WILLS AND SUCCESSION

REVIEWER

Prof. Avelino Sebastian Jr.

Prepared by UP Law D2018

     
   1

GENERAL PROVISIONS § Estate of Hemady v. Luzon Surety Co

Surety filed claim against estate based
(Arts. 774 – 782) on counterbids that Hemady guaranteed
as surety. Prayed for contingent claim on
Succession and Inheritance
20 bonds executed. Lower court
§ Inheritance refers to the decedent’s
dismissed because Hemady ceased to be
properties, rights and obligations not
guarantor upon death. Court reversed;
extinguished by death and transmitted to
heirs succeed not only to rights of
heirs
deceased but also to obligations.
§ Succession is a mode of acquisition by which
Payment from estate is payment by heirs
the decedent’s property, rights and
and distributees.
obligations are transmitted to his heirs
Transmission to the Heirs through
Elements of Succession
the Estate
§ A Mode of Acquisition
§ Limjoco v Estate of Fragante
§ Transmission of an Inheritance
PSC granted Certificate of Public
(Property, Rights and Obligations)
Convenience to intestate estate of Pedro
§ Butte v Manuel Uy & Sons, Inc.
Fragrante to operate ice plant. Oppositor
Jose Ramirez co-owned house and lot;
contends error to allow substitution of legal
died and gave one third of free portion to
representative of estate as part applicant.
Angela Butte. Co-owner of property sold
Court rules there would be a failure of justice
undivided share, Butte wants to redeem.
unless the estate is considered a person;
Entitled to redemption because by law,
quashing of proceedings would entail
rights to succession transmitted to heirs
prejudicial results to his investment.
from moment of death, and includes all
property rights and obligations.
Object of Succession
§ National Housing Authority v Almeida
§ Inheritance of decedent; includes properties,
Land awarded to Margarita Herrera;
transmissible rights and obligations
daughter Francisca executed Deed of
Self – Adjudication based on affidavit
Future Property and Future Inheritance
allegedly executed by Margarita
§ Future Property is anything which a person
bequeathing land to her. During trial to
does not own at present but which the
assail Deed, NHA granted application
person may acquire.
made by Francisca on the lots. NHA
§ Future Inheritance is the contingent
should have noted that original applicant
universality or complex of property, rights
Margarita already died; interest of
and obligations that are passed to the heirs.
Margarita should go to her estate.
It may not be the object of a contract.
§ Verdad v Court of Appeals
§ Requisites of Future Inheritance
Zosima Verdad purchased lot from
§ Succession not yet been opened
Macaria Atega’s son from first marriage;
§ Object of the contract forms part
Socorro is Macaria’s mother in law, her
of the inheritance
husband being from her second
§ Promissor has with respect to the
marriage. Socorro wants to redeem
object an expectancy of a right
property but not allowed due to low
purely hereditary in nature
price. Socorro can redeem; she is a legal
heir of her husband David, part of whose
estate is a share in his mother’s
inheritance, applying Art. 995.

     
   2

§ Santos v Blas Exclusions to the Inheritance

Simeon Blas contracted first marriage § Subject of fideicommisary substitutions
with Marta Cruz; later contracted second § Subject of reserve troncal
marriage with Maxima Santos without § Subject matter of valid aleatory contracts
liquidating properties of the first § Macam v Gatmaitan
marriage. Issue is “Exhibit A” where Deceased Macam and defendant
Maxima promises to give ½ of her share Gatmaitan purchased house (Macam’s),
to their properties to heirs and legatees Buick automobile (Gatmaitan’s) and
named in the will of her husband. Not furniture; in consideration of “friendship”,
future inheritance, as it deals with whoever dies first shall leave to survivor
existing properties which she will receive the said properties excluding listed
by law because it is her share in conjugal furniture belonging to Macam. Plaintiff
assets. Estate ordered to deliver one half contends that with respect to the house,
because Maxima did not keep her donation mortis causa in favor of Juana
promise.   and due to not being executed with
§ Concurring Opinion by JBL Reyes formalities is invalid. However, act is not
Inheritance consists of totality of assets donation but an aleatory contract (now
and liabilities at time of demise; if the Art 2010 NCC); reciprocally assigned
questioned contract envisages all or a property conditioned upon who dies first,
fraction of that contingent mass, then it is binding upon the parties.
is a contact over future inheritance. § Rivera v People’s Bank
§ Vda. de Cabalu v Tabu Validity of survivorship agreement
9000 sq. meter lot in the name of between Edgar Stephenson and
Faustina Maslum who died with no housekeeper Ana Rivera, where
children; holographic will, not probated, Stephenson’s account was transferred to
assigned property to nephews and a joint account between them. Bank
nieces, one of which was Benjamin refused to pay due to doubtful validity.
Laxamana, father of Domingo. Domingo Valid agreement; aleatory contract,
executed Sale disposing of share of land Rivera served master for 19 years without
to Cabalu (1975); after, Deed of compensation.
Extrajudical Succession imparted the § Vitug v Court of Appeals
9000 sq. meters to Domingo who sold Romarico Vitug filed motion asking for
half to his nephew Tabamo and the other authority from probate court to sell stock
half to Tabu (1994). 1975 sale not valid; and real properties belong to estate of
simulated, but even if not, cannot be his wife to cover allegedly his advances to
valid because Domingo was not yet the estate, which he claimed were
owner of the property. Could not dispose personal funds through a survivorship
because he was not the sole heir. agreement. Rowena Corona opposed on
  ground that same funds withdrawn were
Definition of Terms conjugal partnership properties and part
§ Decedent: Person whose property is of the estate. Conveyance is not mortis
transmitted through succession, whether or causa, which should be embodied in a
not he left a will will; no showing funds belonged to one
§ Testator: If he left a will, also called testator party, presumed conjugal. Not donation
§ Heir: Person called to the succession either inter vivos because it was to take effect
by will or operation of law after the death of one party.
§ Legatee: Person called to the succession in
testator’s will who will receive movable
property
§ Devisee: Person called to the succession in
testator’s will who will receive immovable
property

     
   3

Opening of Succession before declaration. Although heirs have

§ The rights to succession are transmitted from no legal standing upon commencement
the death of the decedent. of testate or intestate proceedings,
§ Bonilla v Barcena exception as when administrator fails or
Fortunato instituted a civil action to quiet refuses to act.
title, but passed away; defendants filed § Puno v Puno Enterprises, Inc.
motion to dismiss based on her having Carlos Puno was incorporator of Puno
lost capacity to sue. Plaintiff’s children Enterprises; Joselito as heir initiated
asked for substitution but trial court complaint for specific performance
refused. The Court rules that while a averring he is son with common-law wife
dead person cannot sue in court, he can and claiming entitlement to rights and
be substituted by his heirs in pursuing privileges as stockholder. Failed to prove
the case. From the moment of the death filiation. Moreover, upon death of a
of the decedent, the heirs become shareholder, the heirs do not
absolute owners of his property. When automatically become stockholders of
Fortunato died, heirs acquired interest. the corporation. The stocks must be
§ Salvador v Sta. Maria distributed first to the heirs in estate
Celestino Salvador sold lots to spouses proceedings, and the transfer must be
Salvador; later filed a suit for recorded in the books of the corporation.
reconveyance alleging sale was void for § Reyes v RTC of Makati Branch 142
lack of consideration. Later died intestate Case involves two supposed
and heirs substituted. Branch I rendered heirs/children of Anastacia Reyes
judgment ordering reconveyance; three claiming stocks from Zenith; relevant to
years later, Branch II ordered one of the establish whether an intra-corporate
lots sold to pay debtors. Hence action to relationship exists for a derivative suit.
question Branch II’s power to dispose of Rodrigo cannot be considered a
the lands involved. Heirs cannot stockholder of Zenith, as he must prove
distribute properties among themselves there are shareholdings that will be left
without the debts of the estate being first and must register the transfer
satisfied. The right of heirs to specific § De Borja v vda. de Borja
distributive shares of the inheritance does Francisco (husband) and Jose (son) were
not become fully determinable until all co-administrators of testate estate of
the debts of the estate are paid. Until Josefa until Francisco’s death; Francisco
then, rights cannot be enforced, are took second wife Tasiana who instituted
inchoate and are subject to the existence testate proceedings and was appointed
of a residue after payment of the debts. special administratix upon death of
§ Ramirez v Baltazar Francisco. Jose and Tasiana executed
Victoriana Eguaras executed real estate compromise agreement where latter
mortgage over land; upon demise, agreed to convey land, now being
mortgagees filed petition for foreclosure attacked for not having first probating
against administrator, who was also will of Francisco. Agreement is valid. No
Deputy Clerk of Court. Administrator was legal bar to a successor disposing of
duly served summons but failed to hereditary share immediately after death,
answer, so sheriff sold the property. Heirs even if the actual extent is not
filed a complaint averring that determined until the subsequent
administrator and mortgagees acted in liquidation of the estate.
collusion to defraud them. As a general § Lee v RTC of Quezon City Branch 85
rule, formal declaration or recognition to Dr. Ortanez owned 90% of subscribed
successional rights needs judicial capital stock of Phil. International Life
declaration, but Court has under special Insurance Company Inc. Wife and son
circumstances protected rights from Jose claiming to own 1014 and 1011
encroachments made or attempted shares sold them to FLAG. Appropriation

     
   4

and therefore the sale held invalid. An TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION

heir can only alienate such portion of the
estate that may be allotted to him in the Characteristics of a W ill
division of the estate after final § Statutory right
adjudication. This means that an heir § Unilateral act
may only sell his ideal or undivided share § Formal act
in the estate. § Personal act
§ Heirs of Sandejas v Lina § Effective mortis causa
Lina sought to intervene in a Motion for § Essentially ambulatory
Reconstitution of records alleging § Free act
Sandejas as administrator bound to sell
parcels of land belonging to the estate of Limitations on the Power to Control
the late Sandejas subject to procurement Dispositions
of lower court approval. CA obligated § Legitime
petitioner to sell the pro-indiviso share. § Reservable property
Contract was a conditional sale; § Mistress cannot inherit
stipulation requiring court approval does § Fideicomissary substitution: first and second
not affect validity of the effectivity of the heirs must be related
sale as regards the selling heirs. § Condition not to marry is void
§ Santos v Lumbao § Dispocicion Captatoria
Heirs of petitioners sold to Spouses § Dispositions in favor of incapacitated persons
Lumbao subject property, part of her
share in estate of deceased mother. Necessity of Conveyance of Property
Lumbao occupied but no title yet § Seangio v Reyes
because not yet partitioned; claims Respondent prayed to settle intestate estate
petitioners acted fraudulently dividing but petitioners opposed claiming Segundo
estate including the property already left a holographic will disinheriting one of the
sold. That heirs are bound by contracts respondents for cause. For disinheritance to
entered into by their predecessors-in- be valid, must be effected through a will; in
interest applies; sale is valid but only with this case, it is a will because there is an act of
respect to the aliquot share of the selling disposition, i.e. intent to dispose mortis cause
co-owner. can be clearly deduced from the terms.
Types of Succession Non-Delegability of Testam entary
§ May be testamentary, legal or intestate, or Discretion (Art. 784 – 787)
mixed. § The making of a will is a strictly personal act;
§ Testamentary: That which results from it cannot be left in whole or in part to the
the designation of an heir, made in a will discretion of a third person, or accomplished
executed in the form prescribed in the through the instrumentality of an agent or
law. attorney.
§ Intestate: That which results by law. Only § The duration or efficacy of the designation of
subsidiary to the estate, since intestacy heirs, devisees or legatees, or the
only takes place in absence of a valid will determination of the portions which they are
§ Mixed: Partly by will and partly by to take, when referred to by name, cannot be
operation of law. left to the discretion of a third person
§ The testator may entrust to a third person
the distribution of specific property or sums
of money that he may leave in general to
specified classes or causes, and also the
designation of the persons, institutions or
establishments to which such property or
sums of money are to be given or applied.

     
   5

§ The testator may not make a testamentary § Of two modes of interpretation, that is to be
disposition in such manner that another preferred is that which will prevent intestacy.
person has to determine whether or not it is § Dizon-Rivera v Dizon
operative. Agripina Valdez died leaving seven
compulsory heirs; left last will in
Defective Dispositions (Art. 789) Pampango, commanded that her
§ Latent and Patent Defects: Latent if apparent property be divided in accordance with
from a reading of the will, patent if not testamentary disposition. Oppositors
§ Remedial Measures: Efforts must be exerted submitted own counter-project of
to determine true intention. Examine will in partition. Testator’s wishes and intention
its entirety and use other provisions. If the constitute first and principal law in
will does not provide, use extrinsic evidence matter of testaments; when expressed
clearly and precisely in his last will,
Interpretation of Dispositions amount to the only law whose made
(Art. 788, 790 - 792) must be faithfully obeyed. Vda. de
§ Interpretation by which the disposition is to Villaflor v Juico: Don Villaflor executed a
be operative shall be preferred. holographic will bequeathing one half of
§ Terms are to be taken in their ordinary and properties to his brother and the other
grammatical sense, unless a clear intention half to his wife; Clauses 6 and 7 deemed
to use them in another sense can be annulled from moment he bore any child
gathered. with his wife. Plaintiff institutes present
§ Technical words are to be taken in their action against administration contending
technical sense, unless: that upon widow’s death, became vested
§ Context clearly indicates a contrary with ownership. Plain desire of testator
intention, or was to invest widow with only a usufruct.
§ It satisfactorily appears that will was Speculation as to the motives of the
drawn solely by the testator and that he testator should not be allowed to obscure
was unacquainted with such technical the clear and unambiguous meaning.
sense. § The invalidity of one of several dispositions
§ De Roma v Court of Appeals does not result in the invalidity of the other
Candelaria had two legally adopted dispositions, unless it is presumed that
daughters; Buhay was appointed testator would not have made such other
administratix and filed inventory. dispositions if the first disposition had not
Opposed by Rosalinda on grounds of been made.
certain properties given to Buhay were § Balanay, Jr. v Martinez
not included. Issue is whether lands Felix Balanay filed petition for probate of
subject to collation; Buhay claims deed mother’s notarial will, where she
prohibited collation. However, nothing in declared she was the owner of the
deed of donation prohibits collation; southern half of nine conjugal lots and
phrase “sa pamamagitan ng pagbibigay that properties should not be divided
na di na mababawing muli” merely among her heirs during her husband’s
described donation as irrevocable. Use of lifetime; same will partitioned and
such terms as “legitime” and “free devised conjugal lands as if they were all
portion” indicates prepared by lawyer, owned by her. Probate court erred in
and would have included express declaring will was void; statement on
prohibition. “southern half” was void because share
§ Interpretations that will give to every was inchoate, and provision that
expression some effect, rather than one properties of testatrix should not be
which will render any of the expressions divided during lifetime is contrary to
inoperative, are to be favored. Article 1980 of Civil Code. No right to
require legitime be paid in cash because
did not assign whole estate.

