son-priest P60M out of an estate worth 100M. The remaining
40M was given to a stranger. Applying Article 1027, the
son-priest inherits 50M as his legitime and not the additional
10M which is part of the free portion nullified by the
disqualification. The 10M shall accrue in his favor of the
stranger.

Re priests/ministers and their relatives: The will or his

testamentary disposition must be made shortly after the last
illness indicating its correlation with the possibility of the
exercise of undue influence. Last illness, as used in Article
1027, contemplates the illness of which the testator died
from or the one immediately preceding it. WHat is important
is the fact that such priests and ministers heard the
confession of the testator while contemplating his own
mortality. The disqualification extends to the relatives of such
spiritual persons.

Re guardians: Since the guardian has certain if not

considerable influence, he will always be in a position to
advance his own interests. Final account serves as the
accounting process that terminates the financial
responsibility and authority of the guardian over the ward. By
this, the ONLY time a guardian may inherit is when the
disposition was made after the approval of the “final
accounts” or when the guardian is relative to the testator.

Re attesting witnesses: Article 823 renders the disposition

void in favor of the attesting witness while 1027 renders the
witness incapacitated to inherit. In short 823, refers to the
objects whereas 1027(4) refers to the subject. BUT if there
are at least 3-4 witnesses, such witness can still testify since
possibility of tainted testimony is not anymore present. 823
speaks of qualification/disqualification of witness while 1027
speaks of capacity to succeed.

Re physicians, surgeons: If physician, surgeon or health

officer is a relative of deceased, testamentary disposition is
still valid since relatives are naturally expected to take care
of a person. Take note that relatives of health personnel are
not disqualified to inherit in contrast of priests/ministers.
“Took care” means the physician, nurse, surgeon had
religiously and diligently attended to the medical needs of
deceased in a manner that undue influence may likely have
been present.

Disqualification due to Moral Grounds - Arts. 1028,

739 NCC

Scope of disqualification
These testamentary provisions/donations mortis causa are
considered as void for reasons of public policy

Article 739. The following donations shall be void:

(1) Those made between persons who were guilty of adultery or
concubinage at the time of the donation;
(2) Those made between persons found guilty of the same
 criminal offense, in consideration thereof;
(3) Those made to a public officer or his wife, descendants and
ascendants, by reason of his office.

Adultery and concubinage cases

The action for declaration of nullity may be brought by the
spouse of the donor or donee. The disqualification does not
apply to a person who institutes or gives legacy or a devise
to a live-in partner since the disqualifications enumerated
presuppose an adulterous relationship or one that partakes
of the nature of concubinage. Adultery and Concubinage can
only be committed by a married person. In a live-in
arrangement there can be no A or C. Further, Article 739
includes the term guilty which means may final judgement
na. Jurists say the mere preponderance is needed to
establish such adulterous relationships. The spirit behind
such public policy does not require a criminal finding guilt to
invalidate such dispositions.

Criminal conspiracy
Unlike Article 739(1), the disqualification contemplates a
decision of a criminal offense and the gift was given to a
co-conspirator perhaps share to the loot. To fall within this
disqualification, the heir must be given a bequest by the
testator in consideration for the commission of an offense.

Made to a public officer

Similar to Article 739(1) there is no need for any formal
finding of guilt that the gift was given as a bribe. Evidence of
such giving “by reason of public office” can be stated in the
will either expressly or can inferred from the circumstances
surrounding the execution of the will.

Disqualification due to Unworthiness - Art.

1032-1034 1035-1040;

Disqualification due to Disinheritance Art. 915- 923

Disinheritance is the process or act, thru a testamentary

disposition of depriving in a will any compulsory heir of his legitime
for true and lawful causes.

Purpose:
The purpose of disinheritance is not vengeance BUT
RETRIBUTION inasmuch as there can possibly be no
 feelings of vengeance between parents and children or
between husband and wife at the supreme hour of death.”
The object of disinheritance is to punish the ungrateful, the
culpable, the cruel, the unnatural heir, or an unfaithful
spouse.

Note: No disinheritance in legal succession. Only compulsory heirs

can be disinherited, for they alone are entitled to the legitime.

A disinheritance excludes the heir not only from the legitime but also
from the free portion; in other words, he is completely excluded from
the inheritance.

Requisites for a Valid Disinheritance

(a) Must be made in a valid will. (Art. 916).

(b) Must be made expressly (See Art. 918) (thus,

disinheritance is NOT presumed).

(c) Must be for a LEGAL CAUSE. (Art. 916). (The cause

must be one authorized by law; hence, even if graver than
those set forth in the law, if it be not one of those
enumerated, the disinheritance will be ineffective.) (Art. 918).

