l\epublic of tbe ~btlipptne~

~upreme Court
:$a:nila:

TIDRD DIVISION

NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames:
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution
dated January 23, 2023, which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 220324 - GENER J. BADILLO, Petitioner, v. BANK

OF COMMERCE, Respondent.

After a review of the Petition for Review on Certiorari, 1 including the

assailed Decision,2 dated March 9, 2015, and the Resolution,3 dated August
18, 2015, of the Court of Appeals (CA), in CA-G.R. CV No. 101623, the
Court resolves to partially grant the Petition. The assailed Decision and
Resolution of the CA, together with the September 30, 2013 Decision4 of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaluyong City, Branch 213, in Civil
Case No. MC12-6453, in so far as they ordered the withholding of the
deposit5 subject of this case, are reversed.

In the March 9, 2015 Decision, the CA affirmed with modification the

September 30, 2013 Decision of the RTC, which gave due course to the
Complaint6 for declaratory relier" filed by respondent Bank of Commerce
(BankCom). In the said Decision, the RTC ordered BankCom not to release
the deposit of the late Walter V.K. Lips (Walter), amounting to USD
50,000.00 under Foreign Currency Time Deposit FCD No. 4000598735 and
Account No. 115-51-00269-7 (the deposit), until after the two documents,7
both denominated as Walter's "Last Will and Testament" (the wills), are
probated in a proper court. The CA, however, modified the RTC's Decision
by deleting the award of attorney's fees, appearance fee, and costs of suit.

1
Rollo, pp. I0-61.
2
Id. at 63-70. Penned by Associate Justice Fiorito S. Macalino and concurred in by Associate Justices
Maritlor P. Punzalan Castillo and Zenaida T. Galapate-Laguilles.
Id. at 72-74.
4
CA Rollo, pp. 49-54; Records, pp. 221 -226.
5
Records, p. 9.
6
Id. at 2-8.
7
Id. at 68-69.

- over- (ts;
Resolution -2 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

The August 18, 2015 Resolution of the CA denied Badillo's Motion for
Partial Reconsideration8 of the assailed Decision.

The petitioner Gener J. Badillo (Badillo) argues that the CA erred in

affirming the Decision of the RTC, averring that not all the requisites of a
petition for declaratory relief are present in this case. 9 Badillo further
submits that the CA erred when it sustained the RTC's ruling that Walter's
wills must be probated since they are extrinsically and intrinsically void, and
he, the named heir, has already repudiated all his rights that may emanate
from such deeds. 10 Badillo laments BankCom' s refusal to release Walter's
deposit as he believed that he already submitted all the documents that the
bank had asked him to present. 11 Thus, he faulted the CA for not awarding
him moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney's fees. 12

In its Comment, 13 BankCom prays for the denial of the Petition for
lack of merit. It submits that all of Badillo's factual allegations are self-
serving and unsubstantiated since he was declared in default by the RTC for
his failure to file his Answer on time. Maintaining that the CA committed
no error, it submits that a petition for a declaratory relief was warranted
since Badillo presented two conflicting claims as to who could withdraw
Walter's deposit. It insisted that had it not filed the Petition, it would have
unduly exposed itself to liability. 14

In his Reply, 15 Badillo avers that he has already explained why he

presented two conflicting claims to the subject deposit. He submits that
BankCom's fear of being unnecessarily exposed to liability was misplaced
and misleading, arguing that it was unfounded and highly speculative.
Badillo thus asserts that the Petition for declaratory relief was improper, and
the institution of a probate proceeding unwarranted.

8
CA Rollo, pp. 111-130.
9
Rollo, pp. 34-39.
w Id. at 39-51.
11
Id. at 52-54.
12
Id. at 55-56.
13
Id. at 87-104.
14
Id. at 92-98.
15
Id. at 114-123.

- over-
Resolution -3 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

The Petition is partly meritorious.