     
   6

After – Acquired Properties § National law of the decedent applicable with

(Art. 781 – 793) respect to order of succession, amount of
§ The inheritance of a person includes not only successional rights, intrinsic validity of the
the property and the transmissible rights and provisions of the will and the capacity to
obligations existing at the time of his death, succeed
but also those which have accrued thereto
since the opening of the succession Testamentary Capacity (Art. 796 – 803)
§ Refers to the accruals to the inheritance § Capacity to Act: Power of a person to perform
after succession has opened; belongs to an act with legal effect; not an element of
heirs by right of accession although liable testamentary capacity
for payment of testator’s debts § Elements of Testamentary Capacity
§ Property acquired after the making of a will § The testator is a natural person
shall only pass thereby, as if the testator had § The testator is at least 18 years of age at
possessed it at the time of making the will, time of execution
should it expressly appear by the will that § The testator must be of sound mind at
such was his intention time of execution
§ Permits testator to dispose future § The testator is not expressly prohibited
property, as it allows testator to dispose by law from making a will
the property without having to execute a
new will or to amend the existing will Soundness of Mind
§ Every devisee or legacy shall convey all the § Elements
interest which the testator could devise or § Should know nature of estate to be
bequeath in the property disposed of, unless disposed: Knowledge of composition of
it clearly appears from the will that he his properties, transferable rights and
intended to convey a less interest obligations
§ General Rule: A testamentary disposition § Should know proper object of bounty:
confers upon the beneficiary the totality Appreciation of his personal relationships
of the testator’s interest in the property § Should be conscious of nature of
subject matter thereof. However, testator testamentary act: Awareness that by
may convey less making a will, he realizes that he makes
§ Explicit grant of a greater interest may be provisions for the distribution of his
construed as the testator’s directive that estate, and that such distribution shall
the third party interest in the thing be take effect upon his demise
acquired so that it may be given in its § The law presumes that every person is of
entirety sound mind, in the absence of proof to the
contrary.
Governing Law § The burden of proof that the testator was
§ The validity of a will as to its form depends not of sound mind at the time of making
upon the observance of the law in force at his dispositions is on the person who
the time it is made. opposes the probate of the will
§ Formal validity of a will governed by the § Presumption of sanity except:
law in effect at the time of execution § One month or less before execution,
§ Substantive validity governed by law in testator was publicly known to be
force at the time of the death of testator insane
§ As to place: form and solemnities of § Prior judicial declaration of the
contracts, wills and other public instruments testator’s insanity, unless such
shall be governed by the law of the country in declaration has been set aside
which they are executed prior to execution of the will
§ Prior judicial appointment of a
guardian by reason of having been
found to be insane

     
   7

Form of Wills same paper to identify such paper as will

executed.
(Art. 804 – 809) § Balonan v Abellana
If third person signs on behalf of the testator,
Requisites
testator’s name must be affixed thereto by
§ A will must be in writing.
some other person in his presence and by his
§ A will must be written in a language or
express direction.
dialect known to the testator.
§ The testator must sign at the end of the will.
Must Be Attested and Subscribed by
§ The will must be attested and subscribed by
Three Credible W itnesses
three credible witnesses.
§ Icasiano v Icasiano
§ The testator and witness must sign in the
Failure of one witness to affix his signature to
presence of one another
one page of a testament, due to the
§ The testator and witnesses must sign on the
simultaneous lifting of two pages in the
left margin of each page
course of signing, is not per se sufficient to
§ Each page of the will must be numbered
justify a denial of probate.
correlatively
§ The will must contain an attestation clause
Must Sign on the Left Margin of Each
§ The will must be acknowledged before a
Page
notary public
§ Subscribing signature to identify each page;
purpose is to prevent the substitution of
Must Be in W riting
pages
§ To evidence compliance with formalities
prescribed
Each Page of the W ill Must Be
§ To serve as exclusive proof of its contents,
Numbered Correlatively
avoiding reliance on memory
§ The location of the page is not material for as
long as there is pagination
Must Be W ritten in a Language or
§ Lopez v Liboro
Dialect Known to the Testator
If the first page is not numbered, the
§ Suroza v Honrado
omission shall not necessarily invalidate the
Opening paragraph of the will stated English
will. Purpose of the law is to guard against
was a language understood and known to
fraud and to afford means of preventing
the testatrix; but concluding paragraph
substitution or of detecting loss of any of its
stated will was read and translated into
pages.
Filipino. Void because will must be executed
in language known to testator.
The W ill Must Contain an Attestation
§ Reyes v vda. de Vidal
Clause
Nothing in testimony of witnesses indicated
§ Requisites
testatrix knew and spoke the Spanish
§ Must contain the number of pages upon
language as used in preparing the will; but
which the will was written
enough evidence supplies the technical
§ That testator signed the will or caused
omission such as the letters written in
another to write his name
Spanish by the deceased and being a
§ That the testator and the witnesses
mestizo espanola married to a Spaniard.
signed the will in the presence of one
another
Must Sign at the End of the W ill
§ Tabaoda v Rosal
§ Taboada v Rosal
Failure of attestation clause to state the
No requirement for all three instrumental
number of pages used upon which the will
and attesting witnesses to sign at the end of
was written is not necessarily a fatal defect,
the will; attestation consists in witnessing
may yet be admitted to probate if the actual
testator’s execution of the will, subscription is
number of pages is readily discernible and
the signing of the witnesses’ names upon the
one need not adduce extrinsic evidence.

     
   8

§ Samaniego-Celada v Abena the effect that a will must be acknowledged

Error in attestation clause relating to number before a notary public by the testator and
of pages used is not necessarily a fatal error. also by the witnesses is indispensable for
§ Lopez v Lopez validity.
Substantial compliance for defects in the § Guerrero v Bihis
form of the attestation clause may be Will was opposed because acknowledged by
allowed, but the rule must be limited to testatrix and witnesses at her residence in
disregarding those defects that can be Quezon City before Atty. Directo, who was a
supplied by an examination of the will itself. commissioned notary public for and in
§ Estate of Abada v Abaja Caloocan City. Outside place of commission,
Failure to state the number of attesting notary public is bereft of power to perform
witnesses is not a fatal error. Substantial any notarial act and is not a notary public.
compliance rule may apply. § Cruz v Villasor
§ Garcia v Lacuesta Of three instrumental witnesses to the will,
Attestation clause that fails to state that the one of them was at the same time the notary
testator’s name was written by a third person public. Cannot be considered as third
may result in denial of probate. instrumental witness since he cannot
§ Cagro v Cagro acknowledge before himself his having
Attesting signature of the witnesses must be signed the will
affixed at the bottom of the attestation
clause, If signed elsewhere, the attestation Special Formalities
and the will are void. § If the testator is deaf or a deaf mute:
§ Vda. de Ramos v Court of Appeals § He must personally read the will if able to
Two of the attesting witnesses in a last do so;
testament testified against their due § Otherwise, designate two persons to read
execution, strengthened by photographic it and communicate to him, in some
evidence of the two only being there in the practicable manner, the contents
act of signing but no picture of testatrix § If the testator is blind,
signing the will. In the attestation clause, § The will shall be read to him twice;
witnesses attest to the signatures of testatrix once by one of the subscribing witnesses,
but also to the proper execution of the will; and again by the notary public before
by signing the will, the witness impliedly whom the will is acknowledged
certified to the truth the facts which admit to § Garcia v Vasquez
probate. If subscribing witnesses testify Opthalmologist testified that
against due execution of the will, the will may testatrix by 1960 had cataract and
be allowed if the court is satisfied the will was possible glaucoma; vision was only
executed and attested in manner required by counting fingers, not for reading
law. Testimonies of the witnesses were print. Deceased was hence not unlike
rejected. a blind testator. Requirements of Art
808 must be complied.
The W ill Must Be Acknowledged Before § Alvarado v Gaviola
a Notary W ill Alvarado, the testatrix, was then
§ Acknowledgement is the act of one who has suffering from glaucoma, did not
executed a deed in going before some personally read the final draft and
competent officer and declaring it to be his instead private respondent (lawyer
act or deed. but not notary public) read it aloud
§ Garcia v Gatchalian once in his presence and with
Gatchalian had no forced heirs; probate of witnesses. Alvarado was held to have
alleged will opposed because allegedly been blind, but Court held that spirit
procured by fraud. Document was behind the law was served given the
acknowledged before notary public but not facts (substantial compliance)
by instrumental witnesses. Compliance to

     
   9

Doctrine of Liberal Interpretation § Need not be witnessed

§ In the absence of bad faith, forgery or fraud, § Consists of date, testamentary dispositions
or undue and improper pressure and and signature of testator, all of which should
influence, defects and imperfections in the be in handwriting of testator. Need not be a
form of attestation or in the language used complete date but should be sufficient as
therein shall not render the will invalid if it is reference
proved that the will was in fact executed and § Labrador v Court of Appeals
attested in substantial compliance with all Date located in first paragraph of second
the requirements of Article 805 page remains valid; the law does not
§ Cannot be used to address specify a particular location.
defects/imperfections in the body of the
will or the notarial acknowledgement. Probate of a Holographic Will (Art. 811)
Applies solely to form or language of the § Necessary that at least one witness who
attestation clause if proven that will was knows the handwriting and signature of the
in fact executed and attested in testator explicitly declare that the will and
substantial compliance with Art. 805 the signature are in the handwriting of the
§ Bad faith, forgery, fraud, undue and testator
improper pressure and influence must be § If the will is contested, at least three such
ruled out witnesses are required
§ Cannot be invoked in a holographic will § In the absence of any competent witness,
because this will does not have an expert testimony may be resorted to
attestation clause § Azaola v Singson
§ Vda de Gil v Vda de Murciano Authenticity of will not contested; hence not
Attestation clause of the will lacks the phrase required to produce more than one witness,
“han sido firmadas por el testator” between but even if contested, three witnesses not
the words “del mismo” and “en nuestra compulsory
presencia” to be complete. Court agrees but § Codoy v Calugay
decided that it can and should correct the Opposition alleges will was a forgery; six
error to effectuate the testator’s intention as witnesses presented but only two can testify
expressed in the will. they were familiar. Article 811 ruled to be
§ Caneda v Court of Appeals mandatory since uses “shall”.
Attestation clause failed to specifically state
that the instrumental witnesses saw the Disposition Rules for Holographic Wills
testator sign the will in their presence and (Art. 812 – 814)
that they also signed the will and all the § In holographic wills, the dispositions of the
pages in the presence of the testator and of testator written below his signature must be
one another. Will invalid because absence of dated and signed by him in order to make
that statement required by law is a fatal them valid as testamentary dispositions.
defect. Defects must be remedied by intrinsic § Testator must affix his signature at the
evidence, but here proof can only be supplied end of the last testamentary disposition;
by extrinsic evidence. if an additional disposition is found after
the signature of the testator, not
Form of Holographic Wills considered unless entirely written, dated
and signed by testator
(ART. 810 – 814) § Compare with notarial will where any
additional disposition makes the entire
Requisites (Art. 810)
will void
§ Art. 810: A person may execute a holographic
§ When a number of dispositions appearing in
will which must be entirely written, dated and
a holographic will are signed without being
signed by the hand of the testator himself.
dated, and the last disposition has a
§ Subject to no other form
signature and a date, such date validates the
§ May be made in or out of the Philippines
dispositions preceding it

     
   10

§ In case of any insertion, cancellation, erasure Rules on W itnesses (Art. 822 – 824)
or alteration in a holographic will, testator § If the witnesses attesting the execution of a
must authenticate the same by his signature will are competent at the time of attesting,
§ Kalaw v Relova their becoming subsequently incompetent
Will opposed alleging that the shall not prevent allowance of the will.
holographic will contained alterations § Economic benefit given to a testator in his
without proper authentication by the full notarial will to an attesting witness, his or her
signature of testatrix. Ordinarily, not spouse, his or her parents, his or her children
thereby invalidated as a whole but only and/or anyone claiming under such witness,
particular words altered; but entire will spouse, parent or child is void
voided in this case because only one § Note Art. 1027, holding the same parties
substantial provision altered by incapable of succeeding
substituting one heir with another. § While Art. 823 nullified the legacies and
§ Ajero v Court of Appeals devisees, Art. 1027 declares the recipient
Will opposed because neither thereof incapacitated to inherit
testament’s body nor signature was in § While nullity of Art. 823 is qualified by an
decedent’s handwriting, contained exception, Art. 1027 is absolute
alterations and corrections not duly § Nullification of legacies and devises may
signed. Holographic will can still be extend to compulsory heir; but many
admitted notwithstanding compliance commentators believe the same should
with Art. 813 and 814; if testator fails to not and cannot extend to the legitime of
sign and date some of the dispositions, such compulsory heir but should be
dispositions cannot be effectuated but limited to such dispositions in his favor
failure does not render testament void. that may exceed the legitime
§ Law does not specifically define claimant
Joint W ills (Art. 818) but reasonable to assume that claimant
§ Two or more persons cannot make a will is a creditor
jointly, or in the same instrument, either for § A mere charge on the estate of the testator
their reciprocal benefit or for the benefit of a for the payment of debts due at the time of
third person the testator's death does not prevent his
§ Distinctive feature is testamentary creditors from being competent witnesses to
dispositions of two or more testators his will.
contained in a single instrument
§ Prohibited because of the opportunity they Codicils and Incorporation by
create for one of the joint testators to
unduly influence the other
Reference
Codicils (Art. 826)
Witnesses to Wills § A supplement or addition to a will, made
after its execution and annexed as a part
Qualifications (Art. 820) thereof, by which disposition made in the
§ Any person of sound mind original will is explained, added or altered
§ Of the age of 18 years or more § Theory of Dependent Relative
§ Not blind, dead or dumb Revocation: Effectivity of revocation is
§ Able to read or write dependent on admission to probate of
subsequent revoking codicil
Disqualifications (Art. 821) § Not absolute necessary if antecedent will
§ Any person not domiciled in the Philippines is holographic
§ Convicted of falsification of a document,
perjury or false testimony
§ Cannot be the notary public who
acknowledged the will

     
   11

Incorporation by Reference (Art. 827) Modes of Revocation (Art. 830)

§ Requisites § By implication of law
§ The document or paper referred to in the § By subsequent will or codicil
will must be in existence at the time of § By burning, tearing, canceling or obliterating
the execution of the will the will with the intention of revoking it
§ The will must clearly describe and
identify the same, stating among other Revocation by Im plication of Law
things the number of pages thereof; § Mere occurrence of specified event gives rise
§ It must be identified by clear and to automatic revocation
satisfactory proof as the document or § Example: Legal separation (Art. 63 FC)
paper referred to therein; and
§ It must be signed by the testator and the Revocation by the Execution of Another
witnesses on each and every page, except Will or Codicil
in case of voluminous books of account or § Requisites
inventories. § Testator must possess testamentary
§ Since holographic will need not be witnessed, capacity at the time
Art. 827 could not have intended to include § Must be definite, either through a
incorporation to a holographic will revocatory clause (express) or
§ If incorporated element is not in the dispositions which are irreconcilably
handwriting of the testator, Art. 810 is inconsistent with those of the prior will
breached causing nullity of the holographic (implied)
will. § Formally valid and admitted to probate
§ Formal validity of both revoked and revoking
Revocation (Art. 828 – 834) will are essential
§ Dependent Relative Revocation: Instrument
Characteristics (Art. 828) intended to be a will, but failing of its effect
§ May be revoked by the testator at any time as such on account of some imperfection in
before death; any waiver or restriction is void its structure or for want of due execution,
§ Essentiality ambulatory; does not become cannot be set up for the purpose of revoking
final until death provided the testator a former will
possesses testamentary capacity at the time § May be conditional
of revocation
§ May be partial without necessarily revoking Revocation by Overt Act
the entire will § May be described as deliberate destruction of
§ Personal act of the testator, but may cause will which indicates the testator’s intention to
another person to write his name in the get rid of the same; hence non-exclusive
revoking codicil provided it is done by express § Requisites
direction, in his presence and in the presence § Must possess testamentary capacity at
of three instrumental witnesses as provided the time of revocation
in Article 805 § Must be specified by the law, or otherwise
§ Delegation of authority does not apply if consistent with the notion of revoking
the will is holographic § Must complete the subject phase of the
overt act; must reach a stage where in
Conflict Rules on Revocation of W ills the mind of the testator he has
Place of Revocation Applicable Law completed the act
Within Philippines Philippine law § Must have animus revocandi, or the
Outside Philippines by a Domiciliary law of intent to revoke the will
non-domiciliary testator, or law of place § Must be executed by the testator
where the will was personally, or through a third person
executed under the express direction and in the
Outside Philippines by a Philippine law or law of presence of the testator
domiciliary place of revocation

