By : John Cyrei Kennedy Tamo

Legal or Intetate
SUCCESSION
 r a g e General Provisons

Co ve Relationship & Rights of

Representation
Bagunu vs Piedad (347 SCRA
571)
Delgado Vda. De Dela Rosa vs
Heirs of Marciana Rustia (480
SCCRA 334)
What is Legal Succession?
Legal or Intestate Succession is the transmision of the
inheritance based on presumed will fo the decedent. It is
called legal because the succession is bestowed by law in
the absence of a valid testament.
Basis of Legal Succession
Because unexpected death may come to any person, the law
presumes what would have been his last wishes had he
executed a will while still alive, taking into consideration his
love and affection for those closest to him.
When does Legal or Intestate
Succession takes place?
Article 960, New Civil Code of the Philippines:

(1) If a person dies without a will, or with a void will, or one which has subsequently lost its validity;
(2) When the will does not institute an heir or does not dispose of all the properties of the
testator. In such case, legal succession shal take place only with respect to the property of which
the testator has not disposed;
(3) If the suspensive condition attached to the institution of heir does not happen or is not
fulfilled, or if the heir dis before the testator, or tepudiates the inheritance, there being no
substitution, and no right of accretion takes place;
(4) When the heir instituted is incapable of succeeding, except in cases provided in this Code.
 Article 962, New Civil Code of the Philippines. In every
inheritance, the relative nearest in degree excludes the more
distant ones, saving the right of representation when it
properly takes place.

Relatives in the same degree shall inherit in equal shares,

subject to the provisions of article 1006 with respect to
relatives of the full and half blood, and of article 987, par.
2, concerning division between the paternal and maternal
lines.
Order of Preference Among Intestate Heirs

Legitimate children and their descendants as well as adopted children

under Section 18 or the Domestic Adoption Act.

Legitimate parents and ascendants

illegitimate Children
Order of Preference Among Intestate Heirs

Surviving spouse subject to the rights of brothers and sisters, or

nephews and nieces.

Collateral relatives up to the 5th civll degree

The State
Exception to the Rule on Proximity

Representation - the right by virtue of which the

representative is raised to the place and degree of the
person represented and acquires the rights which the person
represented would have if he were living or if he could have
inherited.
 When does Rules to Remember
representation exists?
In Testate Succesion - (1) An adopter child cannot represent. Neither may an
(1) Exists in predecease, incapacity and adopted child be represented.
disinheritance. (2) The representative succeeds not the person
(2) Covers only the legitime, which goes to the represented but the one whom the person
represntative by operations of law. represented would have succeed. (Article 971, NCC)
(3) There is no right to represent a voluntary heir. (3) The right of representation takes place only in the
direct descending line; never in the ascending lines.
In intestate Succesion - (4) In collateral line, representation takes place only
(1) Exists also in predecease, disinheritance and in facor of children of brothers and sisters, whether
incapacity; but not in case of repudiation. full or half blood.
(2) Covers all the person represented could have (5) The representative must be himself capable of
inherited. succeeding the descendants.
 Rules to Remember

(6) The representative must at least be conceived at

the time the succession opens.
(7) When there is representation, the heirs inherit per
stirpes, not per capita.
(8) A person may represent him whose inheritance he
has renounced (Art. 976, NCC)
(9) A renouncer may represent but may not be
represented. (Art. 976, 977, NCC)
(10) Illegitimate children of legitimate children
cannot represent because of the barrier, but
illegitimate children or illegitimates can represent.
Ofelia Baganu vs Pastora Piedad
G.R. No. 140975, December 8, 2000

PETITIONER OFELIA BAGUNU MOVED TO INTERVENE IN THE INTESTATE PROCEEDINGS OF

THE ESTATE OF AUGUSTO H. PIEDAD, PENDING BEFORE THE RTC OF PASAY CITY,
ASSERTING TO BE ENTITLED TO THE ESTATE OF THE LATE AUGUSTO PIEDAD, WHO
HAPPENED TO BE COUSIN OF HIS LATE MOTHER.
SHE LIKEWISE ASSERTED THAT THERE WERE PROCEDURAL INFIRMITIES ON THE SAID
TRIAL AS THERE WAS INCOMPLETE PUBLICATION OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING, LACK OF
PERSONAL NOTICE TO THE HEIRS AND CREDITORS, AND THE IRREGULAR DISBURSEMENT
OF ALLOWANCES AND WITHDRAWALS BY THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE.
Ofelia Baganu vs Pastora Piedad
G.R. No. 140975, December 8, 2000