The Petition for declaratory reliefwas a

proper remedy

A petition for declaratory relief is an action instituted by a person

interested in a deed, will, contract or other written instrument, executive
order or resolution, to determine any question of construction or validity
arising from the instrument, executive order or regulation, or statute and for
a declaration of his rights and duties thereunder. 16 It must be filed before the
breach or violation of the statute, deed or contract to which it refers;
otherwise, the court can no longer assume jurisdiction over the action. 17
Thus, "[t]he only issue that may be raised in such [an action] is the question
of construction or validity of provisions in an instrument or statute." 18
Corollary is the general rule that such an action must be justified, as no other
adequate relief or remedy is available under the circumstances. 19

Thus, for a petition for declaratory relief to prosper, the following

requisites must be present:

[F[irst, the subject matter of the controversy must be a deed, will,

contract or other written instrument, statute, executive order or regulation,
or ordinance; second, the terms of said documents and the validity thereof
are doubtful and require judicial construction; third[,] there must have
been no breach of the documents in question; fourth , there must be an
actual justiciable controversy or the "ripening seeds" of one between
persons whose interests are adverse; fifth , the issue must be ripe for
judicial determination; and sixth, adequate relief is not available through
other means or other forms of action or proceeding. 20

16
Commission on Audit v. Pampilo, Jr., G.R. Nos. 188760, 189060 & 189333, June 30, 2020, citing
Section I, Rule 63 of the Rules of Court which reads:

Section I. Who may file petition. - Any person interested under a deed, will, contract or other written
instrument, or whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any
other governmental regulation may, before breach or violation thereof, bring an action in the appropriate
Regional Trial Court to determine any question of construction or validity arising, and for a declaration
of his rights or duties, thereunder.

An action for the reformation of an instrument, to quiet title to real property or remove clouds
therefrom, or to consolidate ownership under Article 1607 of the Civil Code, may be brought under this
Rule.
17
Id., citing Tambunting, Jr. v. Sps. Sumabat, 507 Phil. 94, 98-99 (2005).
18
Id. , citing Monetary Board v. Philippine Veterans Bank, 75 1 Phil. 176, 182(20 15).
19
Almeda v. Bathala Marketing Industries, Inc., G.R. No. 150806, 566 Phil. 458 (2008), citing Atlas
Consolidated Mining & Development Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 54305, 26 1 Phil. 283
( 1990).
20
Barrio Balagbag of Pasay City Neighborhood Association, Inc. v. Office of the President, G.R. No.
230204, August 19, 20 19, citing Republic v. Roque, 7 18 Phil. 294, 304(201 3). Emphasis not ours.

- over- (ts-)
Resolution -4 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

The Court agrees with the CA that all the requisites of an action for
declaratory relief have been established in the present case. The existence of
the first requisite is indisputable since the subject matter of the case is a will
and deed. Particularly, Bank.Com submitted for clarification, first, Walter's
wills, and second, the Declaration of Heirship Self-Adjudication of Estate of
Deceased Person21 (Declaration of Heirship) executed by Badillo on behalf
of Tanja Andrea Yvonne Carla Lips (Tanja), Walter's daughter who is
based in Belgium.

The second requisite, i.e., the terms of said documents and the validity
thereof are doubtful and require judicial construction, is likewise present
considering that the documents presented showed two conflicting claims as
to who should have the right to withdraw the proceeds of Walter's deposits.
Walter's will named Badillo as his sole heir who was entitled to the deposit.
However, the Declaration of Heirship states that Tanja was the only child
and the sole heir of Walter.

As for the third requisite, there is no question that there has been no
breach of all the documents in question.

The fourth requisite requires that there must be an actual justiciable

controversy or "the ripening of seeds" of one between persons whose
interests are adverse, and the fifth requisite demands that the issue must
already be ripe for judicial determination. Barrio Balagbag of Pasay City
Neighborhood Association, Inc. v. Office ofthe President22 explains:

There is a justiciable controversy where there is an actual

controversy, or the ripening seeds of one exists between the parties, all of
whom are sui Juris and before the court, and that the declaration sought
will help in ending the controversy. Pertinently, a justiciable controversy
refers to an existing case or controversy that is appropriate or ripe for
judicial determination, not one that is conjectural or merely anticipatory.
Indeed, a question becomes justiciable when it is translated into a claim of
right which is actually contested. A question is ripe for adjudication when
the act being challenged has had a direct adverse effect on the individual
challenging it.