     
   12

Rules on Revocation § Because of inconsistencies, second will

§ Does not require proof of revocation, nor is implicitly revokes first will
proof of revocation required to be preserved § Testator revoked the second will
§ Where a will which cannot be found is shown
to have been in the possession of the testator Allowance and Disallowance of
when last seen, the presumption is, in the
absence of other competent evidence, that
Wills (Art. 838 – 839)
the testator canceled or destroyed the same
Nature and Necessity of Probate
§ Subsequent wills which do not revoke the
§ Has two phases: probate proper and partition
previous ones in an express manner annul
of the estate
only such dispositions in the prior wills as are
§ In probate proper, the court determines:
inconsistent with or contrary to those
§ Testamentary capacity of the testator
contained in the later wills
§ Compliance with the formal requisites
§ Revocation made in a subsequent will shall
§ That it is indeed the will of the testator
take effect even if the new will becomes
§ That the testator freely and voluntarily
inoperative
executed the will
§ Revocation based on false cause or an illegal
§ In the second phase, the probate court
cause is null and void
examines intrinsic validity, including
§ Cause of the contract is liberality; “cause”
evaluation of capacity
for revocation of will is the reason which
§ Necessary before a will can pass property
impels the testator to revoke a will
§ Rodriguez v Rodriguez
§ Revocation for false cause is vitiated by
Dispute between stepmother and
mistake if the intervening event is false
children over alleged sale of inherited
§ Due to the parol evidence rule, revoking
property. Will and partition agreement
will must contain the false cause for the
have no legal effect since the will has not
rule to apply
been probated
§ Recognition of an illegitimate child does not
lose legal effect even if the will wherein it was
Jurisdiction of the Probate Court; Effect
made should be revoked
of Judgment
§ Recognition of an illegitimate child is not
§ Probate proceedings deal generally with
in the nature of a property disposition
extrinsic validity; intrinsic validity is another
matter and questions regarding the same
Republication and Revival of may still be raised even after the will has
Wills (Art. 835 – 837) been authenticated
§ A probate court has no jurisdiction to rule
Revocation (Art. 835 – 836) with finality on ownership; may provisionally
§ If will is void as to form: The testator cannot pass upon such questions, but without
republish, without reproducing in a prejudice to a separate action
subsequent will, the dispositions contained in § General Rule: Scope of inquiry of a probate
a previous one which is void as to form court Is limited to testamentary capacity of
§ If will is formally valid but revoked: The the testator and extrinsic validity of the will
execution of a codicil referring to a previous § Exception: Can pass upon matters of
will has the effect of republishing the will as intrinsic validity before passing upon
modified by the codicil extrinsic validity if separate or later
proceedings would be superfluous
Revival (Art. 837)
§ Requisites Types of Probate
§ First formally valid will § Ante-Mortem: During the lifetime
§ Second formally valid will irreconcilably § Post-Mortem: Initiated after death
consistent with the first will § Reprobate: Reprobate of a will admitted in a
probate court in a foreign jurisdiction

     
   13

Probate of a Lost Will Undue Influence

§ Possible though a difficult process: must § Form of moral coercion
prove compliance with formalities and prove § Any means employed upon a person which
contents under the circumstances he could not resist
§ Lost Notarial Will: Quality of evidence to and which controlled his volition
prove formalities were observed must be of
such kind that leaves no doubt; contents ma Fraud
be proven by secondary evidence § Employed by a party upon a counter-party
§ Lost Holographic Will: Proof of due execution § It is serious
totally dependent on testimonial evidence, § Induced the other to give consent
because primary evidence (handwriting) is § Resulted in damage or injury
not available
§ Gan v Yap Jurisprudence on the Vices of Consent
Execution and contents may not be § In order to invalidate a will, the vice of
proven by the bare testimony of consent must be proven
witnesses who have read/seen the will § Pascual v de la Cruz
§ Rodelas v Aranza That the testatrix lived with the heir does not
Photostatic copy of lost will may be used per se indicate that the latter had unduly
as secondary evidence of existence influenced the former in making the will
§ Ozaeta v Cuartero
Grounds for Disallowance The allegation that a testator was unduly
§ Formalities required by law have not been influenced by the person with whom he
complied with temporarily lived is negated by the fact that
§ Insane or otherwise mentally incapable of the testator did not revoke the will when he
making a will at time of execution stepped out of the house of the influencer
§ Force or under duress, or influence of fear or § Coso v Fernandez – Deza
threats The oppositor has the burden of proving
§ Undue and improper pressure and influence undue influence. The testator’s strong
§ Signature procured by fraud affection for a particular person does not
§ Acted by mistake or did not intend that the prove that the latter had exerted undue
instrument he signed should be his will at the influence on the former
time of affixing signature
Institution of Heirs
Mistake
§ Testator did not know that the instrument he
(Art. 840 – 856)
signed is a testament that will govern the
Concept of Institution (Art. 840)
disposition of his estate
§ An act by virtue of which a testator
designates in his will the person/s to succeed
Force
him in his property, transmissible rights and
§ Physical force is irresistible or of such degree
obligations
that the victim has no other recourse
§ Inaccurate as legatees/devises not heirs due
§ The force is the determining cause in giving
to receiving specific property vs fractional
consent
Requisites for Institution
Intimidation
§ Will must be extrinsically valid
§ Reason for testator to execute the will
§ Must be compliant with relevant provisions of
§ Threat is unjust or unlawful
substantive law, i.e. no preterition, must not
§ Threat is real or serious, there being a
impair legitime, etc.
disproportion between the threatened evil
§ Free from vices of consent
and the resistance
§ Must personally institute the heir
§ The intimidation produced a reasonable and
§ Instituted heir must be clearly identified
well-grounded fear on the testator

     
   14

Rules on Institution (Art. 841 – 842) § Balance is 45,000; distribute between A,

§ Will shall be valid even though it should not B and C giving each 1/3 or Php 15,000
contain an institution of an heir, or such
institution should not comprise the entire Heir Legitime Institution Total
estate, and even though the person so A 22, 500 15,000 37,500
instituted should not accept the inheritance B 22,500 15,000 37,500
or incapacitated to succeed C 0 15,000 15,000
§ Testator without compulsory heirs may 90,000
dispose by will of all or part of his estate in
favor of any person having capacity to Second Approach Example
succeed § Facts (Same as in First Approach):
§ Testator with compulsory heirs may dispose § Net hereditary estate of Php 90,000
of estate provided he does not contravene § Sons A and B, and nephew C as heirs;
provisions of the Code with regard to legitime § Procedure:
§ Distribute net hereditary estate in
Identification of Heir (Art. 843 – 845) accordance with institutions, giving each
§ If two or more instituted heirs have the same 1/3 or Php 30,000
name and surname, the testator should § In this case, no adjustment
indicate some circumstance by which the true
heir can be identified Second Approach with Adjustment
§ If despite the circumstances, intent of Example
testator may be determined; otherwise, § Facts:
disposition is void unless identity § Net hereditary estate of Php 90,000
becomes certain § Son A, and nephews B and C in equal
§ Identification of heir is not absolutely shares as heirs
necessary if the testator describes the heir in § Dividing equally into 1/3 or Php 30,000
such manner that there is no confusion as to will impair A’s legitime of Php 45,000 as
the identity of the heir the testator’s son; deficit of Php 15,000
§ Error in name or circumstances of heir does § Procedure:
not vitiate institution if possible to know with § Complete A’s legitime, sourced from
certainty the heir shares of the voluntary heirs
§ Disposition in favor of unknown person is
Original
void unless identity becomes certain Heir Adjustment Total
Institution
§ Disposition in favor of a definite class or A 30,000 15,000 45,000
group of persons is valid B 30,000 (7,500) 22,500
C 30,000 (7,500) 22,500
Equality of Shares (Art. 846) 90,000
§ Heirs instituted without designation of shares
shall inherit in equal parts § Second approach is preferred to preserve Art
§ Assumption is heirs are of the same class, i.e. 854 on preterition and Art 906 on
all voluntary or all compulsory completion of legitime
§ Necessary to ascertain that shares at least
equal to legitime
First Approach Example
§ Facts:
§ Net hereditary estate of Php 90,000
§ Sons A and B, and nephew C as heirs;
§ Procedure:
§ Segregate legitime of A and B
(1/2: Php 45,000)
§ Divide equally between A and B
(Php 22,500 each)

     
   15

Collective and Individual Institution § Total is only 660,000. Hence,

(Art. 847 -849) undisposed balance of Php 60,000
§ “I designate as my heirs A and B and the
children of C” – Those collectively designated § Adjustment Formula:
considered as individually instituted unless it § (A x B) / C
clearly appears the intention was otherwise § A = Net hereditary estate
§ If testator institutes siblings, some of full § B = Aliquot part assigned
blood and others of half blood, inheritance § C = Total amount distributed
distributed equally unless a different
intention appears Adjusted
Heir A B C
§ When the testator calls to the succession a Share
person and his children, they are deemed X 720,000 180,000 660,000 196,364
instituted simultaneously, not successively Y 720,000 240,000 660,000 261,818
Z 720,000 240,000 660,000 261,818
720,000
Institution Based on a False Cause
(Art. 850)
All Compulsory Heirs Example
§ Statement of false cause considered not
§ Facts:
written unless it appears would not have
§ Net hereditary estate is Php 720,000
made such institution if he had known the
§ Sons X, Y and Z as sole heirs
falsity of the cause
§ X has 1/2, Y has 1/4 and Z has 1/6 share
§ Cause must be understood in colloquial
§ Undisposed balance of Php 60,000
sense, i.e. incidental reason
given legitime and second approach
§ Requisites
§ Must expressly state the incidental cause Free
§ Cause must shown to be false Heir Legitime Total
Portion
§ Must appear on the face of the will that A 120,000 240,000 360,000
the testator would not have made such B 120,000 60,000 180,000
institution if he had known the falsity C 120,000 0 120,000
§ Austria v Reyes Total 660,000
§ Nephews and nieces vs allegedly Balance 60,000
adopted; no evidence testator would not
have instituted latter had she known she § Adjustment Formula (Free Portion):
was not bound to leave them inheritance § (A x B) / C
§ A = Total disposable free portion
Adjustment of Shares (Art. 851 – 853) § B = Original share in disposable free
§ If all parts/shares of the instituted heirs do portion pursuant to institution
not cover the whole inheritance, legal § C = Total amount of disposable free
succession takes place with the remainder of portion distributed pursuant to
the estate institution
§ If the intention of testator is for instituted
heirs to be sole heirs and the parts do not Adjusted
Heir A B C
cover the whole inheritance, each part shall Share
be increased proportionately X 360,000 240,000 300,000 288,000
§ If parts exceed the whole, each part shall be Y 360,000 60,000 300,000 72,000
reduced proportionately Total 360,000

Heir Legitime Adjusted Total

All Voluntary Heirs Example
X 120,000 288,000 408,000
§ Facts: Y 120,000 72,000 192,000
§ Net hereditary estate of Php 720,000 Z 120,000 120,000
§ Brothers X, Y and Z as sole heirs Total 720,000
§ X has 1/4 share, Y has 1/3, Z has 1/3

     
   16

Compulsory + Voluntary Heirs Example § Add 30,000 taken from A and B to

§ Facts: add to D’s legitime
§ Net hereditary estate of Php 300,000 § After completion of legitime,
§ Sons A and B, brothers C and D as heirs combined shares of A and B of Php
§ A and B collectively have 3/4 share; C 195,000 still exceeds actual
and D collectively have 1/8 share disposable free portion of 15,000;
apply second reduction
Free
Heir Legitime Total
Portion After First
A 75,000 37,500 112,500 Reduction
B 75,000 37,500 112,500 A 39,000 15,000 195,000 3,000
C 18,750 18,750 B 156,000 15,000 195,000 12,000
D 18,750 18,750
Total 262,500 § Final distribution of estate:
Balance 37,500 § A – 36,000
§ B – 144,000
Adjusted § C – 90,000
Heir A B C
Share § D – 90,000
A 150,000 37,500 112,500 50,000
B 150,000 37,500 112,500 50,000
Preterition (Art. 854)
C 150,000 18,750 112,500 25,000
§ Omission of compulsory heir(s) in the direct
D 150,000 18,750 112,500 25,000
Total 150,000
line, whether living at the time of the
execution of the will or born after the death
Heir Legitime Adjusted Total of the testator
A 75,000 50,000 125,000 § Effect: Annuls the institution of heirs, but
B 75,000 50,000 125,000 devisees and legacies shall be valid in so
C 25,000 25,000 far as not inofficious
D 25,000 25,000 § In contrast to when heir is given less than
Total 300,000 legitime (remedy is completion) or when
deprived through donations (collation)
Compulsory + Voluntary Heirs: Reduction § Requisites
§ Facts: § Heir omitted is a forced heir in the direct
§ Net hereditary estate of Php 360,000 line
§ Brothers A and B; sons C and D § Omission is by mistake or oversight
§ A has 1/8, B 1/2, C 1/4 and D 1/6; hence: § Omission is complete so that the forced
§ A – 45,000 heir received nothing in the will
§ B – 180,000 • Total omission means receiving nothing from
§ C – 90,000 testator by donations inter vivos, received
§ D – 60,000 nothing by will and will receive nothing by
§ Total – 375, 000 intestate succession
§ Procedure: • Even if a compulsory heir is omitted in
§ Correct impairment of D’s legitime by the will, cannot claim preterition if there
30,000 by reducing shares of A and B in remains a free portion
disposable free portion by 30,000; use • Omitted heir must be a compulsory heir in
aggregate disposition of A and B the direct line
(225,000) as basis § Acain v IAC
§ No preterition of a surviving spouse
even if she is omitted; but a legally
A 45,000 30,000 225,000 6,000 adopted child can be preterited
B 180,000 30,000 225,000 24,000 § Omitted compulsory heir must survive the
Total 30,000 testator; but descendants may exercise right
of representation

