CHAPTER 3

RULE 91- ESCHEAT

AEJAY V. BARIAS
PHILIPPINE CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF LAW
WHAT IS ESCHEAT?
Escheat is a proceeding whereby the
real and personal property of a
deceased person in the Philippines,
become the property of the state
upon his death, without leaving any
will or legal heirs.
NATURE OF ESCHEAT PROCEEDINGS
 Escheat is not an ordinary civil action but a special
proceeding that should be commenced not by complaint
but by petition.
 It is an incident or attribute of sovereignty and rests on the
principle of the ultimate ownership by the state of all
property within its jurisdiction. It is a substantial right of
the state and is not a claim based on charity, gratuity or
unearned benefit.
 RULE 91
SECTION
RULE 91 1. When and by whom petition
filed. — When a person dies intestate; seized of
real or personal property in the Philippines,
leaving no heir or person by law entitled to the
same, the Solicitor General or his representative
in behalf of the Republic of the Philippines, may
file a petition in the Regional Trial Court of the
province where the deceased last resided or in
which he had estate, if he resided out of the
Philippines, setting forth the facts, and praying
that the estate of the deceased be declared
escheated.
WHEN PETITION FOR ESCHEAT MAY BE FILED

The petition for escheat may be filed when a person

dies intestate, seized of real or personal property in
the Philippines, leaving no heir or person by law
entitled to the same. The petition should set forth
the facts and should pray that the estate of the
decedent be escheated.
PARTIES IN A PETITION FOR ESCHEAT
 An escheat proceeding under this Rule must be initiated by the Government
through the Solicitor General. All interested parties, especially the actual
occupants and the adjacent lot owners shall be personally notified of the
proceeding and given the opportunity to present their valid claims; otherwise, it
will be reverted to the State.
 Any person alleging to have a direct right or interest in the property
sought to be escheated, likewise an interested and necessary party, may properly
oppose the petition for escheat or file claim thereto with the court within the
period provided for in Section 4 of this Rule.5
 Under Section 3, Act No. 3936 or the law on forfeiture of dormant bank deposits, a
depository bank should be joined as a respondent in an action for escheat since a
decree of escheat would necessarily deprive it of the use of such deposits.
COURTS WITH JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN A
PETITION FOR ESCHEAT

Under the Rule, a petition for escheat may be filed

with the Regional Trial Court of the province where
the deceased last resided or in which he had estate,
if he was a non-resident
REQUISITES FOR THE FILING OF A PETITION FOR
ESCHEAT

In order that a proceeding for escheat may prosper, the

following requisites must be present:
(1)that a person died intestate;
(2)that he left no heirs or persons by law entitled to the
same; and
(3)that the deceased left properties
PROCEEDINGS IN ESCHEAT CANNOT BE CONVERTED INTO
SETTLEMENT OF THE ESTATE
Once the court acquires jurisdiction to hear the petition for
escheat by virtue of the publication of the petition for
escheat, this jurisdiction cannot be converted into one for
the distribution of the properties of the decedents. For the
distribution of the estate of the decedents to be instituted,
the proper petitions must be presented and the proceedings
should comply with the requirements of the Rule. Hence, an
escheat court does not have the power to order or proceed
with, the distribution of the estate of a decedent in escheat
proceedings and adjudicate the properties to the oppositors
 RULE 91
RULE 91 2. Order for Hearing. — If the petition is
SEC.
sufficient in form and substance, the court, by
an order reciting the purpose of the petition,
shall fix a date and place for the hearing
thereof, which date shall not be more than six
(6) months after the entry of the order, and shall
direct that a copy of the order be published
before the hearing at least once a week for six
(6) consecutive weeks in some newspaper of
general circulation published in the province, as
the court shall deem best.
REMEDY OF RESPONDENT AGAINST A PETITION FOR
ESCHEAT
When a petition for escheat does not state facts which entitle the petitioner to the
remedy prayed for, and even admitting them hypothetically, it is clear that there is no
ground for the court to proceed to the inquisition provided by law, an interested party
should not be disallowed from filing a motion to dismiss the petition which is untenable
from all standpoints. And when the motion to dismiss is entertained upon this ground,
the petition may be dismissed unconditionally and the petitioner is not entitled to be
afforded an opportunity to amend his petition.
While the Rules of Court provisions relative to escheat of properties do not in fact
authorize the filing of a motion to dismiss the petition presented for that purpose, and
the Rules permitting the interposition of a motion to dismiss to the complaint and
answer, respectively, are not applicable to special proceedings, nevertheless, there is
no reason of a procedural nature which prevents the filing of a motion to dismiss based
upon any of the grounds provided for by law for a motion to dismiss the complaint. In
such a case, the motion to dismiss plays the role of a demurrer and the court should
resolve the legal questions raised therein.
 RULE 91
RULE 91
SEC. 3. Hearing and Judgment. — Upon the satisfactory proof in open
court on the date fixed in the order that such order has been published as directed
and that the person died intestate, seized of real or personal property in the
Philippines, leaving no heir or person entitled to the same, and no sufficient cause
being shown to the contrary, the court shall adjudicate that the estate of the
deceased in the Philippines, after the payment of just debts and charges, shall
escheat; and shall, pursuant to law, assign the personal estate to the municipality or
city where he last resided in the Philippines, and the real estate to the municipalities
or cities, respectively, in which the same is situated. If the deceased never resided
in the Philippines, the whole estate may be assigned to the respective municipalities
or cities where the same is located. Such estate shall be for the benefit of public
schools, and public charitable institutions and centers in said municipalities or cities.
The court, at the instance of an interested party, or on its own motion, may order
the establishment of a permanent trust, so that only the income from the property
shall be used.
CONCLUSIVENESS OF JUDGMENT OF ESCHEAT