THE TRIAL COURT DENIED THE MOTION, PROMPTING HER TO APPEAL IN THE COURT OF
APPEALS. RESPONDENT, WHO HAPPENS TO BE THE AUNT OF THE DECEASED, SOUGHT ITS
DISMISSAL ON THE THESIS THAT THE ISSUES BROUGHT WERE PURE QUESTIONS OF LAW.
FINDING MERIT IN THE ARGUMENT, THE SAID PETITION WAS DISMISSED. HENCE, THIS
PETITION
ISSUE: WHETHER OFELIA HAS RIGHTS TO THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED.
Ofelia Baganu vs Pastora Piedad
G.R. No. 140975, December 8, 2000

HELD:

NO, IN THE CASE AT BAR, AUGUSTO PIEDAD DIED WITHOUT ANY DIRECT DESCENDANTS OR
ASCENDANTS. RESPONDENT IS THE MATERNAL AUNT OF THE DECEDENT, A THIRD DEGREE
RELATIVE OF THE DECEDENT, WHILE PETITIONER IS THE DAUGHTER OF A FIRST COUSIN OF
THE DECEASED, OR A FIFTH DEGREE RELATIVE OF THE DECEDENT.
UNDER THE RULE OF PROXIMITY (ARTICLE 962, NCC), THE RELATIVE NEAREST IN DEGREE
TO THE DECEDENT EXCLUDES THE MORE DISTANT ONES EXCEPT WHEN AND TO THE
EXTENT THAT THE RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION CAN APPLY.
Ofelia Baganu vs Pastora Piedad
G.R. No. 140975, December 8, 2000

HELD:
RELATIVES IN THE SAME DEGREE SHALL INHERIT IN EQUAL SHARES, SUBJECT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1006 WITH RESPECT TO RELATIVES OF THE FULL AND HALF BLOOD,
AND OF ARTICLE 987, PAR. 2, CONCERNING DIVISION BETWEEN THE PATERNAL AND
MATERNAL LINES.
IN THE DIRECT LINE, RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION IS PROPER ONLY IN THE DESCENDING,
NEVER IN ASCENDING LINE. IN THE COLLATERAL LINE, THE RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION MAY
ONLY TAKE PLACE IN FAVOR OF THE CHILDREN OF BROTHERS OR SISTERS OF THE DECEDENT
WHEN SUCH CHILDREN SURVIVE WITH THEIR UNCLES OR AUNTS.
Ofelia Baganu vs Pastora Piedad
G.R. No. 140975, December 8, 2000

HELD:
THE RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION DOES NOT APPLY TO “OTHER COLLATERAL RELATIVES
WITHIN THE FIFTH CIVIL DEGREE” (TO WHICH BOTH PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS
BELONG) WHO ARE SIXTH IN THE ORDER OF PREFERENCE;
ACCORDINGLY, RESPONDENT, BEING A RELATIVE WITHIN THIRD CIVIL DEGREE, OF THE LATE
AUGUSTO PIEDAD EXCLUDES PETITIONER, A RELATIVE OF THE FIFTH DEGREE, FROM
SUCCEEDING AB INTESTATE THE ESTATE TO THE ESTATE OF THE DECEDENT.
WHEREFORE, THE INSTANT PETITION IS DENIED.
 Exceptions to Rule of Equal Division

(a) Division in cases of representation inder Article 974

(b) Division between ascending line under Article 987
(c) Division between legitimate and illegitimate children in
relation to Article 983 of the Civil Code
(d) Division between full-blood and half-blood brothers and
sisters under Article 1006
EXAMPLE
 IN THE MATTER OF THE INTESTATE ESTATES OF THE
DECEASED JOSEFA DELGADO AND GUILLERMO RUSTIA
vs HEIRS OF MARCIANA RUSTIA VDA. DE DAMIAN
G.R. No. 155733, January 27, 2006