     
   17

Effects of Preterition Recovery from Undisposed Portion of the

§ Annulment of institution of heirs resulting in Estate Example
total intestacy, though without prejudice to a § Facts:
legacy. However, legacy may be reduced § Legitimate children A, B, C and D
§ However, share of omitted heir may be taken § A received 1/3, B 1/3 and C 1/6
from part of estate not disposed by will, if § D was omitted
any; and if not sufficient, shares of other heirs § Net hereditary estate: Php 90,000
may be reduced proportionally (Art. 855)

Annulment of Institution Example A 1/3 30,000

§ Facts: B 1/3 30,000
§ Two of three legitimate sons (A, B) as C 1/6 15,000
sole heirs, after legacy to X D 30,000
§ C was omitted Total 75,000
§ Net hereditary estate: Php 180,000 Balance 15,000
§ Value of Legacy: Php 30,000
§ In this case, no reduction needed because
Intestacy Legacy Total legitime of each child is only Php 11, 250 per
A 50,000 50,000 child
B 50,000 50,000 § Php 90,000/2 = Php 45,000
C 50,000 50,000 § Php 45,000/4 =Php 11,250
X 30,000 30,000
Total 150,000 30,000 180,000
Recovery from Undisposed Portion of the
Estate with Reduction of Legacies
Annulment of Institution with Reduction (1 st Approach)
of Legacies Example § Facts:
§ Facts: § Legitimate children A, B, C and D
§ Two of three legitimate sons (A, B) as § Php 50,000 legacy to A and Php 40,000
sole heir, after legacy to X and Y, worth each to B and C
more than disposable free portion § Net hereditary estate is Php 140,000;
§ C was omitted undistributed balance of Php 10,000
§ Net hereditary estate: Php 210,000 § D omitted, but balance insufficient for
§ Legacy to X: Php 80,000 legitime
§ Legacy to Y: Php 40,000 § Php 140,000/2 = Php 70,000
§ Procedure: § Php 70,000/4 = Php 17,500
§ Reduce the legacies of X and Y pro-rata
Total Charged to Charged to
Legacy DFP Total Legacy Total Legacy Legitime DFP
X 80,000 105,000 120,000 70,000 A 50,000 17,500 32,500
Y 40,000 105,000 120,000 35,000 B 40,000 17,500 22,500
C 40,000 17,500 22,500
§ Distribute estate after reductions
Total
Reduced Legacy
Intestacy Total Excess Legacy
Legacies Charge Reduction
Legacy Charged
A 35,000 35,000 to DFP
to DFP
B 35,000 35,000 A 32,500 7,500 77,500 3,145.16
C 35,000 35,000 B 22,500 7,500 77,500 2,177,42
X 70,000 70,000 C 22,500 7,500 77,500 2,177.42
Y 35,000 35,000
Total 105,000 105,000 210,000

     
   18

§ Final Distribution Substitution of Heirs

Recovery Reduction (Art. 857 – 870)
Legacy of of Net Share
Legitime Legacies Concept and Definition (Art. 857)
A 50,000 (3,145.16) 46,854.84 § The appointment of another heir so that he
B 40,000 (2,177.42) 37,822.58 may enter into the inheritance in default of
C 40,000 (2,177.42) 37,822.58 the heir originally instituted
D 0 17,500 17,500 § Substitution takes place when the right
of the first heir to the inheritance expires
Recovery from Undisposed Portion of the § Grounds:
Estate with Reduction of Legacies § Repudiation
(2nd Approach) § Incapacity
§ Give D the balance of Php 10,000 § Predecease
representing the undisposed portion of the § Substitution can never burden the legitime;
hereditary estate vacancies in the legitime cannot be
§ Complete the legitime of D by reducing the substituted
legacies of A, B and C with respect only to the § Subject to same charges and conditions
portions of the legacies in excess of legitime upon instituted heir, except if provided to the
§ A = Php 32,500 contrary or personally applicable only to the
§ B = Php 22,500 heir instituted
§ C = Php 22,500
§ Reduce legitimes of A, B and C Types of Substitution (Art. 858 – 863)
§ Simple: Substitute takes the place of the
Legacy to
Total Net instituted heir who defaults
DFP be
Legacies Legacies § Brief: Two or more substitutes for one
Reduced
A 70,000 32,500 77,500 29,354.84 instituted heir
B 70,000 32,500 77,500 20,322.58 § Compendious: One substitute is appointed
C 70,000 32,500 77,500 20,322.58 for two or more instituted heirs
§ Reciprocal: Two or more heirs are substituted
Reduced and each of them is a substitute for others
Legitime Net Share
Legacies § Fideicommisary: First heir is entrusted with
A 17,500 29,354.84 46,854.84 obligation to preserve and transmit to a
B 17,500 20,322.58 37,822.58 second heir the inheritance
C 17,500 20,322.58 37,822.58
D 17,500 17,500 Reciprocal Substitution (Art. 861)
§ If heirs instituted in unequal shares are
Representation in Testam entary reciprocally substituted, the substitute shall
Succession (Art. 856) acquire the share unless testator clearly
§ A voluntary heir who dies before the testator intends otherwise
transmit nothing to his heirs § If there is more than one substitute, same
§ The share of a predeceased or share in substitution as in institution
incapacitated voluntary heir may pass by § What if there remains an undistributed
substitution, if provided, or by accretion, if balance? Ambiguous whether to divide
appropriate, and finally by intestate equally among substitutes or uses as
succession basis the proportion for institution
§ A compulsory heir who predeceased or is
incapacitated to inherit may be represented
by his own heirs, subject to limitations
§ Available only in the descending line
§ Limited to the legitime
§ Representatives must not be barred to
inherit, disqualified/incapacitated

     
   19

Reciprocal Substitution Example § The substitution must be made in an

§ Facts: express manner by naming the
§ Net hereditary estate of Php 210,000 substitution as fideicommisary; or in the
§ A receives 2/7, B 2/7, C 3/7 alternative, the testator must explicitly
§ A is substitute for B and C, B and C are impose upon the fiduciary the duty to
substitutes for A preserve the inheritance and to transmit
§ A predeceased the testator but survived the same to the fideicommisary
by a legitimate son X
Rules on Fideicom m isary Substitution
§ Procedure: § A fideicommisary substitution can never
§ A’s legitime passes by right of burden the legitime
representation to legitimate son X § The nullity of the fideicommisary substitution
§ Balance corresponding to free portion is does not prejudice validity of institution of
burdened by the substitution heirs first designated
§ The fideicommisary clause is simply
Total Charged to Charged to considered not written
Legacy Legitime DFP § Second heir acquires a right to the succession
A 60,000 35,000 25,000 from the time of testator’s death, even
B 60,000 35,000 25,000 though he should die before the fiduciary
C 90,000 35,000 55,000 § The right of the second heir shall pass to
his heirs
§ (A x B)/C § Void as Circumventions of Limits on
§ A = Substitute’s share of free portion Fideicommisary Substitution
§ B = Vacant portion § Substitution not explicitly denominated
§ C = Combined shares of substitutes as fideicommisary
§ Substitution that does not impose a
Share
of Free
Charged Total Share by positive obligation to preserve and
to DFP Substitution transmit property to a second heir
Portion
B 25,000 25,000 80,000 7,812.50 § Perpetual prohibition against alienation
C 55,000 25,000 80,000 17,187.50 of property, to ensure same property
passes to a specific person(s) upon death
Fideicom m isary Substitution of the instituted heir
§ First heir is entrusted with obligation to § Obligation imposed on an instituted heir
preserve and transmit to a second heir the to pay sums of money to various persons
inheritance successively, although first payment may
§ Essentially a case of limited successive be valid
institutions, successive institutions meaning § Substitution that leaves some hereditary
that control of testator over inheritance will property to be applied or invested
not cease despite transfer of ownership according to secret instructions
§ Fiduciary neither a mere usufructuary nor a § A provision where the testator gives the
trustee of the property usufruct to various successively is subject to
§ Requisites the rules on fideicommisary substitutions
§ Testator institutes a first heir or § A provision where the testator leaves to a
bequeaths to a legatee or devisee a person the inheritance and to another the
specific property usufruct is valid
§ Imposes upon the duty to preserve the
inheritance and to transmit the same in Prohibited Dispositions (Art. 870)
whole or in part to the second heir § The dispositions of the testator declaring
§ Must not go beyond one degree apart, as estate inalienable for more than twenty years
pertains to blood relationship is void
§ Fiduciary and fideicomissary both alive at § Rodriguez v CA
time of death of testator Clause void with respect to after the period

     
  20

Conditional Testamentary § Condition that imposes marriage to a specific

person or to anyone in general is valid
Dispositions (Art. 871 – 885) § Testamentary gifts while remaining single or
in a state of widowhood is valid, as an
Conditional Institutions
institution subject to a resolutory condition
§ May be suspensive, or dependent on
happening of future and uncertain event
Dispocicion Captatoria
§ May be resolutory, or terminated upon a
§ Disposition upon the condition that the heir
future and uncertain event
shall make some provision in his will in favor
§ Requisites
of the testator or of any other person
§ Must be expressly stated in the will
§ Void in its entirety; not just condition
§ Must be clear and understandable; but
§ However, a separate agreement that the heir
rules of interpretation may be resorted to
will make some provision in his will in favor of
§ Cannot be imposed on legitimes; otherwise,
the testator or nominee is not a dispocicion
considered as not imposed
captatoria as it is not conditioned upon the
§ Generally, nullity of condition does not
testator making a testamentary disposition
include nullity of the institution
§ Compare to term, a future and certain event.
Purely Potestative Conditions
A suspensive term does not prevent the heirs
(Art. 876, 879)
from acquiring rights and transmitting to
§ Potestative: Purely dependent upon the will
heirs even before arrival of the term. Merely
of the heir, legatee or devisee
defers the demandability of the inheritance
§ If Positive: Must be fulfilled by the heir as
soon as he learns of the testator’s death
Impossible Conditions
§ Except if the condition, already complied
§ Considered as not imposed, along with those
with, cannot be fulfilled again
contrary to law or good customs
§ Condition must be potestative, positive
§ In no manner prejudices the heir
and suspensive for the rule to apply
§ Need not be universally impossible and may
§ Must be fulfilled after succession has
include conditions impossible particular to
opened; fulfillment during lifetime is not
the beneficiary
considered compliance
§ Deemed not imposed as a punishment to
§ If Negative: Must comply by giving a security
testator who makes a mockery of the
and that in case of contravention will return
testamentary act
what was received with fruits and interests
§ Must be reckoned at the time of the
§ The breach results in extinguished title
execution of the will, as at that time of the
§ Security (caucion muciana) may be any
execution the condition may well be possible
type but must name either substitute heir
and the condition was imposed in good faith
or intestate heirs as assured parties
§ If unable to post security, property will be
Conditions Related to Marriage
put under administration during lifetime
§ Conditions prohibiting marriage are generally
or until it becomes clear that the
considered void for violating right to choose
condition can no longer be breached
status and encouraging immorality
§ Exception is if imposed on the living spouse,
Casual or Mixed Conditions
or by the latter’s ascendants or descendants;
(Art. 877, 880, 881, 885)
no distinction between common or legitimate
§ Casual: Dependent upon chance, luck and/or
children of deceased spouse
upon the will of a third person
§ However, condition cannot be imposed on
§ Mixed: Partly dependent on will and on luck
the legitime of the surviving spouse
§ Deemed as complied with if it happens or Is
§ Relative prohibition to marry, i.e. from
fulfilled at any time before or after death of
marrying foreigners, is generally valid
the testator
because not a total deprivation

     
   21

§ If Fulfilled at the Will was Executed: Deemed § Posting of security a condition to the modal
complied with if testator was unaware, must heir entering into the inheritance, although
be complied with again or must no longer be not necessary for transmission of the
able to be fulfilled if testator was aware property
§ The appropriate solution if the modal heir
Property Placed Under Adm inistration fails to deliver the security is to put the
§ Grounds: property under administration
§ If the condition is both negative and
potestative and security is unable to be Legitime (Art. 886 - 914)
posted Definition (Art. 886)
§ If the disposition is subject to a § The testator’s property which he cannot
suspensive condition dispose of because the law has reserved it for
§ If the heir fails to deliver the security certain heirs
required under a modal institution § Conceptually, a specified portion of the
§ Dispositions may take effect only from a estate of a deceased person which is reserved
certain day (ex die) or only up to a certain day for compulsory heirs as the latter’s minimum
(in diem) share of the inheritance
§ Appointment of substitute or interim heir to
address the vacuum in inheritance left by Compulsory Heirs (Art. 887)
institutions ex die or in diem, partaking of the § Heirs for whom the legitime is reserved, as
nature of a fideicommisary substitution opposed to testamentary heirs who inherit by
§ Legal heirs are called to the succession; virtue of a duly probated will
in the interim, acquire title to the § Differ from intestate heirs because intestate
property subject to the resolutory term of heirs inherit only if the decedent did not leave
when the term arrives a valid and operative will, whereas a
§ But if ex die, legal heirs cannot enter into compulsory heir is called to succeed by law
possession of property until after giving whether or not the decedent left a will
security. Intestate heirs nearest in degree § Classification of Compulsory Heirs:
take over § Primary: As principal beneficiaries,
exclude secondary compulsory heirs.
Modal Institutions (Art. 882 – 883) Legitimate children are the primary
§ Testator specifically states: compulsory heirs
§ The object of the institution; or § Secondary: Succeed only in default of
§ The application of the property; or primary compulsory heirs. Legitimate
§ The charge on the recipient parents and other legitimate ascendants
§ Obliges the heir, devisee or legatee to comply are secondary compulsory heirs.
but does not actually defer or suspend the Illegitimate parents inherit as secondary
efficacy of the institution compulsory heirs only in the absence of
§ Not considered as a condition unless it descendants of the decedent
appears that such was the intention § Concurring: Heirs who succeed
§ May be claimed provided security for concurrently with primary or secondary
compliance and for the return of compulsory heirs. Includes surviving
anything he received if the obligation is spouse and illegitimate children
disregarded
§ Breach results in the forfeiture of the gift Essential Qualifications (Art. 992)
§ Must be premised on a categorical directive § Illegitimate child can inherit from parents but
expressed by the director cannot inherit from the legitimate relatives of
§ If doubt on whether modal or the illegitimate mother or father
institutional, considered modal § Illegitimate ascendant cannot inherit from
§ If doubt on whether mode or suggestion, the legitimate children and descendants of
considered mere suggestion his illegitimate child