In the case of Hamilton v. Brown,1 a judgment of

escheat was held conclusive upon persons notified
by advertisement to all persons interested. Absolute
lack on the part of petitioners of any dishonest
intent to deprive the appellee of any right, or in any
way injure him, constitutes due process of law,
proper notice having been observed
EVIDENCE REQUIRED IN ESCHEAT PROCEEDINGS

Escheats and forfeitures are not favored by law, and the modern
rule under statutes regulating escheat proceedings is that the
burden of proof rests on the state to prove that the
property in question is in all respects liable to escheat. The
state must recover if at all, on the strength of its own title and
not on the weakness of the other claimants. The burden
includes proof not only that the deceased died intestate without
heirs but also that he died seized of the property in question
WAIVER OF ESCHEAT

The right to escheat may be waived, either

expressly or impliedly. Thus where the right to
escheat claimed by a municipality has existed long
prior to the registration proceedings instituted by
the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila and the
same has not been asserted in said proceedings, it
is deemed to have been completely waived
 RULE 91
RULE 91
SEC. 4. When and by whom claim to estate
filed. — If a devisee, legatee, heir, widow, widower
or other person entitled to such estate appears and
files a claim thereto with the court within five (5)
years from the date of such judgment, such person
shall have possession of and title to the same, or if
sold, the municipality or city shall be accountable to
him for the proceeds, after deducting reasonable
charges for the care of the estate but a claim not
made within said time shall forever be barred.
PERIOD FOR FILING CLAIM

If a person legally entitled to the estate of the

decedent appears, he should file a claim with the
court within five (5) years from the date the property
was delivered to the state. Otherwise, the claim
shall be forever barred.
EFFECT OF LACK OF JURISDICTION OF THE ESCHEAT
COURT
In the absence of jurisdiction to order an
escheat due to noncompliance with
jurisdictional requirements provided under the
Rules of Court, the court has no jurisdiction to
grant the remedy enabling the devisee,
legatee, heir, widow, widower or other person
entitled to the estate to appear within a
specific period from the date of the decree of
escheat and file a claim to the estate.
RULE 91 91
RULE
SEC. 5. Other actions for escheat. — Until
otherwise provided by law, actions for
reversion or escheat of properties alienated in
violation of the Constitution or of any statute
shall be governed by this rule, except that the
action shall be instituted in the province where
the land lies in whole or in part.
ESCHEAT AND REVERSION DISTINGUISHED

An action for reversion is slightly different from an

escheat proceeding but in its effects, they are the same.
They only differ in procedure. Escheat proceedings may be
instituted as a consequence of a violation of Article XIII,
Section 5 of the Constitution which prohibits transfers of
private agricultural land to aliens whereas an action for
reversion is expressly authorized under the Public Land Act.
NATURE OF PROCEEDING TO ESCHEAT LAND HELD IN
VIOLATION OF LAW

A proceeding to escheat or for reversion

of lands held in violation of laws
prohibiting alien ownership has been held
to be a civil action rather than a criminal
proceeding.
END
THANKS!