Case Digest: Uson v.

Del Civil Code in favor of the illegitimate children of

Rosario the deceased cannot, therefore, be asserted to
the impairment of the vested right of Maria Uson
92 P 530 over the lands in dispute.

FACTS: ENDAYA v. VILLAOS G.R. No. 202426 |

27 January 2016
This is an action for recovery of the ownership and possession of five General Provisions of Succession
(5) parcels of land in Pangasinan, filed by Maria Uson against Maria DOCTRINE: The rights of succession are transmitted from the moment
del Rosario and her four illegit children. Maria Uson was the lawful of death of the decedent.
wife of Faustino Nebreda who upon his death in 1945 left the lands FACTS:
involved in this litigation. Faustino Nebreda left no other heir except  Gina Endaya, and other heirs of Atilano Villaos (petitioners)
his widow Maria Uson. However, plaintiff claims that when Faustino filed before the RTC, a complaint for declaration of nullity
Nebreda died in 1945, his common-law wife Maria del Rosario took of deeds of sale, recovery of titles, and accounting of
possession illegally of said lands thus depriving her of their possession income of the Palawan Village Hotel (PVH) against Ernesto
and enjoyment. Defendants in their answer set up as special defense Villaos (respondent).
that Uson and her husband, executed a public document whereby  Petitioners claim that the purported sale by Atilano to
they agreed to separate as husband and wife and, in consideration of respondent was spurios.
which Uson was given a parcel of land and in return she renounced  Subsequently, respondent filed an ejectment case against
her right to inherit any other property that may be left by her husband petitioners in the MTCC.
upon his death. CFI found for Uson. Defendants appealed.  Respondent claims that he bought the properties where
PVH was located and asked those residing in said properties
ISSUE: (petitioners) to vacate. Petitioners refused to vacate
1. W/N Uson has a right over the lands from the assailing that the deeds of sale were forged and not
moment of death of her husband. properly notarized in the correct venue.
2. W/N the illegit children of deceased and his  The MTCC ruled in favor of respondent.
common-law wife have successional rights.  The petitioners appealed before the RTC, which affirmed
the ruling of the MTCC.
HELD:  The RTC said that the questioned deeds of sale, being
1. Yes. There is no dispute that Maria Uson, is the notarized, are public documents afforded the presumption
lawful wife of Faustino Nebreda, former owner of of regularity.
the five parcels of lands litigated in the present  No litis pendentia because the asserted rights and prayed
case. There is likewise no dispute that Maria del reliefs in the first RTC case filed were contrasting. o
Rosario, was merely a common-law wife with  Petitioner files an MR, but it was denied.
whom she had four illegitimate children with the
 The petitioners filed a petition for review before the CA,
deceased. It likewise appears that Faustino
which was also denied. o
Nebreda died in 1945 much prior to the effectivity
 The only issue for resolution in an ejectment case is who is
of the new Civil Code. With this background, it is
entitled to possession independent of any claim of
evident that when Faustino Nebreda died in 1945
ownership.
the five parcels of land he was seized of at the
 No litis pendentia because first RTC case was an action for
time passed from the moment of his death to his
declaration of nullity of the deeds of sale and the case in the
only heir, his widow Maria Uson (Art 777 NCC).As
MTCC was about possession.
this Court aptly said, “The property belongs to the
heirs at the moment of the death of the ancestor
ISSUE: Whether or not petitioners are entitled to possession
as completely as if the ancestor had executed and
delivered to them a deed for the same before his
HELD:
death”. From that moment, therefore, the rights
Yes, under Article 777 of the Civil Code, the rights to the
of inheritance of Maria Uson over the lands in
succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the
question became vested.
decedent. Thus, petitioner and her coheirs should have been
2. The claim of the defendants that Maria Uson had
favored on the question of possession, being heirs who
relinquished her right over the lands in question
succeeded the registered owner of the properties in dispute.
because she expressly renounced to inherit any
Clearly, the MTCC, RTC, and CA erred in ruling in favor of
future property that her husband may acquire
respondent.
and leave upon his death in the deed of
• In resolving the issue of possession in an ejectment case, the
separation, cannot be entertained for the simple
registered owner of the property is preferred over the transferee
reason that future inheritance cannot be the
under an unregistered deed of sale. While respondent has in his
subject of a contract nor can it be renounced.
favor deeds of sale over the eight parcels of land, these deeds
3. No. The provisions of the NCC shall be given
were not registered; thus, title remained in the name of the
retroactive effect even though the event which
owner and seller Atilano. When he died, title passed to
gave rise to them may have occurred under the
petitioner, who is his illegitimate child. This relationship does not
prior legislation only if no vested rights are
appear to be contested by respondent in these proceedings, at
impaired. Hence, since the right of ownership of
least.
Maria Uson over the lands in question became
vested in 1945 upon the death of her late
husband, the new right recognized by the new
 of Down Payment” was prepared and signed by petitioners Romeo A.
Coronel v. CA Coronel, et al., the parties had agreed to a conditional contract of
G.R. No. 103577, October 7, 1996 sale, consummation of which is subject only to the successful transfer
of the certificate of title from the name of petitioners’ father,
The case arose from a complaint for specific performance filed by Constancio P. Coronel, to their names.
private respondent Alcaraz against petitioners to consummate the The provision on double sale presumes title or ownership to pass to
sale of a parcel of land in Quezon City. On January 19, 1985, the first buyer, the exceptions being: (a) when the second buyer, in
petitioners executed a “Receipt of Down Payment” of P50,000 in good faith, registers the sale ahead of the first buyer, and (b) should
favor of plaintiff Ramona Alcaraz, binding themselves to transfer the there be no inscription by either of the two buyers, when the second
ownership of the land in their name from their deceased father, buyer, in good faith, acquires possession of the property ahead of the
afterwhich the balance of P1,190,000 shall be paid in full by Alcaraz. first buyer. Unless, the second buyer satisfies these requirements,