THE CASE RELATES TO THE ESTATE OF GUILLERMO RUSTIA AND JOSEFA DELGADO. THE FACTS
REVEAL THAT JOSEFA PREDECEASED GUILLERMO RUSTIA. JOSEFA IS THE DAUGHTER OF FELIZA
DELGADO AND LUCIO CAMPO. APART FROM HER, THE COMMON LAW UNION OF FELIZA AND LUCIO
WERE BEGOTTEN WITH OTHER 5 CHILDREN: NAZARIO, EDILBERTA, JOSE, JACOBA, AND GORGONIO.
WHEN LUCIO DIED, FELIZA HAD ANOTHER RELATIONSHIP WITH RAMON OSORIO, WHICH BEGOTTEN
LUIS DELGADO.
ON THE OTHER HAND, GUILLERMO RUSTIA WAS SAID TO BE SUCCEEDED BY HIS SIBLINGS. HOWEVER
GUILLERMA RUSTIA INTERVENED ON THE TRIAL CLAIMING TO BE THE ILLEGITIMATE CHILD AND
ADOPTEE OF GUILLERMO RUSTIA AS PROVED BY HIS REPORT CARD FROM UNIVERSITY OF SANTO
TOMAS AND THE APPLICATION MADE BY GUILLERMO TO ADOPT HER AND NANIE RUSTIA.
 IN THE MATTER OF THE INTESTATE ESTATES OF THE
DECEASED JOSEFA DELGADO AND GUILLERMO RUSTIA
vs HEIRS OF MARCIANA RUSTIA VDA. DE DAMIAN
G.R. No. 155733, January 27, 2006

THE PETITION FOR THE PARTITION OF THE SAID PROPERTIES WERE COMMENCED BY LUIS DELGADO
AND HER DAUGHTER LUISA DELGADO WHICH WAS OPPOSED BY THE SISTERS OF GUILLERMO AND
GUILLERMA.
PETITIONERS ASSERT THAT GUILLERMO AND JOSEFA WERE NOT MARRIED AS THERE WAS NO
RECORD TO PROVE IT. HOWEVER, RESPONDENT PRESENTED THE PASSPORT OF JOSEFA RUSTIA,
CERTIFICATE OF IDENTITY, VETERANS APPLICATION OF GUILLERMO, AND THE TITLE OF THEIR REAL
PROPERTY WHICH STATES THAT THEY ARE HUSBAND AND WIFE.
THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT RULED THAT PETITIONER AND HER CO-CLAIMANTS WERE DECLARED AS
THE ONLY LEGAL HEIRS OF JOSEFA DELGADO. ON THE OTHER HAND, GUILLERMA RUSTIA WAS
DECLARED AS THE SOLE AND ONLY SURVIVING HEIR OF GUILLERMO RUSTIA.
 IN THE MATTER OF THE INTESTATE ESTATES OF THE
DECEASED JOSEFA DELGADO AND GUILLERMO RUSTIA
vs HEIRS OF MARCIANA RUSTIA VDA. DE DAMIAN
G.R. No. 155733, January 27, 2006

THE SAID DECISION WAS APPEALED TO THE COURT OF APPEALS BUT WAS DENIED AS IT WAS NOT
FILED WITHIN THE ALLOWABLE PERIOD. HOWEVER, IT WAS LATER ON ALLOWED BY THE APPELLATE
COURT FOR THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THE COURT OF APPEALS REVERSED RTC’S DECISION. HENCE, THIS PETITION.

ISSUE: WHETHER THE PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS MAY BE DECLARED HEIRS OF THE
DECEASED.
 IN THE MATTER OF THE INTESTATE ESTATES OF THE
DECEASED JOSEFA DELGADO AND GUILLERMO RUSTIA
vs HEIRS OF MARCIANA RUSTIA VDA. DE DAMIAN
G.R. No. 155733, January 27, 2006

HELD:
BY REASON OF THE DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTION, IT IS PRESUMED THAT A MAN AND A WOMAN
DEPORTING THEMSELVES AS HUSBAND AND WIFE HAVE ENTERED THE CONTRACT OF MARRIAGE.
THE ABSENCE OF A VALID MARRIAGE DOES NOT NECESSARILY PROVE THAT THE MARRIAGE DID NOT
HAPPEN.
 IN THE MATTER OF THE INTESTATE ESTATES OF THE
DECEASED JOSEFA DELGADO AND GUILLERMO RUSTIA
vs HEIRS OF MARCIANA RUSTIA VDA. DE DAMIAN
G.R. No. 155733, January 27, 2006