Corollary thereto, by ' ripening seeds' it is meant, not that sufficient

accrued facts may be dispensed with, but that a dispute may be tried at its
inception before it has accumulated the asperity, distemper, animosity,
passion, and violence of a full blown battle that looms ahead. The concept
describes a state of facts indicating imminent and inevitable litigation

21
Records, p. 20.
22
G.R. No. 230204, August 19, 2019.

- over-
Resolution -5 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

provided that the issue 1s not settled and stabilized by tranquilizing

declaration. 23

Here, there exists a justiciable controversy between BankCom and

Badillo, prompted by the latter' s submission of Walter's wills and the
Declaration of Heirship, among other documents. Considering that Walter
has already died, and his deposit with BankCom may already be withdrawn,
the issue as to whether Badillo may withdraw such deposit is already ripe for
judicial determination. His right to do so was both confusing and contested
as he first presented and asserted himself as the sole heir of Walter, and
when unsuccessful, returned and claimed to be acting on behalf of Tanja. In
other words, there is a justiciable issue, i.e., who has the right to withdraw
the deposit of Walter, that already needs to be resolved.

As for the sixth requisite, BankCom was left without adequate relief
through other means or other fo1ms of action or proceeding considering that
it was confronted with documents which call for the performance of
conflicting obligations.

Thus, the RTC and the CA did not err in giving due course to the
petition for declaratory relief filed by BankCom.

The CA erred in affirming the ruling of

the RTC which ordered the withholding
of Walter 's deposits

Nevertheless, the Court finds that the CA erred when it affirmed the
ruling of the RTC ordering BankCom not to release the proceeds of Walter's
deposit before his wills are probated by a proper court.

Badillo avers that although Walter was a Belgian National, the

Belgian laws relevant to the probate of a will were neither pleaded nor
proved during trial. Thus, in accordance with the doctrine of processual
presumption, the Philippine laws on succession would govern Walter's
wills.24

Badillo further submits that to have Walter's wills probated was

unnecessary and futile because the documents do not contain an attestation
clause and acknowledgments, both of which are required by the Civil Code

23
Id. Citations omitted.
24
Rollo, pp. 39-42.

- over- (ti
Resolution -6 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

of the Philippines (Civil Code). 25 Badillo argues that even assuming for the
sake of argument that the wills were validly executed, a probate would still
be pointless because he, the sole heir named therein, already repudiated
through a public instrument any right he would have been entitled to under
the said deeds. 26

Badillo's submissions are well taken. Kucskar v. Sekito, Jr.27

illumines:

A will may either be holographic or notarial. A person may

execute a holographic will which must be entirely written, dated, and
signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is subject to no other form,
and may be made in, or out of the Philippines, and need not be witnessed.
In contrast, a notarial will must comply with solemnities including
attestation, subscription and acknowledgment. The attestation refers
to the act of three or more witnesses themselves who certify to the
execution of the will before them, and to the manner of its execution.
The acknowledgment is the act of the one who executed the will in
going to a competent officer and declaring that the will is [his/her] act
or deed. The subscribing or attesting witnesses are likewise required
to acknowledge the will before the notary public. These requirements
are indispensable for the validity of the will. Apropos are Art. 805 and
Art. 806 of the Civil Code, to wit:

ART. 805. Every will, other than a holographic will,

must be subscribed at the end thereof by the testator
himself or by the testator's name written by some other
person in his presence, and by his express direction, and
attested and subscribed by three or more credible witnesses
in the presence of the testator and of one another.

The testator or the person requested by him to write

his name and the instrumental witnesses of the will, shall
also sign, as aforesaid, each and every page thereof, except
the last, on the left margin, and all the pages shall be
numbered correlatively in letters placed on the upper part
of each page.

The attestation shall state the number of pages used

upon which the will is written, and the fact that the testator
signed the will and every page thereof, or caused some
other person to write his name, under his express direction,
in the presence of the instrumental witnesses, and that the
latter witnessed and signed the will and all the pages
thereof in the presence of the testator and of one another.