On February 6, 1985, the property was transferred to petitioners. On title or ownership will not transfer to him to the prejudice of the first
February 18, 1985, petitioners sold the property to Mabanag. For this buyer. In a case of double sale, what finds relevance and materiality
reason, Concepcion, Ramona’s mother, filed an action for specific is not whether or not the second buyer was a buyer in good faith but
performance. whether or not said second buyer registers such second sale in good
faith, that is, without knowledge of any defect in the title of the
ISSUE: Whether the contract between petitioners and private property sold. If a vendee in a double sale registers that sale after he
respondent was that of a conditional sale or a mere contract to sell has acquired knowledge that there was a previous sale of the same
property to a third party or that another person claims said property
Sale, by its very nature, is a consensual contract because it is in a pervious sale, the registration will constitute a registration in bad
perfected by mere consent. In a contract to sell, the prospective seller faith and will not confer upon him any right.
explicitly reserves the transfer of title to the prospective buyer,
meaning, the prospective seller does not as yet agree or consent to LITONJUA v. MONTILLA
transfer ownership of the property subject of the contract to sell until GR No.L-4170, January 31, 1952,
the happening of an event, which for present purposes we shall take 90PHIL757
as the full payment of the purchase price. What the seller agrees or
obliges himself to do is to fulfill his promise to sell the subject FACTS: Pedro Litonjua obtained a judgment against Claudio Montilla
property when the entire amount of the purchase price is delivered for the payment of a sum of P4,039. Failing to find or identify a
to him. In other words the full payment of the purchase price partakes property of Claudio to be levied, petitioner then proceeded to file a
of a suspensive condition, the non-fulfillment of which prevents the claim in the intestate proceeding of the estate of Agustin Montilla Sr,
obligation to sell from arising and thus, ownership is retained by the father of the deceased. The estate has not yet been properly
prospective seller without further remedies by the prospective buyer. probated.
A contract to sell may thus be defined as a bilateral contract whereby
the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the ISSUE: Could the petitioner succeed in collecting the debt as against
subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, the estate of the debtor's deceased parent?
binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective
buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full HELD: No. In the case of Ortiga Brothers and Co. vs. Enage and Yap
payment of the purchase price. Tico, 18 Phil. 345, it was held that the creditor of the heirs of a
It is essential to distinguish between a contract to sell and a deceased person is entitled to collect his claim out of the property
conditional contract of sale specially in cases where the subject which pertains by inheritance to said heirs, only after the debts of the
property is sold by the owner not to the party the seller contracted testate or intestate have been paid and when the net assets that are
with, but to a third person, as in the case at bench. In a contract to divisible among the heirs are known, because the debts of the
sell, there being no previous sale of the property, a third person deceased must first be paid before his heirs can inherit. It was therein
buying such property despite the fulfillment of the suspensive also held that a person who is not a creditor of a deceased, testate or
condition such as the full payment of the purchase price, for instance, intestate, has no right to intervene either in the proceedings brought
cannot be deemed a buyer in bad faith and the prospective buyer in connection with the estate or in the settlement of the succession.
cannot seek the relief of reconveyance of the property. There is no The foregoing pronouncements are perfectly applicable to the case at
double sale in such case. Title to the property will transfer to the bar, because the appellant is not a creditor of the deceased Agustin
buyer after registration because there is no defect in the owner- Montilla, Sr. and he seeks to collect his claim out of the inheritance of
seller’s title per se, but the latter, of course, may be used for damages Claudio Montilla, an heir, before the net assets of the intestate estate
by the intending buyer. In a conditional contract of sale, however, have been determined
upon the fulfillment of the suspensive condition, the sale becomes
absolute and this will definitely affect the seller’s title thereto. LEDESMA v. MCLACHLIN
The agreement could not have been a contract to sell because the GR No.L-44837, November 23, 1938
sellers herein made no express reservation of ownership or title to 66 PHIL 547
the subject parcel of land. Furthermore, the circumstance which
prevented the parties from entering into an absolute contract of sale FACTS: Lorenzo Quitco, died in 1930, leaving defendant Mclachlin and
pertained to the sellers themselves (the certificate of title was not in her children as heirs. Plaintiff Ana Ledesma, spurious/illegitimate
their names) and not the full payment of the purchase price. Under child of Lorenzo Quitco, and her mother, sued to declare her as
the established facts and circumstances of the case, the Court may compulsory heir which the court however denied. Two years later,
safely presume that, had the certificate of title been in the names of Lorenzo's father Eusebio died, and because he left some personal and
petitioners-sellers at that time, there would have been no reason why real properties without a will, an intestate proceeding was instituted
an absolute contract of sale could not have been executed and and a court order declaring his compulsory heirs did not of course
consummated right there and then. What is clearly established by the include Ana as one. Following such court action, the plaintiff
plain language of the subject document is that when the said “Receipt proceeded to collect the sum payable on a promissory note then
issued in favor of her by Lorenzo by filing a claim in the intestate excused by the death of the party when the other party has a property
proceedings of Eusebio's Estate claiming that the sum be paid out of interest in the subject matter of the contract.
the properties inherited by the defendants represents that of the
successional rights of Lorenzo as a compulsory heir of his father Therefore, Victor is bound by the subject Contract of Lease with
Eusebio. Option to Buy.