     
   22

§ If marriage to decedent is terminated, not a § In both cases, share of surviving spouse is

surviving spouse taken from portion that can be freely
§ Spouse who gave cause for legal separation disposed of by the testator
is disqualified to inherit from the innocent
spouse by intestate succession In Case of Legal Separation
§ Remain reciprocal compulsory heirs
Components of Estate of a Deceased § However, offending spouse is disqualified to
Person inherit from innocent spouse by intestacy
§ Strict Legitime: One half of net hereditary § Offending spouse does not inherit from a will
estate, reserved for primary compulsory heirs executed prior to decree of legal separation,
or, in default, secondary compulsory heirs but may inherit if the will is executed
§ Free Portion: For concurring compulsory subsequent to the separation
heirs
§ Disposable Free Portion: Balance of free In Case of Termination by Judicial Decree
portion after payment of legitime of § Assume A is absent spouse, B is spouse in
concurring compulsory heir good faith and C is spouse in bad faith
§ If A records affidavit of reappearance, B
Legitimate Children and Descendants and C cease to be reciprocal compulsory
§ Legitime consists of one half of the hereditary § C is disqualified to inherit from B
estate of the father and mother pursuant to a will executed by B prior to
§ Strict legitime is divided equally among the or after the termination of marriage
legitimate children and/or legitimate § C is disqualified to inherit from B as an
descendants intestate heir
§ Children of the adopted child are neither § Marriage of A and B subsists
relatives nor compulsory heirs of the adopter § If both A and C are spouses in good faith, A
§ Legitimate descendants inherit from a inherits as surviving spouse of B since second
legitimate ascendant by: marriage is terminated
§ Right of Representation: Occurs in
disinheritance, incapacity and predecease Void and Voidable Marriages
§ Own Right: If all legitimate children of § Succession does not flow between them,
decedent repudiate the inheritance except if there is a blood relationship
§ Guilty party is disqualified to inherit by
Legitimate Parents and Ascendants testate or intestate
§ In default of legitimate or adopted children § Disposition made by innocent party are
and other legitimate descendants revoked by operation of law
§ Legitimate ascendants inherit only in § Void marriages not require judicial
absence of legitimate parents declaration of nullity of marriage to deny
§ Legitimate parents share the legitime successional rights
equally. If one parent predeceased the
decedent, legitimate shall pertain exclusively Legitimate Ascendants + Spouse
to the survivor § If no legitimate descendants but legitimate
§ If legitimate ascendants of the same degree ascendants with surviving spouse, spouse
inherit, divided equally between maternal gets one fourth of estate
and paternal lines (succession per stirpes)
Illegitimate Children + Spouse
Legitimate Children + Spouse § Surviving spouse entitled to one third;
§ If only one legitimate child with surviving illegitimate children entitled to another third
spouse, spouse gets one-fourth of estate § Remaining third is at free disposal of testator
§ If two or more legitimate children, spouse § Total legitime of illegitimate children cannot
receives portion equal to legitime of each exceed free portion
§ Legitime of surviving spouse must first be
satisfied

     
   23

Illegitimate Children + Legitimate Survivor LC SS IC LP IP

Parents LC only 1/2
§ Legitimate parents entitled to one half of net 1 LC and SS 1/2 1/4
hereditary estate 2+ LC, IC 1/2
1/2 1 LC
§ Illegitimate child is entitled to one fourth and SS LC
SS and IC 1/3 1/3
Illegitimate Children + Legitimate LP, SS
1/8 1/4 1/2
Children + Surviving Spouse and IC
§ Surviving spouse entitled to portion equal to LP only 1/2
legitime of each legitimate child IC only 1/2
SS only
§ Illegitimate child is entitled one half the
GR:
legitime of each legitimate child
1/2
§ Share of surviving spouse must be paid E:
ahead of legitime of illegitimate children LP and SS 1/2
1/3
EE:
Illegitimate Children + Legitimate 1/4
Parents + Surviving Spouse IP only 1/2
§ Surviving spouse entitled to one eight of IP and SS 1/4 1/4
hereditary estate from free portion
§ Illegitimate children entitled to one fourth of Determination of the Legitime
estate also from free portion, to be divided § Procedure
equally among themselves § Determine total value of properties left
by the decedent or testator at the time of
Surviving Spouse Alone death (fair market and/or BIR zonal)
§ General Rule: One half of net hereditary § From the total value, deduct unpaid
estate debts as well as other charges; balance is
§ Exception: If solemnized in articulo mortis net hereditary estate
and the decedent dies within three months § To the net hereditary estate, add the
§ Exception to the Exception: If prior to the value of all other donations, i.e. fair
marriage in articulo maris the couple have market value at time of the donation.
been cohabiting for more than five years from Sum is the theoretical hereditary estate
day of celebration of marriage § While theoretical hereditary estate is basis for
calculating the legitime of compulsory heirs,
Illegitimate Children the net hereditary estate is the estate to be
§ If alone, entitled to one half of hereditary distributed to the heirs
estate of the deceased
§ Right over the legitime is transmitted upon Duty to Collate
their death to descendants, whether § Necessary if decedent is survived by
legitimate or illegitimate (representation) compulsory heirs, to know if legitime has
§ Compare to the discriminatory effect of been impaired. Donations must not exceed
Article 992, where illegitimate descendants the disposable free portion
cannot inherit from a legitimate child § Merely a notional process, i.e. property is not
physically taken back from the done
Illegitimate Parents § Donations given to children are presumed
§ If only heir, one half of hereditary estate chargeable to legitime unless non-
§ If children are left, not entitled collationable; donations to strangers are
§ If illegitimate parent + surviving spouse, charged to disposable free portion
parents are entitled to one fourth and spouse § If collationable donation was given to a
is entitled to one fourth as well compulsory heir who concurs with other
compulsory heirs, collation equalizes
Summary of Rules on Legitime respective shares of all compulsory heirs
§ Refer to table

     
   24

§ If collationable donation was given to a Presum ptive Legitim e

stranger, limits value of donation to that § Payment of presumptive legitime to childen
which can be absorbed by the disposable free following annulment or declaration of nullity
portion § Must be brought to collation as considered
an advance of the legitime; but may not be
Order of Reduction or Abatement of realistic due to changing fortunes
Donations and Testamentary
Dispositions
§ Calculate the theoretical hereditary estate
Reserva Troncal (ART. 891)
Elements
§ From theoretical hereditary estate, pay the
§ Legitimate ascendant (reservoir) acquires
legitime of the primary compulsory heirs
property from a legitimate descendant
§ If legitime is greater than the net hereditary
(prepositus) by operation of law
estate, donations should be reduced or
§ Prepositus acquired the reservable property
abated beginning from more recent ones to
by gratuitous title from another legitimate
older ones
ascendant, brother or sister (origin)
§ If there is a positive balance comprising the
§ Reservor is required by law to reserve the
disposable free portion after payment of
reservable property
legitime, same shall be used to pay preferred
§ Beneficiaries of the reserve are the legitimate
legacies and devises
relatives of the prepositus within the third
§ After payment of preferred legacies and
degree of consanguinity coming from the line
devises, balance shall be applied to all
of the origin (reservees)
ordinary legacies and devises. If balance is
insufficient, shall be prorated
Parties to Reserva Troncal
§ Origin
Reduction of Partly Inoffocious Devises
§ Prepositus
§ General Rule: Reduction of the devise should
§ Reservor
take the form of a physical partition of the
§ Reservee
property
§ Where Partition is Impractical
Origin
§ If reduction does not absorb one half,
§ Source of the reservable property
devisee may retain property but shall
§ Either a legitimate ascendant or a legitimate
reimburse aggrieved compulsory heirs
brother or sister, whether full or half blood
§ If reduction is one half or greater, the heir
§ Transfers ownership to prepositus by
is entitled to retain the property but must
gratuitous title – donation inter vivos,
reimburse the devisee in cash
donation proper nuptias hereditary
§ If heirs/devisees do not choose to avail
succession or debt paid by prepositus to
themselves of the right granted, any heir or
liquidate estate of origin
devisee who did not have such right may
§ Simulated sales or transfers for less than full
exercise it
consideration may be gratuitous to extent of
§ Should the latter not make use of it, the
inadequacy of consideration/intent
property shall be sold at public auction at
the instance of any one of the interested
Prepositus
parties
§ Legitimate descendant, brother or sister of
origin who acquires ownership of reservable
Disposable Free Portion
property by gratuitous title
§ Testator may devise and bequeath the free
§ While prepositus is owner of property, there is
portion as he may deem fit
no reserve as he is absolute owner
§ But not absolute, subject to restrictions as
§ If alienates the property, it loses the prospect
provided in other provisions of the Code
of becoming reservable at some future time
§ Examples: Fideicommisary substitution,
dispocicion captatoria, common-law

     
   25

§ May forestall the reserve by: Distribution of the Reservable Property

§ Disposing property by an act inter vivos § Padura v Baldovino
§ Controlling the partition of his estate Adopted the theory of delayed intestacy;
§ Begetting a legitimate child hence, distribution is subject to rule of equal
§ Adopting a child division and right of representation
§ After identifying reserves based on rules
Reservor of intestate succession, the rule of equal
§ Legitimate ascendant who acquires division applies
ownership by operation of law from § Nephews and nieces of prepositus may
prepositus exercise right of representation provided
§ Has statutory obligation to return the they concur with at least one brother or
reservable property to the reserves who are sister of the prepositus
legitimate relatives of the prepositus coming § Gonzales v CFI
from the line of the origin Reservor cannot make a disposition mortis
§ Must have received the property by operation cause of the reservable properties as long as
of law: the reserves survive the reservoir; cannot by
§ Intestate succession means of his will choose the reserve to whom
§ Succession to the legitime the property should be awarded
§ Cannot be by right of representation
because such is not available to the Encumbrance Created by the Reserva
ascending line § Reserva restrains ability of reservoir to
§ Owner of the reservable property and has a dispose the reservable property
registrable title thereto; but power to § Burden created by reserva follows the
alienate is subject to qualifications reservable property, such that every
§ Prohibited to dispose mortis causa in transferee deriving title from the reservoir is
favor of persons other than relatives subject to the double resolutory conditions
within third degree of prepositus from § Obligation to return the property to the
line of origin reserves cannot be fulfilled in any other
§ Does not form part of estate of the manner, such as paying its monetary
reservoir, as he is without authority to equivalent. Hence, reservers are entitled to
dispose the reservable property protect themselves by causing the
§ Conditional heir of the prepositus with annotation of their rights as reserves.
respect to the property; resolutory conditions § Sumaya v IAC
of the death of the testator and the survival In reserva troncal, the reservoir has the duty
of a reservee to reserve and therefore the duty to annotate

Reservees Reserva Minim a and Reserva Maxim a

§ Ultimate beneficiaries of the reservable § Relevant where heir has both rights of a
property provided the double resolutory compulsory heir and a voluntary heir
conditions are fulfilled § Reserva Maxima: Reservable character of
§ Relatives of the prepositus within the third property must be preserved to maximum
degree of consanguinity belonging to the line extent; hence must be allocated as much as
of origin possible to the legitime
§ Can run only in the legitimate family § Reserva Minima: Reservable character must
§ Rule of proximity applies in identifying the be mitigated; achieved by a proportionate
reserves, without prejudice to preference in allocation between legitime and disposable
intestate succession free portion
§ De Papa v Camacho
Hence, niece may exclude the uncles and
aunts of the prepositus from distribution
of reservable property

     
   26

Extinguishment of the Reserva § Legacies and devises may be reduced if after

§ Loss of Reservable Property the annulment of the institution of heirs
§ May be physical loss or destruction, or there are insufficient assets to satisfy the
going out of the commerce of man legitime of the disinherited compulsory heir
§ Accidental loss and force majeure § Void disinheritance entitles heir to recover
extinguishes the reserva but only up to legitime
§ Deliberate destruction may give rise to
damages based on breach of the Disinheritance of Children and
obligation and/or tort Descendants
§ Waiver of the Reservees § Child or descendant has been found guilty of
§ If all reservees waive their rights, reserva an attempt against the life of the testator, his
is extinguished in its entirety or her spouse, descendants, or ascendants
§ If only some waive their rights, the § Child or descendant has accused the testator
reserva shall benefit the non-waiving of a crime for which the law prescribes
reservees imprisonment for six years or more, if the
§ Non-Survival of Reservees accusation has been found groundless
§ Extinguished if no surviving reservees at § Child or descendant has been convicted of
the time the reservor dies adultery or concubinage with the spouse of
the testator
Disinheritance § Child or descendant by fraud, violence,
Requisites of a Valid Disinheritance intimidation, or undue influence causes the
§ Disinherited heir must be compulsory testator to make a will or to change one
§ Disinherited heir must be identified with already made
certainty § A refusal without justifiable cause to support
§ Must be for a cause specified by law the parent or ascendant who disinherits such
§ Must be made in a valid will child or descendant
§ Must be express § Maltreatment of the testator by word or
§ Must be for a true and certain cause deed, by the child or descendant
§ Must be total § Child or descendant leads a dishonorable or
disgraceful life
Essential Features § Conviction of a crime which carries with it the
§ Can only occur in testamentary succession penalty of civil interdiction
§ Only compulsory heirs may be disinherited
§ Any testamentary disposition in favor of a Disinheritance of Parents or Ascendants
voluntary heir may be revoked by the testator § Parents have abandoned their children or
at any time prior to his death with or without induced their daughters to live a corrupt or
cause and such revocation cannot be immoral life, or attempted against their
construed as a form of disinheritance virtue
§ Valid disinheritance carries the automatic § Parent or ascendant has been convicted of an
revocation of any and all testamentary attempt against the life of the testator, his or
dispositions made by the testator her spouse, descendants, or ascendants
§ Valid disinheritance bars disinherited heir § Parent or ascendant has accused the testator
from inheriting from the testator both by of a crime for which the law prescribes
testacy and by intestacy imprisonment for six years or more, if the
§ Burden of proof on testator who seek to accusation has been found to be false
enforce the disinheritance § Parent or ascendant has been convicted of
adultery or concubinage with the spouse of
Void Disinheritance the testator
§ Void if does not specify cause, or if the cause § Parent or ascendant by fraud, violence,
is not proven, or for a cause not by law intimidation, or undue influence causes the
§ Disinheritance is effective; institution of heirs testator to make a will or to change one
is annuled already made

     
   27

§ The loss of parental authority § Intervention of heir in the court proceeding

§ The refusal to support the children or may take form of oral testimony; heir need
descendants without justifiable cause not directly accuse testator
§ An attempt by one of the parents against the § But dismissal of the charge at the preliminary
life of the other, unless there has been a investigation stage cannot be used by the
reconciliation between them testator as basis for disinheriting
§ Must be a judicial declaration that the
Disinheritance of Spouse accusation was baseless, resulting in
§ Spouse has been convicted of an attempt acquittal; reasonable doubt, prescription,
against the life of the testator, his or her [Link] not basis to disinherit
descendants, or ascendants
§ Spouse has accused the testator of a crime Adultery or Concubinage
for which the law prescribes imprisonment of § Criminal conviction is necessary
six years or more, and the accusation has § Testator must be lawfully married to the
been found to be false offending spouse
§ Spouse by fraud, violence, intimidation, or § May disinherit a child or descendant at any
undue influence cause the testator to make a time after commission of the offense, but not
will or to change one already made effective until final conviction is obtained
§ Spouse has given cause for legal separation § Disinheritance imposed only on the guilty
§ Spouse has given grounds for the loss of child or descendant, and not on guilty spouse
parental authority
§ Unjustifiable refusal to support the children Fraud or Coercion
or the other spouse § Vice of consent causing the testator to make
a will or to change one already made
Attempt on Life § Necessary to have disinheritance be in a new
§ Legitimacy or illegitimacy of relationship is will or codicil
generally irrelevant, except if attempt is
made on life of spouse, must be lawfully Refusal to Give Support
married § Unjustified refusal is tantamount to willfully
§ Not limited to attempted stage; must include and deliberately putting at risk the survival of
the frustrated and consummated stages the testator
§ Critical element is intent to kill the victim
§ Necessitates final judgment of offense Maltreatment of the Testator
charged; may disinherit even if there is no § May be committed by word or by deed
final conviction yet, but must eventually be § Must be intentional and the purpose is to
obtained demonstrate lack of respect or to humiliate
§ Acquittal renders disinheritance effective but the testator
grant of executive clemency does not render
disinheritance ineffective Leading a Disgraceful Life
§ Disinheritance is valid even if the defendant § Matter of opinion influenced by moral
is convicted as accomplice or accessory standards of a particular community
§ Single or isolated act not sufficient to justify
False Accusation disinheritance
§ Essential Elements
§ Must make an accusation against the Civil Interdiction
testator § Accessory penalty imposed by RPC
§ Accusation is for a crime for which the § Defined as deprivation of an offender during
law imposes the penalty of imprisonment time of his sentence of rights of parental
for six years or more authority, guardianship, etc.
§ The court acquits the testator and § Deferred until such time as the child is
declares the accusation to be false convicted by final judgment whereupon the
accessory penalty is imposed