25 Id. at 39-41.
26
Id. at 47-51.
27
G.R. No. 237449, December 2, 2020.

- over-
Resolution -7 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

If the attestation clause is in a language not known

to the witnesses, it shall be interpreted to them.

ART. 806. Every will must be acknowledged before

a notary public by the testator and the witnesses. The
notary public shall not be required to retain a copy of the
will, or file another with the office of the Clerk of Court. 28

Since Walter's wills are not handwritten, dated, and signed by him,
they cannot be considered holographic wills. They should thus be
considered as notarial wills. As such, they must comply with the provisions
of Articles 805 and 806 of the Civil Code.

For convenience, Walter's wills are reproduced below m their

entirety:

LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT

The undersigned, Mr. Walter Victor Kamiel LIPS, Belgian National with
Passport No. EE 124796, in sound mind hereby bequests in case of my
demise the proceeds of ale # 115-51-000043-1 held with BANK OF
COMMERCE, Baguio City Branch, Philippines in favour of Mr. GENER
J. BADILLO, Filipino National, Passport No. KK914290 with permanent
address at Brgy. San Guillermo, San Marcelino, Zambales, recognized as
my sole heir.

Done at Baguio City 2600 / Philippines

This Friday, February 9, 2007

Signed and certified by myself

[Sgd.] [Sgd.]
Walter Victor Kamiel LIPS Gener J. BADILLO

Witnessed by:

[Sgd.]
CECILIA L. NUESTRO

[Sgd.]
IVY KRISTINE YAP

[Sgd.]
GERARDO M. SUNGA

28
Id. Citation omitted; emphasis and underscoring supplied.

-over- ~)
Resolution -8 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME

THIS 12th DAY OF June 2007 AT
BAGUIO CITY, PHILIPPINES
REYNALDO B. CAJUCOM
NOTARY PUBLIC
UNTIL DECEMBER 31 , 2008
PTR NO. 1645024, 1/10/07, B.C.
IBP NO 665953, 1/10/07, B.C.
ROLL NO 31550, 5/5/82
DOC.NO 298
PAGE NO 59
BOOK NO XXXI
SERIES OF 200729

LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT

The undersigned, Mr. LIPS, Walter V. K., Belgian National with

Passport No. EE 124796, in sound mind hereby personally know Mr.
Gener J. Badillo, Filipino National with Passport # KK.914290 with
permanent residence at Brgy. San Guillermo, San Marcelino, Zambales
and currently living and working for me as a Personal Assistant since
January 1998 at No. 2 Dahlia Street, St. Joseph Village, Navy Base, 2600
Baguio City/Philippines.

That in case of my demise, as per my explicit wish and instruction

to Mr. Gener J. Badillo, he will be solely responsible and have full
authority at the time of my interment by way of cremation.

Moreover, Mr. Gener J. Badillo will have ALL the rights to take
full authority in any of my personal and business transaction(s) on my
behalf after my demise.

This Last Will and Testament was initiated for whatever purpose it
may serve.

Done at Baguio City 2600 I Philippines

This Friday, February 9, 2007

Signed and certified by myself

[Sgd.] [Sgd.]
LIPS, Walter V. K. Gener J. BADILLO

Witnessed by:

[Sgd.] [Sgd.]
CECILIA L. NUESTRO GERARDO M. SUNGA

29
Records, p. 68. Emphasis and underscoring not ours.

- over- (~
Resolution -9 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

[Sgd.]
IVY KRISTINE YAP

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME

THIS 13 th DAY OF June 2007 AT
BAGUIO CITY, PHILIPPINES
REYNALDO B. CAJUCOM
NOTARY PUBLIC
UNTIL DECEMBER 31 , 2008
PTR NO. 1889699, 1/2/07, B.C.
IBP NO 693016, 1/10/07, B.C.
ROLL NO 31550, 5/5/82
DOC. NO 301
PAGE NO 61
BOOK NO XXVI
SERIES OF 200730

It is immediately clear that both wills failed to comply with Articles

805 and 806 of the Civil Code as they have neither attestation clauses nor
acknowledgments. Thus, Walter's wills are extrinsically invalid.