ISSUE: Has plaintiff the right collect the sum promised by her father Aruego Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, A. Aruego
from her grandfather's estate? G.R. No. 112193, March 13, 1996

HELD: No. The properties inherited by the defendants from their FACTS:
deceased grandfather by representation are not subject to the On March 7, 1983, a complaint for compulsory recognition and
payment of debts and obligations of their deceased father, who died enforcement of successional rights was filed before RTC Manila by the
without leaving any property. While it is true that under the minors Antonia Aruego and alleged the sister Evelyn Aruego
provisions of Articles 924 to 927 of the Civil Code, a child presents his represented by their mother Luz Fabian. The complaint was opposed
father or mother who died before him in the properties of his by the legitimate children of Jose Aruego, who died on March 30,
grandfather or grandmother, this right of representation does not 1982. Their claim there is open and continuous possession of status
make the said child answerable for the obligations contracted by his of illegitimate children of Jose who had an amorous relationship with
deceased father or mother, because, as may be seen from the their mother Luz Fabian until the time of his death. The court declared
provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure referring to partition of that Antonia Aruego is an illegitimate daughter of the deceased with
inheritances, the inheritance is received with the benefit of inventory, Luz Fabian while Evelyn is not. Antonia Aruego was declared entitled
that is to say, the heirs only answer with the properties received from to a share equal to 1/2 portion of share of the legitimate children of
their predecessor. The herein defendants, as heirs of Eusebio Quitco, Jose Aruego. Petitioners, on the other hand, submit that with the
in representation of their father Lorenzo M. Quitco, are not bound to advent of the New Family Code on August 3, 1988, the trial court lost
pay the indebtedness of their father from whom they did not inherit jurisdiction over the complaint of private respondent on the ground
anything. of prescription, considering that under Article 175, paragraph 2,
in relation to Article 172 of the New Family Code, it is provided that
an action for compulsory recognition of illegitimate filiation, if based
WHEN SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS TRANSMITTED on the “open and continuous possession of the status of an
illegitimate child,” must be brought during the lifetime of the alleged
DKC Holdings v. CA parent without any exception, otherwise the action will be barred
G.R. No. 118248. April 5, 2000 by prescription.

On March 16, 1998, petitioner DKC Holdings Corporation (DKC) ISSUE:

entered into a Contract of Lease with Option to Buy with Encarnacion Whether or not the Family Code may be given a retroactive effect so
Bartolome, decedent herein, whereby petitioner was given the option as to deprive private respondent of her right to institute the case for
to lease or lease with purchase the subject land. compulsory recognition