     
   28

Abandonment of Children petitioner, a common child, or a child of

§ Total neglect of parental obligations towards the petitioner
the children § Physical violence or moral pressure to
§ Does not apply where a parent voluntarily compel the petitioner to change religious
gives consent to adoption or political affiliation
§ Attempt of respondent to corrupt or
Inducing Daughter to Live a Corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or
Immoral Life a child of the petitioner, to engage in
§ Matter for the court to appreciate prostitution, or connivance in such
§ Some advance the view that proscription corruption or inducement
must be understood to include any female § Final judgment sentencing the
descendant; but in general causes for respondent to imprisonment of more
disinheritance must be strictly construed than six years, even if pardoned
§ Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of
Attempt on Virtue the respondent
§ May constitute attempted rape, attempted § Lesbianism or homosexuality of the
seduction or acts of lasciviousness respondent
§ Need not be a female descendant of offender § Contracting by the respondent of a
subsequent bigamous marriage, whether
Loss of Parental Authority in the Philippines or abroad
§ Grounds § Sexual infidelity or perversion
§ By final judgment in a criminal case the § Attempt by the respondent against the
penalty of deprivation of said authority is life of the petitioner or
imposed upon the parent § Abandonment of petitioner by
§ By final judgment in legal separation respondent without justifiable cause for
such loss of parental authority is decreed more than one year
§ Disinheritance may be justified only when the § Judicial decree of legal separation is not
loss of parental authority is for a culpable act necessary; fact of giving cause for legal
or omission of the erring parent separation that justifies disinheritance
§ Disinheritance may subsist despite
restoration or recovery of parental authority Concept of Reconciliation
§ Reconciliation between offender and
Attempt of a Parent on Life of the Other offended deprives latter of right to disinherit
§ May be grounds for disinheritance unless § Fact to be established by evidence
there has been reconciliation
§ Prior conviction by final judgment is not Common Grounds for Disinheritance and
necessary before a child could exercise power Unworthiness
§ Does not apply where plotter and intended § Attempt on life of testator, spouse,
victim are adopting parents; adopting descendants, or ascendants
parents are not compulsory heirs § Abandonment of children or inducing
§ Neither does it apply if either the plotter or daughters to live a corrupt or immoral life
the intended victim is a stepparent § Falsely accusing the testator of a crime for
§ If plotter is a stepparent, cannot which the law imposes a penalty of
disinherit because not compulsory heir imprisonment for six years or more
§ If plotter is biological parent, cannot § Conviction of adultery or concubinage with
disinherit because intended victim is not the spouse of the testator
a relative of the child § Use of fraud, violence, intimidation or undue
influence
Giving Cause for Legal Separation
§ Grounds
§ Repeated physical violence or grossly
abusive conduct directed against the

     
   29

Obliteration of Disinheritance and § If burden is collective, or no heir charged in

Unworthiness particular, heirs are liable in the same
§ Obliteration of Unworthiness proportion
§ Testator had knowledge of such § If two or more heirs take possession of the
unworthiness at the time he made the estate, solidarily liable for loss or destruction
will and nonetheless left something even if only one at fault
§ Having known of the unworthiness, § If heirs are bound to deliver, also warrant
nonetheless condones in writing generic legacies and devises. Liable in case of
§ Conflict if testator, after having disinherited eviction
the heir, subsequently reconciles
§ When testator and disinherited reconcile, Partly Owned Property/Order to Acquire
disinheritance becomes ineffective and § General Rule: Legacy or devise is limited to
antecedent offense can longer serve as part or interest owned by the testator, heir or
basis to deny successional rights legatee
§ Exceptions:
Right of Representation § If testator expressly declares gives the
§ Disinheritance of a compulsory heir entitles thing in its entirety
children and descendants of disinherited heir § Must indicate in the will that he is
to exercise right of representation aware of another person having
§ Disinherited parent shall not have usufruct or interest
administration of property § Such knowledge gives rise to an
§ Rules implied instruction from the testator
§ Right available only in direct descending § If thing becomes testator’s after making
line, never in ascending line the will, though erroneously believed
§ Right of representation in testamentary thing pertained to him at the time he
succession covers only the legitime; right made till
of representation in intestate succession § Otherwise, disposition is void
covers the entire intestate share of the § If testator gives order to acquire
defaulting intestate heir § If owner of thing refuses to alienate
§ In order to exercise the right of or demands an excessive price, heir
representation, representative must be or estate only obliged to give just
capable of succeeding the testator value of the thing

Legacies and Devises Ineffective Legacies and Devises

§ If the legacy or devise already belonged to
(Art. 924 – 959) the legatee or devisee at the time of the
Concept
execution of the will
§ Legacies: Gift of movable property given by
§ But if testator expressly orders that the
the testator to a specified beneficiary
thing be freed from interest or
§ Devises: Gift of immovable property given by
encumbrance of another person, shall be
the testator to a specified beneficiary
valid to that extent
§ Must be within commerce of man, hence
§ Applies even if subsequently alienated
capable of private ownership or can be the
§ If on the date of execution of the will the
subject matter of a contract
thing did not belong to the legatee or
devisee, but the latter acquired the same
Burden
during the lifetime of the testator
§ General Rule: Legacies and devises are
§ Gratuitous: Can claim nothing
burdens on the estate of the deceased, must
§ Onerous: Can demand reimbursement
be paid by the executor or administration
§ Exception: Burden may be imposed upon a
particular heir, legatee or devisee
§ Burden cannot exceed value of the gift

     
  30

Subject to Encumbrance Rules on Alternative Legacies and

§ If legacy or devise is burdened by pledge or Devises
mortgage, estate is obliged to pay the debt § Right to choice is presumably given to the
unless contrary appears heir charged; if no such person is burdened,
§ Any other charge passes to legatee or choice shall be made by executor
devisee § Legatee or devisee cannot be compelled or
§ Obligation must be demandable demand to receive part of one thing and part
§ If thing bequeathed is subject to usufruct, of another
right shall be respected until legally § Cannot choose thing which is impossible or
extinguished could not have been the object of the legacy
or devise
Legacies of Credit and Remission § Right of choice is lost when among the things
§ Pertain only to part of credit or portion of which he is alternatively bound to deliver only
debt existing at time of death of the testator one is practicable
§ Legacy of credit assigns all rights of action § Legatee or devisee has right to indemnity for
against debtor, may thus include future damages when through the fault of the
receivables person burdened, all the things are lost or
§ Delivered by way of an assignment; when compliances becomes impossible
includes all accessory obligations § If things lost due to force majeure, person
§ May be generic, i.e. all receivables owned burdened shall deliver the remaining things
or with parameters, or specific, i.e. only § If things lost due to fault, person with right to
those receivables identified. But generic choose may claim any of those subsisting or
legacies only comprise those existing at price of thing lost, with a claim to damages
time of the execution
§ Legacy of credit extinguished if during the Specific Legacies
testator’s lifetime he brings an action against § Education: Lasts until legatee is of ag or
the debtor beyond age of majority in order that legatee
§ Legacy or devise made to creditor shall not may finish course provided he pursues his
be applied to a credit unless testator course diligently
expressly declares § Support: Lasts during lifetime of legatee
§ In the latter case, creditor has the right to unless otherwise provided
collect the excess § If testator used to give certain sum as
support, same amount is bequeathed
Erroneous Order to Pay Debt unless disproportionate to the estate
§ If testator orders payment of what is in fact § Periodical Pension: Legatee may petition
not due, disposition considered not written court for first installment upon death, and for
§ If more than the amount of a specified debt is following ones due at beginning of each
ordered paid, excess is not due period
§ Without prejudice to natural obligations: if § Cannot be returned even though legatee
testator being aware that obligation has should die before expiration or period
prescribed nonetheless ordered payment,
instruction to pay is valid Acquisition and Transferability of Rights
§ Pure and Simple: Acquires rights from death,
Alternative Legacies and Devises transmits to own heirs if survived testator but
§ Testator gives to a legatee or devisee two or died before physical delivery
more things in the alternative § Specific Property: Same as pure and simple
§ Choice is presumed to be left to the heir upon § Generic Property: Acquires rights from time
whom the obligation to give is imposed; may person to whom the right of selection was
only be exercised after death given exercises the right
§ Governed by rules on alternative obligations § Alternative: Same as generic property
§ Once choice is made, generally irrevocable § Owned by a Third Person: From the time
acquired from the third person

     
   31

§ General Rule: Things bequeathed shall be § If estate is not sufficient:

delivered with all accessions and accessories, § Remuneratory legacies or devises
in condition in which it may be upon death of § Declared to be preferential
the testator § For support
§ Legatee or devisee has right to fruits of § For education
specific and determinate things § Of a specific thing
§ But not income due and unpaid before § All others pro rata
testator’s death
§ From moment of death, thing Request of Delivery
bequeathed is at risk of legatee or § Legatee or devisee cannot possess thing
devisee who bears loss and benefits from upon own authority, shall make a request for
improvement or increase delivery to person burdened
§ Legatee or devisee also has rights to fruits
and interests of generic thing if testator Acceptance and Repudiation
expressly so declares § If onerous: Cannot accept a part and
repudiate the other
Discharge of Legacies and Devises § If legatee/devisee predeceases: Some heirs
§ Heir, executor or administrator must deliver if of the legatee/devisee may accept and
able to do so, cannot discharge by paying others may repudiate share
value in cash § Share of repudiating heirs shall pertain to
§ Legacies of money must be paid in cash, even those who accept it by accretion
though heir or estate may not have any § If multiple legacies:
§ Expenses necessary for delivery shall be for § If one of the objects is onerous and the
account of heir or estate, but without other is gratuitous, cannot renounce the
prejudice to legitime onerous one and accept the gratuitous
§ If both are onerous or gratuitous, can
Order of Preference accept one and reject the other except if
§ Requisites for Application testator intended to be inseparable
§ Testator gave various legacies and § If compulsory heir is also legatee/devisee:
devises May accept both, reject both, or accept one
§ Estate does not have sufficient assets to and reject the other
pay § If neither substitution nor right of accretion is
§ Testator has no compulsory heirs unavailable, object reverts to mass of estate;
§ If the testator is survived by compulsory heirs, distributed under rules of intestacy
order of preference is governed by Article 911 § RIP: repudiation, incapacity, predecease
§ Calculate the theoretical hereditary
estate Ineffective Legacies and Devises
§ From theoretical hereditary estate, pay § Transformation: Does not retain either form
the legitime of the primary compulsory or denomination
heirs § Alienation: Without effect only to part
§ If legitime is greater than the net alienated; reacquisition does not make
hereditary estate, donations should be legacy/devise valid unless reacquisition is by
reduced or abated beginning from more the right of repurchase
recent ones to older ones § Loss: Totally lost during lifetime of testator or
§ If there is a positive balance comprising after death without heir’s fault. Warranty for
the disposable free portion after payment generic legacies and devises applies
of legitime, same shall be used to pay
preferred legacies and devises Other Rules
§ After payment of preferred legacies and § Mistake in name of thing is of no
devises, balance shall be applied to all consequence if it is possible to identify
ordinary legacies and devises. If balance § General terms in favor of relatives is for
is insufficient, shall be prorated nearest in degree

     
   32

INTESTATE SUCCESSION § Must be capacitated to inherit from the

decedent
§ Adopted child may not represent his adoptive
General Provisions parent
(Art. 960 – 962) § Neither may adopted child be represented in
the inheritance of his adoptive parent
Causes of Intestacy § Representative only steps into the shoes of
§ Person dies without a will, or with a void will, the person represented
or one which has subsequently lost its validity § In the descending line, right of representation
§ Will does not institute an heir, or dispose of is exercisable in an unbroken chain one
all property belonging to testator degree at a time
§ Suspensive condition is not fulfilled § As a right created by fiction of law, does not
§ Heir predeceases or repudiates, there being take into account the wishes of the deceased
no substitution or right of accretion § Repudiator may represent, but may not be
§ Heir instituted is incapable of succeeding represented; hence, his heirs may not by right
of representation accept what he rejected
Rule of Proxim ity
§ Relatives nearest to the decedent in degree Scope of Representation
will inherit from the decedent to the Testamentary Intestate
exclusion of the more remote ones
§ Exceptions Disinheritance, incapacity
Incapacity and predecease
§ Right of Representation and predecease
§ Preference for the descending line over Covers only the legitime of Covers the full intestate share of
the person represented the person represented
the ascending line
Generally available only in the
§ Preference for the direct line as opposed descending line, but may be
to the collateral line Available only in the
exercised in collateral line by
descending line
nieces and nephews of the
Equal Division decedent
§ Heirs of the same degree shall inherit in
equal shares Representation in the Direct Line
§ Exceptions § Takes place in the direct descending line but
§ Full – blood brothers and sisters are never in the ascending line
entitled to have twice the share of
brothers and sisters of half blood Representation in the Collateral Line
§ In ascending line, inheritance is divided § In the collateral line, takes place only in favor
equally between paternal and maternal of the children of brothers and sisters
lines. Within each line, the inheritance is § Available only in intestate succession
divided per capita § Right is exclusive to nephews and nieces
§ When heirs inherit by right of § May exercise the right only if they concur with
representation, the representatives at least one uncle or aunt; inherit in their own
receive only that portion which the right as relatives otherwise
person represented would otherwise § Subject to the application of the barrier in
inherit if he were living and could inherit Article 992 (legitimate/illegitimate)
§ Nephews and nieces inheriting in a
Right of Representation representative capacity inherit as second
(Art. 970 – 977) degree relatives in the collateral line
§ Exclude all other relatives of the
Basic Principles decedent, including uncles and aunts
§ Exception to the rule of proximity
§ Representative is called to succession by law;
does not inherit from the person inherited