(d) Must be for a TRUE CAUSE. (Arts. 917 and 918).

(e) Must be for an EXISTING CAUSE therefore, there can

be no conditional or preventive disinheritance; although the
REVOCATION of a DISINHERITANCE may be conditional.

(f) Must be TOTAL or COMPLETE (not partial).

(g) The cause must be STATED in the WILL itself (Art. 918).

(Although the exact words of the law need not be used nor
details given, nor is it essential that the statement of the fact
of disinheritance and the statement of the cause be made
together in one will or instrument as long as a necessary
connection is proved. Neither is it essential that the
disinheritance be made in the same instrument by which the
testator provides for the disposition of his properties mortis
causa, for the law merely says “a will,” meaning “any will”).
(Merza v. Paras, L-4888, May 25, 1953).
 (h) The heir disinherited must be clearly identified, so that
there will be no doubt as to who is really being disinherited.

(i) The will must not have been revoked — at least insofar
as the disinheritance is concerned.

Burden of Proving the Truth of the Cause for Disinheritance (Art

917)

What should the other heirs of the testator now do?

- They should now prove the truth of the cause for
disinheritance.They may present witnesses or documents to
prove the truth of the cause stated in the will. In turn, the
disinherited heir should be given a chance to rebut whatever
proof had been presented against him. In the end, it is the
Court who should decide as to whether or not the
disinheritance is valid.

Ineffective Disinheritance (Article 918)

This Article treats of three cases when the disinheritance is

considered invalid or ineffective or illegal.
(a) without giving the cause (NO CAUSE STATED)
(b) a cause denied by the heir concerned and not proved
by the instituted heir (NOT TRUE CAUSE)
(c) a cause not given in the law (NOT LEGAL
CAUSE)

“A subsequent reconciliation between the offender and the offended

person deprives the latter of the right to disinherit and renders
ineffectual any disinheritance that may have been made.” (Art. 922,
Civil Code).

Effects of Ineffective Disinheritance

(a) The institution of heirs is annulled but only insofar as it
may prejudice the person disinherited, that is, insofar as the
legitime of said heir is impaired.
(b) The devises, legacies, and other testamentary
dispositions shall be valid to such extent as will not impair
the legitime.

Distinctions Between Preterition and VALID Disinheritance

Preterition VALID Disinheritance

1. the omission may be either 1. disinheritance is always

intentional or unintentional intentional (thus, it is an
 (thus, it is an implied express deprivation)
deprivation)
2. cause must always be stated
2. may be with cause or without in the will; must be true and
cause legal

3. preterition annuls the 3. the disinherited heir inherits

institution; therefore the omitted NOTHING (either by way of
heir inherits legitime, or by way of free
portion)
4. may exist with or without a
will (as when everything has 4. a will is always required
been given to only one of the
compulsory heirs by way of 5. may be VALID — when all
donation inter vivos). the requirements of the law are
followed
5. the institution is always VOID
— except when the preterited
heir predeceases the testator.

Distinction Between Preterition and Imperfect or Ineffective

Disinheritance

Preterition Imperfect Disinheritance

The institution of heirs is The institution remains valid,

completely annulled. but must be reduced insofar as
the legitime has been impaired

Similarities Between Preterition and Imperfect or Ineffective

Disinheritance
(a) In both cases, the omitted heir and the imperfectly
disinherited heir get at least their legitime.
(b) In both cases, the legacies and devises remain valid
insofar as the legitime has not been impaired.
(c) Both refer to compulsory heirs

Causes for the Disinheritance of Children and Descendants

(Article 919)

(a) Paragraph one — “When a child or descendant has been

found guilty of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her
spouse, descendants, or ascendants.”

● there must be intent to kill

 ● If after conviction there is a pardon, disinheritance is also
proper, unless, the pardon be based on the heir’s complete
innocence
● Conviction for “homicide thru reckless imprudence” is not a
ground under par. (1) in view of the absence of intent to kill.

(b) Paragraph 2 — “When a child or descendant has accused

the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment
for six years or more, if the accusation has been found groundless.”

● Notice here that the alleged crime must have been

committed against the child himself or against any
descendant, or for that matter against anybody.
● If the testator has been acquitted on the ground of “lack of
proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt” or “lack of criminal
intent,” this does not necessarily mean that the accusation
was groundless. The testator would not have the right to
disinherit the accusing heir.
● There are three elements involved here:
a) the act of accusing
b) the fact that the accusation has been found
groundless
c) the offense or crime charged carries a penalty of
imprisonment for at least six years

(c) Paragraph 3 — “When a child or descendant has been convicted

of adultery or concubinage with the spouse of the testator.”