This Court in Azuela v. Court ofAppeals31 declared that a will without

an attestation clause and an acknowledgment is fatally defective:

A will whose attestation clause does not contain the number of

pages on which the will is written is fatally defective. A will whose
attestation clause is not signed by the instrumental witnesses is fatally
defective. And perhaps most importantly, a will which does not
contain an acknowledgment, but a mere jurat, is fatally defective. Any
one of these defects is sufficient to deny probate. A notarial will with
all three defects is just aching for judicial rejection.

XXX

Yet even if we consider what was affixed by the notary public as a

jurat, the will would nonetheless remain invalid, as the express
requirement of Article 806 is that the will be "acknowledged", and not
merely subscribed and sworn to. The will does not present any textual
proof, much less one under oath, that the decedent and the instrumental
witnesses executed or signed the will as their own free act or deed. The
acknowledgment made in a will provides for another all-important legal
safeguard against spurious wills or those made beyond the free consent of
the testator. An acknowledgement is not an empty meaningless act. The
acknowledgment coerces the testator and the instrumental witnesses to
declare before an officer of the law that they had executed and subscribed
to the will as their own free act or deed. Such declaration is under oath and
under pain of perjury, thus allowing for the criminal prosecution of

30
Id. at 69. Emphasis and underscoring not ours.
31
G.R. No. 122880, 521 Phil. 263 (2006).

- over- (-t
Resolution -10 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

persons who participate in the execution of spurious wills, or those

executed without the free consent of the testator. It also provides a further
degree of assurance that the testator is of certain mindset in making the
testamentary dispositions to those persons he/she had designated in the
will.

It may not have been said before, but we can asse11 the rule, self-
evident as it is under Article 806. A notarial will that is not
acknowledged before a notary public by the testator and the witnesses
is fatally defective, even if it is subscribed and sworn to before a
notary public.32

Furthermore, Caneda v. Court of Appeals33 explains the purpose of

the attestation clause and outrightly states that a will without one would
result in its invalidity:

An attestation clause refers to that part of an ordinary will

whereby the attesting witnesses certify that the instrument has been
executed before them and to the manner of the execution of the same. It is
a separate memorandum or record of the facts surrounding the conduct of
execution and once signed by the witnesses, it gives affirmation to the fact
that compliance with the essential formalities required by law has been
observed. It is made for the purpose of preserving in a permanent form a
record of the facts that attended the execution of a particular will, so that
in case of failure of the memory of the attesting witnesses, or other
casualty, such facts may still be proved.

Under the third paragraph of Article 805, such a clause, the

complete lack of which would result in the invalidity of the will, should
state (1) the number of pages used upon which the will is written; (2) that
the testator signed, or expressly caused another to sign, the will and every
page thereof in the presence of the attesting witnesses; and (3) that the
attesting witnesses witnessed the signing by the testator of the will and all
its pages, and that said witnesses also signed the will and every page
thereof in the presence of the testator and of one another. 34

Considering the foregoing, it cannot be disputed that submitting

Walter's wills to probate would only merit an outright dismissal. Thus,
Badillo correctly postulated that such a proceeding would be futile and a
waste of time and effort not only for the parties, but for the courts as well.

32
Id Emphasis not ours; underscoring supplied.
33
G.R. No. I 03554, 294 Phil. 80 I ( 1993).
34
Id. Citations omitted; italics removed; emphasis and underscoring supplied.

- over-
r
(285)
Resolution -11 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

However, even assuming for the sake of argument that Walter's wills
were executed in accordance with the Civil Code, the same would still be
dismissed outright if submitted to probate because Tanja was excluded as an
heir. The ruling in Morales v. Olondriz35 is instructive:

Preterition consists in the omission of a compulsory heir from the

will, either because he is not named or, although he is named as a father,
son, etc., he is neither instituted as an heir nor assigned any part of the
estate without expressly being disinherited - tacitly depriving the heir of
his legitime. Preterition requires that the omission is total, meaning the
heir did not also receive any legacies, devises, or advances on his legitime.