Encarnacion died. Thereafter, petitioner coursed its payment to RULING:

private respondent Victor Bartolome, being the sole heir of No. The action brought by private respondent Antonia Aruego for
Encarnacion. Victor, however, refused to accept these payments. On compulsory recognition and enforcement of successional rights
March 14, 1990, petitioner served upon Victor, via registered mail, which was filed prior to the advent of the Family Code, must be
notice that it was exercising its option to lease the property, tendering governed by Article 285 of the Civil Code and not by Article 175,
the amount of P15,000.00 as rent. Again, Victor refused to accept the paragraph 2 of the Family Code. The present law cannot be given
tendered rental fee and to surrender possession of the property to retroactive effect insofar as the instant case is concerned, as its
petitioner. On April 23, 1990, petitioner filed a complaint for specific application will prejudice the vested right of private respondent to
performance and damages against Victor and the Register of Deeds have her case decided under Article 285 of the Civil Code. The right
was vested to her by the fact that she filed her action under the
ISSUE: Whether or not the rights under a Contact of Lease with Option regime of the Civil Code. Prescinding from this, the conclusion then
to Buy were transmissible. ought to be that the action was not yet barred, notwithstanding the
fact that it was brought when the putative father was
YES. The general rule, therefore, is that heirs are bound by contracts already deceased, since private respondent was then still a minor
entered into by their predecessors-in-interest except when the rights when it was filed, an exception to the general rule provided under
and obligations arising therefrom are not transmissible by (1) their Article 285 of the Civil Code. Hence, the trial court, which acquired
nature, (2) stipulation or (3) provision of law. The Court held that jurisdiction over the case by the filing of the complaint, never lost
there is neither contractual stipulation nor legal provision making the jurisdiction over the same despite the passage of E.O. No. 209, also
rights and obligations under the lease contract intransmissible. More known as the Family Code of the Philippines.
importantly, the nature of the rights and obligations therein are, by
their nature, transmissible. LORENZO vs. POSADAS JR.
G.R. No. L-43082
In the case at bar, the subject matter of the contract is a lease, which June 18, 1937
is a property right. The death of a party does not excuse
nonperformance of a contract which involves a property right, and FACTS: Thomas Hanley died, leaving a will and a considerable amount
the rights and obligations thereunder pass to the personal of real and personal properties. Proceedings for the probate of his will
representatives of the deceased. Similarly, nonperformance is not and the settlement and distribution of his estate were begun in the
CFI of Zamboanga. The will was admitted to probate.
The CFI considered it proper for the best interests of the estate to
appoint a trustee to administer the real properties which, under the
will, were to pass to nephew Matthew ten years after the two CALALANG-PARULAN VS. CALALANG-GARCIA
executors named in the will was appointed trustee. Moore acted as GR. No. 184148
trustee until he resigned and the plaintiff Lorenzo herein was
appointed in his stead. Topic: Succession, Successional rights
During the incumbency of the plaintiff as trustee, the defendant
Collector of Internal Revenue (Posadas) assessed against the estate Principle: It is hornbook doctrine that successional rights are vested
an inheritance tax, together with the penalties for deliquency in only at the time of death. Article 777 of the New Civil Code provides
payment. Lorenzo paid said amount under protest, notifying Posadas that "[t]he rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment
at the same time that unless the amount was promptly refunded suit of the death of the decedent." In Butte v. Manuel Uy and Sons, Inc.,
would be brought for its recovery. Posadas overruled Lorenzo’s we proclaimed the fundamental tenets of succession:
protest and refused to refund the said amount. Plaintiff went to court.
The CFI dismissed Lorenzo’s complaint and Posadas’ counterclaim. The principle of transmission as of the time of the predecessor's death
Both parties appealed to this court. is basic in our Civil Code, and is supported by other related articles.
Thus, the capacity of the heir is determined as of the time the
ISSUE: decedent died (Art. 1034); the legitime is to be computed as of the
same moment (Art. 908), and so is the in officiousness of the donation
(e) Has there been delinquency in the payment of the inheritance tax? inter vivas (Art. 771). Similarly, the legacies of credit and remission
are valid only in the amount due and outstanding at the death of the
HELD: The judgment of the lower court is accordingly modified, with testator (Art. 935), and the fruits accruing after that instant are
costs against the plaintiff in both instances deemed to pertain to the legatee (Art. 948).