● It is essential that there must be a final judgment of

conviction either in the adultery case or in the concubinage
case before this Article can be applied.
● If a son commits adultery with his mother, and is found guilty
thereof by final judgment, may the mother disinherit him on
this ground? NO.
The law does not say so. The causes for disinheritance must
be strictly construed and should not cover cases not clearly
governed by the law.

(d) Paragraph 4 — “When a child or descendant by fraud, violence,

intimidation, or undue influence causes the testator to make a will or
to change one already made.”

● Unless a new will is made, there can be no disinheritance,

because for this to exist, there must be a will where the
disinheritance is made

(e) Paragraph 5 — “A refusal without justifiable cause to support the

parent or ascendant who disinherits such child or descendant.”
 ● No judicial demand is needed for the law does not require
this. (6 Manresa 636). Note that when a judicial
pronouncement is needed, the law says so.
● If there had been a refusal to support, and support is later
given but only because of judicial compulsion, this would still
be a valid ground for disinheritance.

(f) Paragraph 6 — “Maltreatment of the testator by word or deed, by

the child or descendant.”

● This covers two causes:

a) maltreatment by word (slanderous words,
offensive language)
b) maltreatment by deed
● it is not necessary that there should fi rst be a judgment
convicting the child or descendant for either act. (Decision of
Nov. 4, 1904). However, the maltreatment should have been
caused intentionally and not merely thru imprudence.
● If the maltreatment in the form of gross disrespect and
raising of the hand against a grandfather was caused by a
child of tender years (14) and who a little later became
insane, this would not be sufficient cause for disinheritance.
(Pecson v. Mediavillo)

● As long as acts of violence are committed against the

testator, whether physical injuries resulted or not, there
would be a case of maltreatment.

Of course, if there was actually an attempt against the life of

the testator, paragraph 1 of Art. 919 would govern.

Even if there is no conviction for such an attempt, still,

should there be maltreatment by deed, the latter as such
would constitute enough cause for disinheritance.

● Maltreatment by an ascendant of a descendant does not

constitute a ground for the descendant to disinherit the
ascendant, for while it may be an ABUSE, it is generally in
the exercise of a power.

(g) Paragraph 7 — “When a child or descendant leads a

dishonorable or disgraceful life.”

● There need not be a final judgment of conviction. The

essence of the cause is that anything that brings dishonor or
disgrace to the family of the testator merits correction in the
form of disinheritance. However, a single act is not ordinarily
suffi cient, for “leading a life” implies continuity.
(h) Paragraph 8 — “Conviction of a crime which carries with it the
penalty of civil interdiction.”

● This is self-explanatory, but it should be noted that there

must be a final judgment of conviction here. Moreover, under
Arts. 40 and 41 of the Revised Penal Code, civil interdiction
is given as an accessory penalty to:
(1) death (if commuted)
(2) reclusion perpetua
(3) reclusion temporal

(NOTE also that if the Indeterminate Sentence Law is applied, it is

the MAXIMUM that should be considered, not the MINIMUM.).

Causes for the Disinheritance of Parents and Ascendants

(Article 920)

(a) Paragraph 1 — “When the parents have abandoned their

children or induced their daughters to live a corrupt or immoral life
or attempted against their virtue.”

(1) Abandonment includes not merely the exposure of

the child or descendant to danger but also the failure
to give it due care or attention

Abandonment is indeed physical, moral, social or

educational; hence, it does not have the technical
signification of “abandonment” under the Rev. Penal
Code. Moreover, whether intentional or not, the negligent
and careless failure to perform the duties of parenthood is a
signifi cant element of abandonment.

(2) The word “daughters” includes other descendants

(3) When a mother helps a stranger commit rape on

her own daughter, said daughter can disinherit the Mother

(4) When the parents encourage or force their daughters

into a life of prostitution, the daughters concerned have a
valid cause for disinheriting their parents

(5) The “attempt against virtue’’ does not have to be in

a final judgment

(b) Paragraph 2 — “When the parent or ascendant has been

convicted of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her
spouse, descendants or ascendants.”

(1) See comments under par. 1, Art. 919.

 (2) “his or her spouse, descendants, or ascendants”
refers to those of the testator.

(c) Paragraph 3 — “When the parent or ascendant has accused

the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment for
six years or more, if the accusation has been found to be false.”

Of course, if the accusation proves to be true, there

will not be a valid disinheritance

(d) Paragraph 4 — (See par. 2, Art. 919)

(e) Paragraph 5 — (See par. 4, Art. 919)
(f) Paragraph 6 — “The loss of parental authority for causes
specified in this Code.”