     
   33

DIRECT DESCENDING LINE

Legitimate and/or Adopted Children and
Order of Intestate Succession their Descendants
(Art. 978 – 1014) § Entire estate shall be divided equally among
the legitimate and/or adopted children
Problem in Case of Partial Intestacy § Legitimate descendants of a legitimate child
§ What if distribution impairs legitime of one may exercise right of representation in case
heir while having an excess in the legitime of of predecease, incapacity and valid
another? disinheritance; receive in equal shares
§ Note following rules: § Illegitimate descendants of a legitimate child
§ Legitime must be preserved even in are barred from exercising right of
intestate succession. Legitime of a representation
compulsory heir can never be reduced § Adopted child may not be represented by his
except for illegitimate children whose or her descendants
legitime is taken from the free portion
§ To satisfy a legacy or devise which is not + Illegitimate Children and their
inofficious, the share of intestate heir may Descendants
be reduced but not to extent of impairing § Illegitimate child gets half the share of a
the legitime legitimate and/or adopted child
§ Solution: § Intestate share of illegitimate child may be
§ Pay the legacy which is not inofficious reduced if the division would result in
§ Give the legitime of A and B impairment of legitime of legitimate and/or
§ Divide disposable free portion equally adopted children
between them § Illegitimate child may be represented by
descendants, whether legitimate or not
Order of Intestate Succession to a
Legitimate Decedent + Surviving Spouse
§ Legitimate children and their legitimate § Estate divided equally among them
descendants
§ In default, legitimate parents and other + Surviving Spouse + Illegitimate
legitimate ascendants Children
§ Illegitimate children and their descendants § Surviving spouse gets same share as
§ Surviving spouse legitimate and/or adopted child
§ Legitimate brothers, sisters, nephews and § Each of the illegitimate children shall get half
nieces the share of a legitimate and/or adopted
§ Other legitimate collateral relatives up to the child
fifth degree § Paid only after the intestate share of the
§ The State surviving spouse has been paid
§ Intestate share of illegitimate children
Order of Intestate Succession to an may be reduced if, after the payment of
Illegitimate Decedent the intestate share of the surviving
§ Legitimate children and legitimate spouse, the estate is insufficient to pay in
descendants full the share of illegitimate children
§ Illegitimate children and their descendants
§ In default, illegitimate parents Illegitimate Children and their
§ Surviving spouses Descendants
§ Illegitimate brothers, sisters, nephews and § Entire estate shall be divided equally among
nieces the illegitimate children
§ The State

     
   34

+ Surviving Spouse SURVIVING SPOUSE

§ Half the estate divided equally among the Surviving Spouse
illegitimate children § The surviving spouse is entitled to the entire
§ The other half will be given to the surviving estate
spouse shall take half of the estate
+ Brothers, Sisters, Nephews and Nieces
DIRECT ASCENDING LINE § Half the estate given to the surviving spouse
Legitimate Parents/Legitimate § The other half shall pertain to the brothers
Ascendants and sisters, subject to the right of
§ Estate divided equally between surviving representation of nephews and nieces
parents § Subject to the provisions of 992 and 1006
§ If there is no surviving parent, the estate shall § Illegitimate child has no right to inherit
be adjudicated to the ascendants nearest in intestate from legitimate children and
degree dividing equally between paternal relatives of his parents, and vice versa
and maternal lines § Brothers and sisters of full blood entitled
§ In each line, divided per capita to a share double that of brothers and
§ Illegitimate ascendants do not have rights sisters of half blood
§ Have no right of representation
COLLATERAL LINE
+ Illegitimate Children and their Brothers, Sisters, Nephews, Nieces
Descendants § Estate divided between brothers and sisters
§ Half the estate given to the legitimate with children of predeceased or incapacitated
parents or legitimate ascendants brother or sister, who inherit by right of
§ The other half will be divided equally among representation
the illegitimate children, subject to right of § Subject to the provisions of 992 and 1006
representation of the grandchildren § Illegitimate child has no right to inherit
regardless of their legitimacy intestate from legitimate children and
relatives of his parents, and vice versa
+ Surviving Spouse § Brothers and sisters of full blood entitled
§ Half the estate given to the legitimate to a share double that of brothers and
parents or legitimate ascendants sisters of half blood
§ The other half will be given to the surviving
spouse Other Collateral Relatives
§ Shall take the entire estate subject to
+ Surviving Spouse + Illegitimate application of rule of proximity and 992
Children and their Descendants § Illegitimate child has no right to inherit
§ Half the estate given to the legitimate intestate from legitimate children and
parents or legitimate ascendants relatives of his parents, and vice versa
§ The surviving spouse takes one fourth
§ The illegitimate children take one fourth and The State
shall divide the share equally § Steals the entire estate

Illegitimate Parents
§ Estate divided equally among illegitimate
parents; other illegitimate ascendants do not
have successional rights

+ Surviving Spouse
§ Half the estate given to the illegitimate
parents
§ The other half shall be given to the surviving
spouse

     
   35

PROVISIONS COMMON TO § Bequeathing all movable property X and

all immovable property to Y
TESTATE AND INTESTATE
SUCCESSION Basic Principles
§ Accrued inheritance is shared proportionately
Right of Accretion § Heirs succeed to all rights and obligations
(Art. 1015 – 1023) which the heir who renounced or could not
receive it would have had
Definition § Does not apply to a vacancy in the legitime;
§ The right by virtue of which, when two or in such case, co – heirs succeed to the
more persons are called to the same additional legitime in their own right
inheritance, devise or legacy, the part § Distribution of the vacant portion among the
assigned to one who renounces or cannot co – heirs must be in proportion to their
receive his share, or who died before the respective entitlements to the disposable
testator, is added or incorporated to that of free portion; legitime must be set aside in
his co – heirs, co – legatee or co – devisee computation
§ Exercised only if substitution and right of § If accretion is inapplicable, vacant portion
representation did not adequately remedy passes to the legal heirs of the decedent
vacancy in inheritance
§ Substitution: Different contingency may Capacity to Succeed
occur from what is specified, or substitute (Art. 1024 – 1040)
may be incapacitated
§ Right of Representation: Not available in Absolute and Relative Incapacity
case of repudiation, takes place only in § Absolute: Incapacity of a person to inherit
direct descending line from any one or to inherit any property under
any circumstance
Accretion in Intestacy § Relative: Incapacity to succeed a particular
§ Share of person who repudiates always decedent or inherit a particular property
accrues to his co – heirs
§ But applies only if repudiator is a voluntary Application to Testacy and Intestacy
heir; if compulsory heir, no accretion because § Incapacity by undue influence and improper
accretion does not apply to the legitime pressure relevant only in testamentary
succession
Requisites of Accretion – Testam entary § Only incapacity by reason of unworthiness
§ Unity of the object applicable to both testacy and intestacy
§ Plurality of the subjects
§ Vacancy in the inheritance, legacy or devise Essential Element of Capacity to Succeed
§ Acceptance of the inheritance by those who § The existence of the heir, legatee or devisee
are to benefit from accretion at the time of death of the testator/decedent
§ Non – earmarking of shares § Exceptions
§ Right to representation
Concept of Non – Earmarking § Reserva
§ Shares must not be earmarked such that § Child already conceived at time of death
when they receive the same they shall under conditions in Art 41
become co – owners pro indiviso
§ Testator must not have partitioned the Dispositions in Favor of Juridical Persons
inheritance or the specific property and Unincorporated Entities
§ Otherwise, right of accretion cannot apply § May succeed unless there is a provision to the
§ Examples of earmarking contrary in their charter or creating law
§ Bequeathing to X a western part of § Testator may also create a trust to establish
property and to Y, the eastern part an educational or charitable institution

     
   36

Dispositions in Favor of the Soul have been approved, even if the testator
§ Applies when the testator disposes property should die after the approval thereof
for prayers and pious works for the benefit of § But disposition is valid when the
the soul in general terms guardian is his ascendant, descendant,
§ Executor shall deliver one half to church or brother, sister, or spouse
denomination to which testator belongs and § Note that minors cannot execute a will
the other half to the State § Any attesting witness to the execution of a
will, the spouse, parents, or children, or any
Dispositions in Favor of the Poor one claiming under such witness, spouse,
§ Applies to institutions of the poor in general parents, or children
where testator did not specify the persons or § Cross – refer with Article 823, declaring
the community to whom the bequest is given void a testamentary gift given by testator
§ Unless it clearly appears his intention is to attesting witness unless there are
otherwise, limited to the poor living in the three other competent witnesses
domicile of the testator at time of death § Exception provided in Art. 823 is
§ To be implemented by person appointed to rendered useless by this incapacity
testator for the purpose § Any physician, surgeon, nurse, health officer
§ In default of such person, the executor or druggist who took care of the testator
§ If no executor, by the justice of the peace, during his last illness
mayor and municipal treasurer § Implies continuing delivery; isolated
consultation is not sufficient
Dispositions in Favor of Disqualified § Not necessary to be duly licensed
§ Void even though made under guise of an practitioner
onerous contract or via an intermediary § Compulsory heirs not covered by the
disqualification
Incapacity by Undue Influence § Individuals, associations and corporations not
§ The priest who heard the confession of the permitted by law to inherit
testator during his last illness, or the minister
of the gospel who extended spiritual aid to Incapacity by Morality and/or Public
him during the same period Policy
§ Does not require that such confession of § Between persons who were guilty of adultery
the testator is the last or concubinage at the time of the execution
§ Lapse of time between confession and of the will
death does not obliterate incapacity § Prior conviction is not necessary
§ But incapacity becomes inoperative if § Between persons found guilty of the same
testator had opportunity to reflect and criminal offense, in consideration thereof
revoke such disposition § Disqualification becomes effective from
§ Does not apply if the will was executed the time of conviction of final judgment
before the confession § Made to a public officer or his wife,
§ Also does not apply if priest is a descendants and ascendants by reason of his
compulsory heir as far as the legitime is office
concerned
§ The relatives of such priest or minister of the Incapacity by Unworthiness
gospel within the fourth degree, the church, § Parents who have abandoned their children
order, chapter, community, organization, or or induced their daughters to lead a corrupt
institution to which such priest or minister or immoral life, or attempted against their
may belong virtue
§ Relatives by consanguinity within the § Any person who has been convicted of an
fourth degree attempt against the life of the testator, his or
§ A guardian with respect to testamentary her spouse, descendants, or ascendants
dispositions given by a ward in his favor § Any person who has accused the testator of a
before the final accounts of the guardianship crime for which the law prescribes

     
   37

imprisonment for six years or more, if the § Exceptions:

accusation has been found groundless § For attempt on life, false accusation of
§ Any heir of full age who, having knowledge of crime, adultery or concubinage with
the violent death of the testator, should fail spouse of testator: Until final judgment
to report it to an officer of the law within a § Failure to report: Expiration of the month
month, unless the authorities have already § Conditional: Time of compliance with the
taken action; this prohibition shall not apply condition for inheritance
to cases wherein, according to law, there is
no obligation to make an accusation Representation of the Instituted Heirs
§ Cannot be invoked; no law requires such § If person excluded is a child or descendant of
an obligation the decedent and should have children or
§ Any person convicted of adultery or descendant of his own:
concubinage with the spouse of the testator; § Children or descendants of incapacitated
§ Any person who by fraud, violence, heir shall have right of representation
intimidation, or undue influence should § But person so excluded will not enjoy
cause the testator to make a will or to change usufruct or administration of property
one already made
§ Any person who by the same means prevents Acts of Incapacitated Heirs
another from making a will, or from revoking § Before judicial order of exclusion, alienations
one already made, or who supplants, of property and acts of administration
conceals, or alters the latter's will performed by the excluded heir are valid as
§ Any person who falsifies or forges a supposed against third persons who acted in good faith
will of the decedent § But co – heirs shall have a right to
recover damages from disqualified heir
Condonation § Unworthy heir has a right to demand
§ Causes of unworthiness shall be rendered indemnity for any expenses incurred in
without effect preservation of hereditary property and to
§ May be express or implied enforce credits against the estate
§ Condonation is express if decedent knows of § Incapacitated person who possesses property
cause of unworthiness subsequently and unauthorized is obliged to return it with its
condones the same in writing accessions
§ Requisites of Implied Condonation § Also liable for all fruits and rents he may
§ Decedent must have knowledge of facts have received or could have received
which render the offender incapacitated through due diligence
§ The decedent nonetheless executes a will § Action for declaration of incapacity and
and makes a provision in favor of heir to recover inheritance must be brought
§ The will is admitted to probate within five years from the time
§ Where the cause for incapacity by reason of disqualified person took possession
unworthiness is also a ground for § Action may be brought by any one who
disinheritance: may have an interest in the succession
§ Reconciliation is the mode of restoring
successional rights if the decedent chose Acceptance and Repudiation
to disinherit the offending heir
§ Condonation is the mode of restoring
(Art. 1041 – 1057)
successional rights if the decedent did
Nature and Effect
not disinherit the offending heir
§ Purely voluntary and free
§ Retroacts to moment of death of decedent
Determination of Capacity to Succeed
§ Requisites
§ General Rule: Capacity must be determined
§ Certainty of death of decedent, except in
at time of the death of the decedent
case of presumptive death
§ Certainty of right to inheritance

     
   38

Capacity to Accept or Repudiate Repudiation in Fraud of Creditors

§ Any person having free disposal of property § Creditors may petition the court to authorize
may accept or repudiate inheritance them to accept in
§ Inheritance left to minors or incapacitated § Acceptance benefits creditors only to extent
persons may be accepted by parents or of their credits; excess is adjudicated to
guardians persons to whom they belong
§ May repudiate only by judicial § Requisites
authorization § Creditor has a valid and lawful claim
§ Right to accept inheritance left to the poor § Succession has opened
belongs to persons designated by the § Successional rights of the repudiator
testator to determine beneficiaries must have been duly established
§ Repudiator has free disposal of property
Special Rules for Specific Heirs § Repudiated inheritance must not have
§ Lawful representatives of corporations and been distributed with finality
other entities may accept inheritance, but § Creditor must prove that repudiation of
require court approval to repudiate the inheritance caused the damage
§ Public official establishments cannot accept § Recovery of creditor is limited to amount
nor repudiate inheritance without approval of of the claim
the government
§ Married woman of age may repudiate Transm issibility of Right to Accept
inheritance without consent of her husband § If heir dies without having accepted or
§ Guardians can accept inheritance of illiterate repudiated the inheritance, right is
deaf mutes but may not repudiate without transmitted to the heirs
approval of the court
Special Rules on Repudiation
Express and Tacit Acceptance § If a person called to the same inheritance as
§ Express: Must be in writing, made in a public a heir by will and by ab intestato repudiates
or private instrument in his capacity as testamentary heir, he is
§ Tacit: Intention to accept is implied understood to have repudiated in both
§ Examples of tacit acceptance: capacities
§ Heir sells, donates, or assigns his right § If he repudiates as an intestate heir
§ Heir renounces inheritance, either without knowledge of being a
gratuitously or for a price testamentary heir, may still accept in the
§ However, if renunciation is gratuitous and latter capacity
heirs in whose favor it is made are those upon § Acceptance or repudiation once made is
whom the portion to renounce should irrevocable and cannot be impugned
devolve by accretion, not deemed accepted § Except in vitiated
acceptance/repudiation or when an
Form s of Repudiation unknown will appears
§ In a public or authentic instrument § Heirs, legatees and devisees should signify
§ By petition presented to the court acceptance or repudiation to court within
thirty days after court has issued an order to
Effects of Repudiation, Disinheritance distribute the estate
and Preterition § If they do not do so, deemed to have
§ Repudiation results in total exclusion of heir; accepted the inheritance
no right of representation
§ Disinheritance also results in total exclusion,
but descendants may exercise right of
representation covering the legitime
§ Preterition is caused by total exclusion, and
preterited heir is entitled to full recovery of
the legitime