YES Facts:
In a Complaint for Annulment of Sale and Reconveyance of Property,
The defendant maintains that it was the duty of the executor to pay the respondents Rosario Calalang Garcia, Leonora Calalang Sabile,
the inheritance tax before the delivery of the decedent’s property to and Carlito S. Calalang asserted their ownership over a certain parcel
the trustee. Stated otherwise, the defendant contends that delivery of land against the petitioners Nora B. Calalang Parulan and Elvira B.
to the trustee was delivery to the cestui que trust, the beneficiary in Calalang. The said lot was allegedly acquired by the respondents from
this case, within the meaning of the first paragraph of subsection (b) their mother Encarnacion Silverio, through succession as the latter’s
of section 1544 of the Revised Administrative Code. This contention compulsory heirs.
is well taken and is sustained. A trustee is but an instrument or agent
for the cestui que trust According to the respondents, their father, Pedro Calalang contracted
two marriages during his lifetime. The first marriage was with their
The appointment of Moore as trustee was made by the trial court in mother Encarnacion Silverio. During the subsistence of this marriage,
conformity with the wishes of the testator as expressed in his will. It their parents acquired the abovementioned parcel of land from their
is true that the word “trust” is not mentioned or used in the will but maternal grandmother Francisca Silverio. Despite enjoying
the intention to create one is clear. No particular or technical words continuous possession of the land, however, their parents failed to
are required to create a testamentary trust. The words “trust” and register the same. On June 7, 1942, the first marriage was dissolved
“trustee”, though apt for the purpose, are not necessary. In fact, the with the death of Encarnacion Silverio.
use of these two words is not conclusive on the question that a trust
is created. ” To constitute a valid testamentary trust there must be a On November 6, 1967, Pedro Calalang entered into a second marriage
concurrence of three circumstances: with Elvira B. Calalang who then gave birth to Nora B. CalalangParulan
and Rolando Calalang. According to the respondents, it was only
(1) Sufficient words to raise a trust; during this time that Pedro Calalang filed an application for free
(2) a definite subject; patent over the parcel of land with the Bureau of Lands.
(3) a certain or ascertain object; statutes in some jurisdictions
expressly or in effect so providing.” On February 17, 1984, Pedro Calalang sold the said parcel of land to
Nora B. CalalangParulan. Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 283321
There is no doubt that the testator intended to create a trust. He was issued in the name of Nora B. CalalangParulan. On December 27,
ordered in his will that certain of his properties be kept together 1989,7 Pedro Calalang died.
undisposed during a fixed period, for a stated purpose. The probate
court certainly exercised sound judgment in appointmening a trustee The respondents assailed the validity of TCT No. 283321 arguing that
to carry into effect the provisions of the will the sale of the land was void because Pedro Calalang failed to obtain
the consent of the respondents who were co owners of the same.
As the existence of the trust was already proven, it results that the
estate which plaintiff represents has been delinquent in the payment Issue: Whether or not the respondents were deprived of their
of inheritance tax and, therefore, liable for the payment of interest respective shares by reason of the sale.
and surcharge provided by law in such cases.
The delinquency in payment occurred on March 10, 1924, the date Ruling: No. It is hornbook doctrine that successional rights are vested
when Moore became trustee. On that date trust estate vested in him. only at the time of death. Article 777 of the New Civil Code provides
The interest due should be computed from that date. that "[t]he rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment
of the death of the decedent." In Butte v. Manuel Uy and Sons, Inc.,
we proclaimed the fundamental tenets of succession:
The principle of transmission as of the time of the predecessor's death
is basic in our Civil Code, and is supported by other related articles.
Thus, the capacity of the heir is determined as of the time the WILL A PERSONAL ACT
decedent died (Art. 1034); the legitime is to be computed as of the
same moment (Art. 908), and so is the in officiousness of the donation CASTAÑEDA v. ALEMANY
inter vivas (Art. 771). Similarly, the legacies of credit and remission GR No.1439, March 19, 1904
are valid only in the amount due and outstanding at the death of the 3 PHIL 426
testator (Art. 935), and the fruits accruing after that instant are
deemed to pertain to the legatee (Art. 948). FACTS: Appellant constested the validity of the will of Doña Juana
Moreno upon the ground that although the attestation clause in the
Thus, it is only upon the death of Pedro Calalang on December 27, will states that the testator signed the will in the presence of three
1989 that his heirs acquired their respective inheritances, entitling witnesses who also each signed in each presence, the will was not
them to their pro indiviso shares to his whole estate. At the time of actually written by the testator.
the sale of the disputed property, the rights to the succession were
not yet bestowed upon the heirs of Pedro Calalang. And absent clear ISSUE: Is it necessary that a will be written by the testator herself?
and convincing evidence that the sale was fraudulent or not duly
supported by valuable consideration (in effect an in officious HELD: No. Section 618 of the Civil Code requires (1) that the will be in
donation inter vivas), the respondents have no right to question the writing and (2) either that the testator sign it himself or, if he does not
sale of the disputed property on the ground that their father deprived sign it, that it be signed by someone in his presence and by his express
them of their respective shares. Well to remember, fraud must be direction. Who does the mechanical work of writing the will is a