In other words, preterition is the complete and total omission of a

compulsory heir from the testator's inheritance without the heir' s express
disinheritance.

Article 854 of the Civil Code states the legal effects of preterition:

Art. 854. The preterition or omission of one, some,

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

If the omitted compulsory heirs should die before

the testator, the institution shall be effectual, without
prejudice to the right of representation.

Under the Civil Code, the preterition of a compulsory heir in the

direct line shall annul the institution of heirs, but the devises and legacies
shall remain valid insofar as the legitimes are not impaired. Consequently,
if a will does not institute any devisees or legatees, the preterition of a
compulsory heir in the direct line will result in total intestacy.36

Here, Tanja, Walter's compulsory heir in the direct line, was left out
in his wills. Arguably, Walter's estate in Belgium may have passed on to
her. The records of the case, however, contain no evidence that Walter had
any other property. In addition, his wills not only bequeathed all his deposit
at BankCom to Badillo, they also named him as his sole heir "who will have
ALL the rights to take full authority in any of [Walter's] personal and
business transactions on [his] behalf after [his] demise. " 37 Thus, based on the
available records, Tanja was completely deprived of her legitime. This
preterition results in total intestacy.

35
G .R. No. 198994, 780 Phil. 317 (2016).
36
Id. Citations omitted; emphasis, italics and underscoring not ours.
37
Records, p. 69.

- over- (ts;
Resolution - 12 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

Morales v. Olondriz3 8 concludes:

The decedent's will does not contain specific legacies or devices

and Francisco's preterition annulled the institution of heirs. The
annulment effectively caused the total abrogation of the will, resulting
in total intestacy of the inheritance. The decedent's will, no matter
how valid it may appear extrinsically, is null and void. The conduct of
separate proceedings to determine the intrinsic validity of its
testamentary provisions would be superfluous. Thus, we cannot
attribute error - much less grave abuse of discretion - on the RTC for
ordering the case to proceed intestate. 39

So must the Court rule in this case. Not only are Walter's wills
extrinsically invalid, they are also intrinsically void. Submitting them to
probate proceedings would be superfluous.

The ruling of this Court in Nuguid v. Nuguid, 40 as cited in Acain v.

Intermediate Appellate Court41 is worth reiterating:

Special Proceedings No. 591-CEB is for the probate of a will. As

stated by respondent Court, the general rule is that the probate court's
authority is limited only to the extrinsic validity of the will, the due
execution thereof, the testator's testamentary capacity and the compliance
with the requisites or solemnities prescribed by law. The intrinsic validity
of the will normally comes only after the Court has declared that the will
has been duly authenticated. Said court at this stage of the proceedings is
not called upon to rule on the intrinsic validity or efficacy of the
provisions of the will x x x.

The rule, however, is not inflexible and absolute. Under

exceptional circumstances, the probate court is not powerless to do what
the situation constrains it to do and pass upon certain provisions of the will
x x x. In Nuguid v. Nuguid the oppositors to the probate moved to
dismiss on the ground of absolute preterition. The probate court
acting on the motion held that the will in question was a complete
nullity and dismissed the petition without costs. On appeal the
Supreme Court upheld the decision of the probate court, induced by
practical considerations. The Court said:

"We pause to reflect. If the case were to be

remanded for probate of the will, nothing will be
gained. On the contrary, this litigation will be
protracted. And for aught that appears in the record, in the
event of probate or if the court rejects the will, probability
exists that the case will come up once again before us on

38
Supra note 35.
39
Id. Citations omitted; emphasis supp lied.
4
o G.R. No. L-23445, 123 Phil. 1305 (1966).
41
G.R. No. 72706, 239 Phil. 96 ( 1987).

- over-
Resolution - 13 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

the same issue of the intrinsic validity or nullity of the will.

Result: waste of time, effort, expense, plus added
anxiety. These are the practical considerations that induce
us to a belief that we might as well meet head-on the issue
of the validity of the provisions of the will in question.
After all there exists a justiciable controversy crying for
solution."