     
   39

Collation § Property left by will is not subject to collation

§ Note: Interpret as legacy or devise that is
(Art. 1061 – 1077) chargeable to legitime instead of
disposable free portion due to
Collation as a Concept
instructions of the testator
§ A notational accounting process; also the
§ Parents are not obliged to collate donations
concept of returning property to the estate
to their children from their grandparents
§ Process of bringing back to the net hereditary
§ Expenses for support are not collationable
estate donations made by a donor in his
§ Expenses for education are not collationable,
lifetime to determine the theoretical
unless parents so provide of unless they
hereditary estate
impair the legitime
§ Using theoretical hereditary estate, also the
§ When collation is required, the sum
process of calculating the legitime and
which the child would have spent if he
determining if donations are inofficious
had lived in the company of his parents
§ Obligation of donees to return to the
shall be deducted
hereditary estate the donations which exceed
§ Donations to spouse of the child shall not be
the disposable free portion and thus
brought to collation
impaired the legitime
§ If they have been given by the parent to
§ More recent donations shall be reduced
the spouses jointly, the child shall be
first
obliged to bring to collation one half of
§ Responsibility to collate generally rests with
the thing donated
the donee
Grandchildrens’ Duty to Collate
Purpose of Collation
§ Applies where the grandchildren inherit from
§ Preserve the legitime of compulsory heirs
grandparents by right of representation;
§ Achieve quantitative equality among
grandchildren represent their parent(s)
compulsory heirs in distribution of the
§ Obliged to bring to collation whatever the
hereditary estate
parent would have been obliged to collate
§ Applies to both testate and intestate
Concepts of Collation
succession
§ Collation of Value: What is collated is value
of the thing at the time the donation is made
Special Rule on Wedding Gifts
§ Collation in Kind: Obligation of co – heirs to
§ Requisites
reimburse done for necessary expenses and
§ Gift of a parent to a child, or by an
expenses for improvement, premised on
ascendant to a descendant
physical return of the property
§ Consists of jewelry, clothing or outfit
§ Given in consideration of the marriage
Dispensing of Collation
§ Consisting of jewelry, clothing and outfit
§ Applies in donations to compulsory heirs
§ Non – collationable to the extent of one –
§ If donor stipulates that donation is not
tenth of the disposable free portion
collationable, donation is nonetheless
§ Excess is charged to the legitime of the
accounted for but shall be charged to
donee
disposable free portion provided that the
donation is inofficious
Collation of Joint Donations
§ If donor donated to a compulsory heir who
§ In case of collation made by both parents,
repudiated the inheritance, donation is
one – half is inheritance of father, other half
nonetheless collated and charged to the
is inheritance of mother
disposable free portion
§ That given by one alone is collation in his or
her inheritance
Donations Not Subject to Collation
§ Surviving spouse has no obligation to collate,
as donations between spouses are void

     
  40

Qualitative Equality Disposition of Fruits and Interest

§ Donee’s share of estate shall be reduced by § Shall not pertain to the estate except from
amount equal to that he already received the day the succession is opened
§ Co – heirs should receive equivalent § Contemplates physical return of the property
property of same kind, nature, class and subject matter
quality as much as possible § Does not cover a situation where the donee
§ If impracticable: has alienated or otherwise lost the property
§ If property is immovable: Co – heirs shall
be entitled to receive equivalent in cash
or securities at rate of quotation. If no
cash or securities, other property may be
sold at public auction
§ If property is movable: Co – heirs have a
right to select an equivalent of other
personal property at its just price

Disposition of Fruits and Interest

§ Shall not pertain to the estate except from
the day the succession is opened
§ Contemplates physical return of the property
subject matter
§ Does not cover a situation where the donee
has alienated or otherwise lost the property

§
§
§
§ Does not cover a situation where the donee
has alienated or otherwise lost the property

Layout and Text by: Dwight Tan

D2018

     
   41

SAMPLE FINAL EXAM 1

INSTRUCTIONS: Tim e m anagem ent is critical. Your answer should not exceed 4
sentences. Do not repeat the facts of the case. In distributing the estate, you will
present your answer in tabular form . You are expected to identify the heirs, the
amounts to be received by each, and the right under which each of the heirs will
receive their respective shares.

By her first deceased husband, Dionesia has 2 legitimate children: Liza and Domingo. By Rosalio her
second estranged husband, Dionesia has 4 legitimate children; Isidra, Manny, Bobby, and Roger. Rosalio
now cohabits with a live-in partner Perfecta with whom he has two daughters, Manilyn and Manuela.
Due to poverty, Manny dropped out of high school and left General Santos City for Manila in 1992 at age
14 to pursue his boxing career. In 1994, at age 16, he turned professional boxer. Manny married Jinkee
with whom he has four legitimate children: Jimuel, Michael, Princess and Queenie.

Following his success as a professional boxer, Manny gained wealth, popularity, prominence and
notoriety. He was known to have frequented night clubs and other places of “amusement” and was
linked to various women including: (i) Maxima, a waitress who had a child by him named Manolito, now a
macho dancer; (ii) Urbana, a culinary acts student who also had a child by him named Manolo, now a
seminarian, and (iii) two prominent showbiz personalities, Ara and Kristal. Jinkee knew of Manny’s
extramarital affairs. Manny has not denied these relationships. While Jinkee had threatened to leave
Manny several times, she ultimately decided to stand by her husband if only for the sake of their 4
children, but more importantly to preserve her interest in their conjugal fortune. To his credit, Manny was
generous to people. He outclassed politicians in giving cash dole-outs nearly to everyone who welcomed
him every time he comes home to Gen. Santos City. Because of his popularity and despite his meager
education, he was elected representative of the lone congressional district of Sarangani in 2010.

In 2011 Manny and his wife Jinkee abandoned the catholic church and joined the ministry of Pastor Jeric
Sarino of the Alabang New Life Christian Center. Manny claimed that his association with Pastor Sarino
led to his religious conversion. He gave up drinking, gambling and womanizing and had since
proclaimed himself as a religious preacher. Manny regained Jinkee’s love and trust as their relationship
improved. Following his religious conversion, Manny lost to Bradley and Marquez in two consecutive
boxing bouts. Dionesia blamed his losses to Pastor Sarino. Repeatedly, vigorously and openly, Dionesia
had pleaded with and pressured Manny to return to the catholic church. Dionesia had no good words for
Pastor Sarino.

1. Explain briefly if based on the facts stated Jinkee has a legal ground to disinherit
Manny. 5 points

2. Explain briefly if based on the facts stated Manny has a legal ground to disinherit
Dionesia. 5 points

     
   42

Manny is a generous son, father, brother, husband and lover. He built a “mansion” for Dionesia which
cost PhP3 million. On the occasion of her 60th birthday, Many gifted Dionesia with a necklace worth
Php800,000. He built a modest house for Rosalio worth PhP600,000. He hosted lavish birthday parties
for each of his four children, having spent for each child the sum of PhP300,000. He enrolled his 4
children in the most expensive school and has to date spent PhP6 million in school and other related
fees. In the last 9 years, he had given Jinkee by way of birthday and anniversary gifts various pieces of
jewelry amounting to PhP2.5 million. He funded Jinkee’s complete make-over at a cost of PhP1.5 million.
He contributed PhP4 million to Roger’s election campaign fund. He contributed PhP500,000 to Isidra’s
legal expenses after being indicted for drug trafficking. He condoned Ara’s debt of Php500,000. As
guarantor, he paid Krista’s obligation to the bank amounting to PhP700,000 which Krista could not
reimburse.

3. How much collationable donations has Manny given to his friends and relatives? 5
points

Meantime, Dionesia enjoyed every moment of her life as a celebrity. She earned a lot of money from
product endorsements. She recorded an album with Claire de la Fuente which sold a grand total of 6
copies. She enrolled in a dancing school, retained the services of a Dance Instructor, and was featured in
various TV programs where she showed her awkward samba moves. She made a movie with Erap which
was a box office disaster. She was featured in TV programs where she gave a tour of her mansion (with
emphasis on her jacuzzi) and her large collection of party dresses with matching signature shoes and
purses. She was interviewed by various celebrity hosts in cluding Boy Abunda during which she lectured
on religion and politics. Her hectic activities took a toll on her health. She then wrote a holographic will
which was immaculate in its form. Dionesia’s will reads as follows:

§ To each of Liza and Domingo, I give 1/5 of my estate.

§ To Isidra, Bobby and Roger collectively, I give 2/5 of my estate to be divided equally among them.
§ To my Dance Instructor, I give a preferred legacy of Php1 million.
§ To Manny who is extremely rich, I leave nothing and I ask him not to question the validity of my will
and to waive his share in my estate in favor of his siblings. After all, he does not need my money.
§ To Jimuel, Michael, Princess and Queenie collectively, I give a legacy of PhP3 million to be divided
equally among them.
§ To Manolito and Manolo, I leave by way of a legacy for support the amount of PhP400,000 each.

After executing the will, Dionesia died of constipation and the will was submitted to probate. Manny
repudiated the inheritance of Dionesia.

4. Manilyn and Manuela intervened in the settlement proceedings objecting to the

probate of Dionesia’s will because Rosalio, was preterited. Briefly resolve the objection
of Manilyn and Manuela. 5 points

Dionesia’s will was eventually admitted to probate. At the time of her death, her estate net of debts and
taxes amounted to Php12 million.

5. Liza objected to the legacy in favor of Manolito and Manolo on the ground that they
are disqualified to inherit from Dionesia. Briefly resolve the objection of Liza. 5 points.

6. Domingo filed a motion to declare Rosalio incapacitated to inherit from Dionesia.

Briefly resolve Domingo’s motion. 5 points.

7. Distribute the estate of Dionesia. 20 points

     
   43

Manny plans to make a boxing come-back in 2013. He is concerned that he could suffer serious injuries
due to his age. He requested Atty. Franklin Gacal to draft a will and gave the following directives: (i) the
will shall be notarial in form, written in the English language, and shall be executed in Las Vegas,
Nevada in accordance with the formalities of Philippine law; (ii) to ensure the availability of witnesses
during probate, there shall be 5 attesting witnesses, namely; his trainer Freddie Roach, his promoter Bob
Arum, his spiritual adviser Jeric Sarino, and his two best friends, Chavit Singson and Lito Atienza; (iii)
prior to signing of the will, Jeric shall translate to him the contents thereof in the Cebuano dialect; (iv)
Chavit and Lito may participate in the execution of the will as attesting witnesses via videoconferencing
facilities; (v) his will shall be probated in the court of competent jurisdiction in San Francisco, California
where he maintains a residence.

8. Which of the directives should Atty. Gacal advise Manny to reconsider and why? 5
points

Upon receipt of Atty. Gacal’s advice, Manny decided to execute his will in his hometown in Quiamba,
Sarangani. Manny’s will contains the following testamentary dispositions:

§ To Manolito I bequeath PhP1 million with substitution in favor of Maxima if Manolito predeceases.
§ To Manolo, I bequeath PhP500,000 on the condition that he shall be ordained to the priesthood.
§ To Freddie Roach, I bequeath PhP1 million with fideicommissary substitution in favor of Bob Arum.
§ To my brother Roger, I bequeath PhP500,000 provided that he marries his live-in partner
Estanislawa within 30 days from my death.

Manny instituted probate ante mortem before the Regional Trial Court of Alabel. His will was admitted to
probate. Manny died leaving assets worth PhP50 million, debts of PhP2.5 million, and estate tax liability
of PhP1.7 million. Maxima predeceased Manny; Manolo had left the seminary to marry his girlfriend
Salome; Roger abandoned Estanislawa and underwent a gender reassignment procedure in Bangkok.

9. Distribute the estate of Manny. 25 points

     
  44

SAMPLE FINAL EXAM 2

INSTRUCTION: Write your answers on the answer sheet appended hereto. No
explanation is required nor will any be entertained. Use the exam booklet for your
calculations and submit the same together with the answer sheet. See the Fam ily Tree
attached hereto.

By a prior marriage to Ang Pah Ngit (wife), Ang Bah Ho (husband) had two legitimated sons: Ang Bah
Gal and Ang Tah Mad. During her lifetime, Ang Pah Ngit (predeceased) donated a parcel of land to the
minor Ang Bah Gal worth Php300,000. Ang Bah Gal joined the “barya o bayong” contest of
KowKowMee and won the jackpot prize of Php1 million. He was, however, crushed to death in the
ensuing stampede. Ang Bah Ho inherited as sole intestate heir the entire estate of Php1.3 million.

Ang Bah Ho contracted a second marriage with Ang Tah Nga. They had three legitimate sons: Ang Hit,
Ang Du Seng and Ang Lee Bog. Ang Hit married Ang Kuh Pad, with whom he had a legitimate son Ang
Kuh Lit, and an adopted daughter Ang Kee Kay. Ang Lee Bog cohabited with Ang Lan Dih and begot Ang
Kah Tee and Ang Tah Ray. Ang Hit, a religious freak, established a sect registered as a corporation sole
under the name and style “Ang Dating Highway”.

In his lifetime, Ang Bah Ho gave the following donations: to Ang Kuh Lit Php250,000 which he declared
non-collationable; to Ang Tah Ray Php400,000; to Ang Du Seng Php200,000 worth of jewelry on the
occasion of the latter’s marriage to Ang Goo Lang.

Ang Bah Ho contracted the bird flu after using a public toilet in China. While in his deathbed, Ang Bah
Ho was given spiritual aid by Ang Hit. Ang Bah Ho converted to Ang Dating Highway and agreed to be
castrated by Ang Hit according to the rites of the said religious sect. Two days after his conversion and
upon the insistence of Ang Tah Nga, Ang Bah Ho executed a notarial will which was attested and
subscribed by Ang Tah Nga, Ang Joh Logs, and Ang Bah Duy. The will contained two dispositions: (i) a
legacy of Php400,000 to Ang Tah Mad; and (2) a legacy of Php1 million to Ang Dating Highway
specifically to be used for pious works in memory of Ang Bah Ho; provided that if the religious
organization repudiates the legacy, the same shall be given to Ang Goo Lang as substitute.

A day after the execution of the will, Ang Hit was sideswiped by a speeding pedicab and died instantly of
multiple head fractures. Upon hearing this tragedy, Ang Bah Ho succumbed to a massive heart attack,
secondary to testicular infection. At the time of Ang Bah Ho’s death, he had assets worth Php5,400,000
(excluding Php1.3 million he inherited from Ang Bah Gal), debts of Php350,000, and tax liability of
Php240,000.

1. Calculate the theoretical hereditary estate of Ang Bah Ho. (10%)

2. Calculate the total amount of legitime due to the compulsory heirs. (10%)

3. How much is the free portion of Ang Bah Ho’s estate? (10%)

4. How much is the maximum amount of non-collationable wedding gift? (10%)

5. How much is actually available for distribution to the heirs of Ang Bah Ho? (10%)

6. Assuming the will of Ang Bah Ho is admitted to probate, distribute the estate.
(25%)

7. Assuming the will of Ang Bah Ho is denied probate, distribute the estate. (25%)