established by clear and convincing evidence. Mere preponderance matter of indifference. The fact, therefore, that in this case the will
of evidence is not even adequate to prove fraud.20 The Complaint for was typewritten in the office of the lawyer for the testratrix is of no
Annulment of Sale and Reconveyance of Property must therefore be consequence.
dismissed.
LAWS GOVERNING INTRINSIC VALIDITY
Balus v. Balus
G.R. No. 168970, January 15, 2010 Miciano v. Brimo
G.R. No. L-22595, 1 November 1927
Petitioner Celestino and respondents Saturnino and Leonarda are the FACTS:
children of the spouses Rufo and Sebastiana Balus. Sebastiana died Joseph Brimo, an alien testator (Turk) who made his will in the
on 6 September 1978. In 1979, Rufo mortgaged a parcel of land as Philippines stated in the will thathis property should be distributed in
security for a loan obtained from a bank. When Rufo failed to pay the accordance with Philippine law, and not that of his nation.
loan, the property was foreclosed and was subsequently sold to the The judicial administrator of the estate of the deceased filed a scheme
Bank as the sole bidder at a public auction held for that purpose. The of partition. However, one of the brothers of the deceased opposed
same was not redeemed within the period allowed by law. Hence, a the said partition.
new title was issued in the name of the Bank. Rufo died on 6 July 1984. The appellant in the case, who opposed the same, based his
On 10 October, 1989, petitioner and respondents executed an opposition on the fact that the deceased was a Turkish citizen, which
Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate adjudicating to each of the a specific his disposition should be in accordance with the laws of his
one-third portion of the subject property. Three years thereafter, nationality.
respondents bought the subject property from the Bank and a new
title was issued in their name. Meanwhile, petitioner continued ISSUE:
possession of the subject lot. The respondents thus filed a complaint Whether or not the disposition shall be made in accordance with
for recovery of possession. However, petitioner alleged that Philippine Laws.
respondents’ act of buying back the property without notifying him
inures to his benefit as co-owner and that he is entitled to a one-third RULING:
share of the property. No, the Turkish law should govern the disposition of his property
pursuant to Article 16.
ISSUE: Whether or not the subject property forms part of the estate of According to Article 16 of the Civil Code, suchnational law of the
petitioner and respondents’ father testator is the one to governhis testamentary dispositions.
No. The court ruled that the subject property does not form part of The provision in the will is not valid. Said condition then is considered
the estate of Rufo considering that ownership over the same was unwritten, hence the institution of legatees is unconditional and
transferred to the bank prior to the death of Rufo. Inheritance consequently valid and effective.
consists of existing property, as well as accrued property, and
transmissible rights and obligations at the time of death of the
decedent. Thus, since Rufo lost ownership over the subject property BELLIS VS BELLIS
during his lifetime, the same no longer forms part of his estate to No. L-23678. June 6, 1967.
which his heirs may lay claim at the time of his death. Consequently,
his children never inherited the property. The Court further ruled that FACTS:
petitioner and respondents are not co-owners of the subject property Amos Bellis was a citizen of the state of Texas of the United States. In
and there is no property to partition, as the disputed lot never formed his first wife whom he divorced, he had five legitimate children; by his
part of the estate of their deceased father. second wife, who survived him, he had three legitimate children.
Before he died, he made two wills, one disposing of his Texas
properties and the other disposing his Philippine Properties. In both
wills, his illegitimate children were not given anything. The
illegitimate children opposed the will on the ground that they have
been deprived of their legitimes to which they should be entitled if by the laws of his domicile. The executor, Adolfo C. Aznar, drew a
Philippine law were to apply. project of partition in conformity with the will. Helen opposed the
project of partition arguing that Philippine laws govern the
ISSUE: distribution of the estate and manner proposed in the project
Whether or not the national law of the deceased should determine deprived her of her legitime.
the sucessional rights of the illegitimate children.
Issue
HELD: Whether or not the succession is governed by Philippine laws.
The Supreme Court held that the said children are not entitled to their
legitimes. Under the Texas Law, being the national law of the Held
deceased, there are no legitimes. Further, even if the deceased had Yes. Philippine law governs.
given them share, such would be invalid because the law governing
the deceased does not allow such. Ratio
Article 16 of the Civil Code provides that the intrinsic validity of
ESTATE ESTATE OF BOHANAN testamentary dispositions are governed by the national law of the
VS decedent, in this case, California law. The provision in the laws of
BOHANAN Et al. California giving a testator absolute freedom in disposing of his estate
GR NO L-12105, Jan 30, 1960 is the internal law which applies only to persons domiciled within the
Labrador J.: said estate. On the other hand, the provision in the laws of California
stating that personal property is governed by the laws of the domicile
Facts of its owner is the conflict of laws rule that applies to persons not
domicile in the said state. Accordingly, the laws of the Philippines, in
C.O. Bohanan was born in Nebraska therefore he is a citizen of which the testator is domiciled governs the succession and the regime
Nebraska and even though he lived in the Philippines for a long period of legitimes must be respected.
of time. he still remained a citizen of the united states. C.O. Bohanan
eventually chose Nevada to spend the rest of his days so therefore Ancheta vs. Guersey-Dalaygon
when he died. He remained a citizen of the united states. Ancheta vs. Guersey-Dalaygon, GR No. 139868 June 8, 2006