In Saguimsim v. Lindayag (6 SCRA 874 [1962]) the motion to

dismiss the petition by the surviving spouse was grounded on petitioner's
lack of legal capacity to institute the proceedings which was fully
substantiated by the evidence during the hearing held in connection with
said motion. The Court upheld the probate court's order of dismissal.

In Cayetano v. Leonidas, supra one of the issues raised in the

motion to dismiss the petition deals with the validity of the provisions of
the will. Respondent Judge allowed the probate of the will. The Court
held that as on its face the will appeared to have preterited the
petitioner the respondent judge should have denied its probate
outright. Where circumstances demand that intrinsic validity of
testamentary provisions be passed upon even before the extrinsic validity
of the will is resolved, the probate court should meet the issue.xx x. 42

In addition to the foregoing, the Court finds merit in Badillo' s

argument that submitting Walter's wills to probate would be pointless even
if the same have been executed in compliance with the Civil Code because
he, the named heir, has already clarified that Walter did not actually intend
to institute him as an heir, but only as a facilitator of the settlement of his
estate. Moreover, he already waived all his rights to whatever claim he may
have under the wills. These are clear from his Deed of Release and
Quitclaim with Undertaking where he attested:

4. The two (2) documents although denominated as "Last Will and

Testament" is (sic) in fact not a last will and testament of Mr. Lips as it
lacks the formalities required by law and that he never intended to
designate me to personally inherit from him but only to facilitate the
transfer of his personal assets to his daughter and sole heir.

5. I hereby declare that I am not entitled to inherit from Mr.

Walter V.K. Lips as his intention was to designate me only as
administrator of his properties after his demise for the purpose of
delivering the same to his lawful heir.

XXX

10. I hereby declare that I do not have any right to which I

may be entitled under existing laws, as well as any and all claims of

42
Id. Citations omitted.

~
- over- (285)
Resolution - 14 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

whatever kind and nature which I have or may have by virtue of the
documents executed by the late. Mr. Walter V.K. Lips and designated
as "Last Will and Testament" and further declare that I will not institute
any court action, whether civil, administrative and or (sic) criminal arising
from the said documents against the BANK OF COMMERCE, its
successors-in-interest, members, trustees, directors, officers, employees,
agents and representatives. 43

Considering that Badillo acknowledged this deed before a notary

public, he has for all intents and purposes effectively repudiated his
supposed inheritance from Walter. As he appropriately submits, the Civil
Code provides:

ARTICLE 1051. The repudiation of an inheritance shall be

made in a public or authentic instrument, or by petition presented to the
court having jurisdiction over the testamentary or intestate proceedings.44

For this reason, the Court finds that the CA erred when it affirmed the
order of the RTC to withhold Walter's deposits in BankCom until his wills
are probated. As the wills are extrinsically and intrinsically invalid,
submitting them for probate would only be superfluous, and as previously
stated, a waste of time for the parties and the courts.

In deposits of money, a bank is considered as the debtor while the

depositor is the creditor.45 Since their contract is governed by the provisions
of the Civil Code on simple loan or mutuum,46 the deposit must be paid upon
demand by the depositor. 47 Here, considering that numerous demands have
already been made by Badillo, who was acting as attorney-in-fact of Tanja,
the daughter of Walter, there is not any more reason for BankCom to
withhold the latter's deposits. BankCom is thus ordered to release the
deposits of Walter to Badillo, with legal interest at the rate of six percent
(6%) per annum, from the finality of this Resolution until fully paid.

Badillo is not entitled to the award of

damages and attorney 's fees

Badillo imputes bad faith on the part ofBankCom, alleging that it was
the bank that advised and encouraged Walter to execute a will for a more

43
Records, pp. I07-108. Emphasis and underscoring supplied.
44
Rollo, p. 50. Emphasis and underscoring supplied by Badillo.
45
East West Banking Corp. v. Cruz, G.R. No. 22 1641 , July 12, 202 1.
46
Id. Citations omitted.
47
Id. Citations omitted.