(1) The words “for causes specified in this Code” are

misleading.
Under Art. 228 of the Family Code, parental authority ends
when the child has been emancipated. It would be absurd to
consider this loss of parental authority to be a ground for
disinheritance.

(2) Parental authority terminates:

a) upon the death of the parents (Art. 228, id.) or of
the child (Art. 228, id.);
b) upon emancipation;
c) adoption of the child;
d) upon the appointment of a general guardian (Art.
228, id.);
e) upon judicial declaration of abandonment of the
child in a case filed for the purpose (Art. 229, id.);
f) upon final judgment of a competent court divesting
the party concerned of parental authority (Art. 229,
id.);
g) upon judicial declaration of absence or incapacity
of the person exercising parental authority. (Art. 229,

[NOTE: It is evident that par. 6 of Art. 920 of the Civil

Code does not refer to Art. 327.]

(3) The father, and in a proper case the mother, shall

temporarily (merely suspended) lose authority over their
children:
a) when by conviction in a criminal case, the penalty
of civil interdiction is imposed upon him or her. (Art.
230, Family Code).
b) Art. 231 of the Family Code provides other
grounds where suspension of parental authority
may be declared by the court.
 (4) The mother who contracts a subsequent marriage
loses the parental authority over her children, unless
the deceased husband, father of the latter, has expressly
provided in his will that his widow might marry again, and
has ordered that in such case, she should keep and exercise
parental authority over the children. (Art. 328, Civil Code).

(5) The courts may deprive the parents of their authority

or suspend the exercise of the same if they should
treat their children with excessive harshness or should give
them corrupting orders, counsels, or examples, or should
make them beg or abandon them. (Art. 332, Civil Code).

(g) Paragraph 7 — “The refusal to support the children or

descendants without justifiable cause.” (This is self- explanatory.
Please refer to notes under par. 5, Art. 919.)
(h) Paragraph 8 — “An attempt by one of the parents against
the life of the other, unless there has been a reconciliation
between them.”

Causes for the Disinheritance of Spouse (Article 921)

Reconciliation (Article 922)

Reconciliation is the mutual restoration of feelings to the status
quo. It is indeed the resumption of friendly relations.

Characteristics of Reconciliation
(a) Reconciliation needs no special form; therefore it may be
expressed or implied. (Ultimately, this is a judicial question of fact).
There is implied or presumed reconciliation if the parties live again
in the same house.

(b) There is no reconciliation in the following instances:

1) A general pardon usually given at the hour of death to all
who may have, in some way or another, offended the
testator, unless there really be a removal of hurt feelings.
2) A pardon not accepted by the disinherited heir.
3) A pardon which does not specify the heir concerned nor
the act which had been committed.
4) A pardon given by the testator in the very same will
wherein he provides for the disinheritance. Here, there
cannot be said to be a reconciliation, and restoration to the
status quo; there only is a sort of moral force or spiritual
influence which forgives in the name of morality.

Effects of Reconciliation
(a) If no disinheritance has been made yet, no disinheritance
can now be done. (Art. 922).
 (b) Disinheritance already made is rendered INEFFECTUAL;
in other words, it is as if there had been no disinheritance at all. (Art.
922)

Rules In Case the Cause of the Disinheritance is ALSO

a Cause of Unworthiness:

(a) BASIS — There are grounds for disinheritance which are

also causes of incapacity to succeed by reason of
unworthiness. Among them are the abandonment of
children, and the attempt to take the life of the testator, etc.
(Art.1032).

(b) If the cause of unworthiness was made a ground for

disinheritance and there is a reconciliation, Art. 922 will
govern, and NOT Art. 1033. In other words, the mere fact of
reconciliation extinguishes the unworthiness and NO written
document is needed for a condonation.

Reason: A person is rendered unworthy to succeed only

because the law presumes this to be the will of the testator.
This presumed intent certainly cannot prevail over the
express will of a person shown by his act of reconciliation.

(c) If the cause for unworthiness was NOT made the ground
for disinheritance, or there has been no disinheritance at all,
Art. 1033 will apply.
Art. 1033 says: “The causes of unworthiness shall be without
effect if the testator had knowledge thereof at the time he
made the will, or if having known of them subsequently, he
should condone them in writing.”

How Disinheritance is Revoked

Disinheritance is revoked by:

(a) subsequent reconciliation;
(b) the making of a new will making the disinherited heir an
instituted heir.

Representation of disinherited heir (Article 923)

Effects of Alienation by disqualified heir Art. 1038

Prescription of Action Art. 1040

 Article 891-914

Computation

OBJECTIVE
ELEMENTS OF
SUCCESSION