HELD:
THE COURT RULED THAT PETITIONERS FAILED TO REBUT THE PRESUMPTION OF MARRIAGE
BETWEEN GUILLERMO AND JOSEFA. IN THIS JURISDICTION, EVERY INTENDMENT OF THE LAW
LEANS TOWARD LEGITIMIZING MATRIMONY. PERSONS DWELLING TOGETHER APPARENTLY IN
MARRIAGE ARE PRESUMED TO BE IN FACT MARRIED. THIS IS THE USUAL ORDER OF THINGS IN
SOCIETY AND, IF THE PRTIES ARE NOT WHAT THEY HOLD THEMSELVES OUT TO BE, THEY WOULD BE
LIVING IN CONSTANT VIOLATION OF THE COMMON RULES OF LAW AND PROPERTY.
THE SAID THING WAS TACKLED BY THE COURT TO ESTABLISH THAT BOTH GUILLERMO AND JOSEFA
ARE HEIRS OF EACH OTHER.
 IN THE MATTER OF THE INTESTATE ESTATES OF THE
DECEASED JOSEFA DELGADO AND GUILLERMO RUSTIA
vs HEIRS OF MARCIANA RUSTIA VDA. DE DAMIAN
G.R. No. 155733, January 27, 2006
HELD:
AS PER THE RELATIONSHIP OF JOSEFA AND LUIS, THE COURT HELD THAT THEY ARE NATURAL CHILDREN OF FELIZA,
AS THE PRESUMED MARRIAGE OF FELIZA AND RAMON WERE DISPUTED BY THE FACT THAT LUIS DID NOT ADOPT
RAMON’S SURNAME.
INDEED, THE LAW PROHIBITS RECIPROCAL SUCCESSION BETWEEN ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND LEGITIMATE
CHILDREN OF THE SAME PARENT, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS UNQUESTIONABLY A TIE BLOOD BETWEEN THEM.
HOWEVER, THE COURT RULED IN THIS CASE THAT SINCE ALL OF THEM ARE ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN OF THE SAME
PARENT, EVEN IF BEGOTTEN WITH DIFFERENT PERSONS, THEY ALL STAND ON THE SAME FOOTING BEFORE THE LAW,
JUST LIKE LEGITIMATE CHILDREN OF HALF- BLOOD RELATION. THE COURT THEREFORE SUBMIT THAT THE RULES
REGARDING SUCCESSIONS OF LEGITIMATE BROTHERS SHOULD BE APPLICABLE TO THEM. FULL BLOOD ILLEGITIMATE
BROTHERS AND SISTERS SHOULD RECEIVE DOUBLE THE PORTION OF HALF-BLOOD BROTHERS AND SISTERS; AND IF
ALL ARE EITHER OF THE FULL BLOOD OR OF THE HALF BLOOD, THEY SHALL SHARE EQUALLY.
 IN THE MATTER OF THE INTESTATE ESTATES OF THE
DECEASED JOSEFA DELGADO AND GUILLERMO RUSTIA
vs HEIRS OF MARCIANA RUSTIA VDA. DE DAMIAN
G.R. No. 155733, January 27, 2006

HELD:
THUS, THE SIBLINGS OF JOSEFA, INCLUDING LUIS ARE HEIR. FOLLOWING ARTICLE 972 OF THE NEW
CIVIL CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES, THE RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION IN THE COLLATERAL LINE TAKES
PLACE ONLY IN FAVOR OF THE CHILDREN OF BROTHERS AND SISTERS. CONSEQUENTLY, IT CANNOT
BE EXERCISED BY GRANDNEPHEWS AND GRANDNIECES. THEREFORE, THE ONLY COLLATERAL
RELATIVES OF JOSEFA ARE HER BROTHERS AND SISTERS, OR THEIR CHILDREN WHO WERE STILL
ALIVE AT THE TIME OF JOSEFA’S DEATH. TOGETHER WITH GUILLERMO WHO IS ENTITLED TO HALF
OF THE ESTATE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 1001 OF THE CIVIL CODE.
 IN THE MATTER OF THE INTESTATE ESTATES OF THE
DECEASED JOSEFA DELGADO AND GUILLERMO RUSTIA
vs HEIRS OF MARCIANA RUSTIA VDA. DE DAMIAN
G.R. No. 155733, January 27, 2006

HELD:
AS PER THE LAWFUL HEIRS OF GUILLERMO RUSTIA, WHO CLAIMS TO BE AN ILLEGITIMATE CHILD OF
HIM, GUILLERMA MAY ONLY BE CONSIDERED FOR SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS UPON PROOF OF
ADMISSION OR RECOGNITION OF PATERNITY.
CONSIDERING THAT THERE WAS NO JUDICIAL DECLARATION OF ADOPTION, SHE MAY NOT ALSO BE
HELD AS AN ADOPTEE. THUS, THE SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS SHALL BE DELIVERED TO GUILLERMO’S
SIBLINGS.
PROXIMITY
COLLATERAL LINE

Article 963, NCC. Proximity of

relationship is determined by
the number of generations.
Each generations froms a
degree.
DIRECT LINE
 RELA T I O N S H I P

FULL BLOOD RELATIONSHIP HALF BLOOD RELATIONSHIP

This exists between persons This exists between persons
who have the same father who have the same father,
and the same mother. but not the same mother, or
the same mother, but not the
same father.
 THANK
YOU!
[Link]