- over-
Resolution - 15 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

efficient release of the deposit. BankCom, however, eventually refused to

honor Walter's wills. 48 Thus, Badillo faults the CA for not awarding him
moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney' s fees. He avers that
BankCom caused him mental anguish and serious anxiety when it refused to
release Walter's deposit, thereby causing him to fail in accomplishing the
decedent' s wishes.49

Moral damages are recoverable only if the party from whom it is

claimed has acted fraudulently or in bad faith or in wanton disregard of his
contractual obligations.50 On the other hand, Article 2229 in relation to
Article 2232 of the Civil Code, provides that exemplary damages may be
awarded in addition to moral damages and if the defendant acted m a
wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner. 51

The Court is not inclined to award Badillo moral and exemplary

damages because the delay of the release of Walter's deposit cannot be
entirely imputed against BankCom. The issues in this case emanated from
the fact that Badillo himself presented Walter' s wills to BankCom to claim
his deposits. Although he later clarified that he was not really an heir, he
nevertheless executed a notarized Affidavit of Self Adjudication52 and
asserted that he was Walter' s sole heir. In other words, Badillo himself
brought about his own mental anguish and serious anxiety.

The Court cannot give credence to Badillo's imputation of bad faith

on the part of BankCom as his allegation that it was the bank that advised
Walter to execute a will and later not recognized it, was uncorroborated by
substantial evidence. Even assuming that BankCom had told Walter to
execute a will, there is no showing that it told him to name Badillo as the
sole heir to the exclusion of his daughter. Thus, there is no reason to award
Badillo moral and exemplary damages.

For the same reasons discussed above, the award of attorney's fees is
unwarranted. In the first place, there would have been no case had Badillo
not initially represented, and then asserted, that he was the sole heir of
Walter.

48
Rollo, pp. 52-54.
49
Id. at 55-56.
50
Reyes v. Jebsens Maritime, inc., G.R. No. 230502, February 15, 2022, citation omitted.
51 i d.
52
Rollo, p. 18.

- over-
Resolution - 16 - G.R. No. 220324
January 23, 2023

In fine, the CA did not err in affirming the ruling of the RTC which
gave due course to BankCom 's petition for declaratory relief. However, it
committed a reversible error when it affirmed the RTC's order not to release
the deposit of Walter.
WHEREFORE, the Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by
petitioner Gener J. Badillo is PARTLY GRANTED. The Decision, dated
March 9, 2015, and the Resolution, dated August 18, 2015, of the Comt of
Appeals, in CA-G.R. CV No. 101623, in so far as they affinned the order of
the Regional Trial Court of Mandaluyong City, Branch 213 , in Civil Case
No. MC12-6453, to withhold the deposit of Walter V.K. Lips, are
REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The respondent Bank of Commerce is
ORDERED to release such deposit to Gener J. Badillo with legal interest at
the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this Resolution
until fully paid.
SO ORDERED."
By authority of the Court:

MISAEL DOMINGO C. BATTUNG III

Division Clerk of Court

By:

De11 .ty Division Clerk of Courto#,.

.,.. ,u

Atty. Stephanie Joy Rolusta The Presiding Judge

Counsel for Petitioner REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
MANAOIS & NAVARRO LAW OFFICES Branch 213, Mandaluyong City
Room 3, 2/F BBCCC Building, Cooperative (Civil Case No. MC I2-6453)
St. cor. Assumption Road
2600 Baguio City PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Research Publications and Linkages Office
COURT OF APPEALS Supreme Court, Manila
CA G.R. CY No. 101623 [research _phi lja@yahoo.com]
1000 Manila
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
CORPUZ EJERCITO MACASAET RIVERA & Supreme Court, Manila
CORPUZ [For uploading pursuant to A.M. 12-7-1-SC]
Counsel for Respondent
16/F, Unit 1602, The Centerpoint Bldg. LIBRARY SERV ICES
Dona Julia Vargas Avenue Supreme Court, Manila
Ortigas Center, 1605 Pasig City
Judgment Division
JUDICIAL RECORDS OFFICE
Supreme Court, Manila

G.R. No. 220324 (285)

URES