Issues Facts:
1. Whether or not the disposition of C.O. Bohanan’s Estate is valid 2 American citizens have resided in the Philippines. They have an
because the petitioner. His Former wife, Magdalena Bohanan and two adopted daughter. The wife died and left a will where she left her
of her children Mary Lydia and Edward Bohanan claims that they have entire estate to her husband. 2 years after the wife's death, the
been deprived of their share of the Estate under the laws of the husband married a Candelaria. 4 years after, Richard died and left a
Philippines. will where he left his entire estate to Candelaria except for some of
2. The claim of the testator’s children, Edward and Mary Lydia his shares in a company which he left to his adopted daughter.
Bohanan, who had received legacies in the amount of PHP 6, 000 each Audrey’s will was admitted to probate in CFI Rizal. Inventory was
only, and, therefore, have not been given their shares in the estate taken on their conjugal properties. Ancheta, as the administrator,
which, in accordance with the laws, should be two-thirds of the estate filed for a partition of the first wife's estate. The will was also admitted
left by the testator. in a court in her native land (Maryland).

Ruling Issue: Whether or not the properties in issue should be governed by

The wife of Testator, Magdalena Bohanan claims that she should be the law where the property is situated
entitled to receive but the last will has not given her any share of the
of Estate left by the testator. Therefore the court refused to recognize Ruling:
her claim on the ground that the laws of Nevada of which the Yes, properties in issue should be governed by the law where the
deceased is a citizen allows him to dispose all of his estate or property is situated. However, since the first wife is a foreign national,
properties without requiring him to leave any portion of his estate to the intrinsic validity of her will is governed by her national law. The
his wife. Therefore Magdalena Bohanan has no right to share in the national law of the person who made the will shall regulate whose
inheritance left by the testator. succession is in consideration whatever the nature of the property
For the second issue, the old Civil Code, which is applicable to this and regardless of the country where the property maybe found (Art
case because the 16 CC). The first wife's properties may be found in the Philipppines,
testator died in 1944, expressly provides that successional rights to however the successional rights over those properties are governed
personal property are to be earned by the national law of the person by the national law of the testator.
whose succession is in question, thus the two-third rule is not
enforceable. LAWS GOVERNING FORMALITIES OF WILLS

Aznar v. Garcia IN RE: PROBATE OF WILL OF JOSE RIOSA

Facts GR L-14074 MALCOLM; November 7, 1918
Edward E. Christensen, an American citizen from California and NATURE Appeal from decision of CFI Albay which disallowed the will
domiciled in the Philippines, left a will executed in the Philippines in of RIosa
which he bequeathed Php 3,600.00 to Maria Helen Christensen
("Helen") and the remainder of his estate to his daughter, Maria Lucy FACTS - Jose Riosa made a will in January 1908, disposing of his entire
Christensen Daney. The laws of California allows the testator to estate. The will was executed according to the law in force at that
dispose of his estate in any manner he pleases. However, California time, complying with all the requisites then required. He died April
law also provides that the personal property of a person is governed 17, 1917. However, between the execution of the will and his death,
the law on formalities on execution of wills was amended by Act No. that although at the time it was executed and at the time of the
2645 (July 1, 1916; it added formalities required such as signatures on testator's death, holographic wills were not permitted by law still,
each page of the will). The new law, therefore, went into effect after because at the time of the hearing and when the case was to be
the making of the will and before the death of the testator, without decided the new Civil Code was already in force, which Code
the testator having left a will that conforms to the new requirements. permitted the execution of holographic wills, under a liberal view, and
to carry out the intention of the testator which according to the trial
ISSUE court is the controlling factor and may override any defect in form,
WON the will is valid said trial court admitted to probate the Last Will and Testament of
Father Abadia. The oppositors appealed the CFI’s Decision.
HELD
1. YES The validity of the execution of a will must be tested by the ISSUE: Should the holographic will be probated despite that when it
statutes in force at the time of its execution and statutes was executed the Civil Code effective at that time does not provide
subsequently enacted have no retrospective effect. All statutes are to for holographic wills?
be construed as having only a prospective operation unless the
purpose and intention of the Legislature to give them a retrospective RULING: The Supreme Court held that despite the effectivity of the
effect is expressly declared or is necessarily implied from the language new Civil Code allowing the execution of holographic wills, the
used. In every case of doubt, the doubt must be resolved against the contested holographic will still cannot be allowed and admitted to
restrospective effect. -The language of Act No. 2645 gives no probate. As stated in Art. 795 of the New Civil Code, the extrinsic
indication of retrospective effect. Such, likewise, has been the validity of a will should be judged not by the law existing at the time
uniform tendency of the SC on cases having special application to of the testator’s death nor the law at the time of its probate, but by
testamentary succession. - Our statute announces a positive rule for the law existing at the time of the execution of the instrument. For
the transference of property which must be complied with as a the very simple reason that although the will becomes operative only
completed act at the time of the execution, so far as the act of the after the testator’s death, still his wishes are given expression at the
testator is concerned, as to all testaments made subsequent to the time of execution. The general rule is that the Legislature cannot
enactment of Act No. 2645, but is not effective as to testaments made validate void wills.
antecedent to that date. - the court considered 3 views in addressing
the issue: (1) validity of wills are tested by the laws in force at the time
of death of the testator (considered the right of one to make a will as
an inchoate right). This view was rejected by the court. “The act of TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY
bequeathing or devising is something more than inchoate or
ambulatory. In reality, it becomes a completed act when the will is BUGNAO VS. UBAG
executed and attested according to the law, although it does not take G.R.No. 4445
effect on the property until a future time.” September 18, 1909

(2) validity of wills must be tested by statutes in force at time of Topic: Testamentary capacity.
execution. This view is the one adopted by SC
Facts: Before Domingo Ubag died, he allegedly executed a will while
(3) statutes relating to the execution of wills, when they increase the he was not of sound mind by making his wife the sole heir of the said
necessary formalities, should be construed so as not to impair the will. The appellant contend that the testator was so sick that he was
validity of a will already made and, when they lessen the formalities unable to speak and understand, or make himself understood and
required, should be construed so as to aid wills defectively executed that he was incapacitated to make a will.
according to the law in force at the time of their making. The court
did not directly Issue: When a person can be considered of sound mind and capable
of executing a will?
Enriquez vs Abadia
Held: To be of sound mind, it is not necessary that the mind should
FACTS: In 1923, Father Abadia, executed a document purporting to be be unbroken or unimpaired, unshattered by disease or otherwise. It
his Last Will and Testament. He died in 1943 and left properties worth is sufficient that a testator knows and appreciate the nature and
P8,000. In 1946, Andres Enriquez, one of the legatees filed a petition effects of the act he is engaged.
for the probate of the will in the CFI. Some of Father Abadia’s cousins
and nephews who would inherit the estate of the deceased, in the BAGTAS VS PAGUIO
absence of any testament executed by the deceased opposed the FACTS:
petition for probation. One of the attesting witnesses, the other two 1. Pioquinto Paguio died on September 28, 1909.
being dead, testified that in his presence together with his co-witness, 2. For some 14 or 15 years prior to the time of his death, he suffered
Father Abadia wrote out in longhand the will in Spanish which the from a paralysis of the left side of his body; that a few years prior to
testator spoke and understood; that he signed on The left hand his death his hearing became impaired and that he lost the power of
margin of the front page of each of the three folios or sheets of which speech.
the document is composed, and numbered the same with Arabic 3. He retained the use of his right hand and was able to write fairly
numerals, and finally signed his name at the end of his writing at the well.
last page, all this, in the presence of the three attesting witnesses 4. Through the medium of signs he was able to indicate his wishes to
after telling that it was his last will and that the said three witnesses his wife and to other members of his family.
signed their names on the last page after the attestation clause in his 5. The testator wrote out on several pieces of paper the disposition
presence and in the presence of each other. The oppositors did not of his property.
submit any evidence. The trial court declared the will to be a 6. The same was in turn delivered to one Señor Marco who
holographic will; that it was in the handwriting of the testator and transcribed and put them in form.
7. The pieces of paper were then delivered to a lawyer who read them other instructions for the preparation of her last will and -testament;
to the testator asking if they were his dispositions. that Attorney Panis prepared said document of compromise as well
8. The testator assented each time with an affirmative movement of as the new will and testament, naming Trinidad Neyra and Eustaquio
his head. Mendoza beneficiaries therein, pursuant to Encarnacion's express
9. The widow of the decedent Juliana Bagtas then sought the probate instructions, and the two documents were prepared, in duplicate, and
of the purported last will and testament of Pioquinto. were ready for signature, since the morning of November 3, 1942;
10. The CFI of Bataan admitted the same for probate. that in the afternoon of that day, November 3, 1942, Attorney Panis
11. Isidoro Paguio, a son of the decedent by a former marriage, read said document of compromise and last will and testament to
opposed the probation on the ground that the testator was not in full Encarnacion Neyra, slowly and in a loud voice, in the presence of
enjoyment and use of his mental faculties and was without mental Father Teodoro Garcia, Dr. Moises B. Abad, Dr. Eladio Aldecoa,
capacity necessary to execute a valid will. Trinidad Neyra, and others, after which he asked her if their terms
ISSUE: Was the will validly executed? were in accordance with her wishes, or if she wanted any change
made in said documents; that Encarnacion Neyra did not suggest any
HELD: change, and asked for the pad and the two documents, and, with the
help of a son of Trinidad, placed her thumb mark at the foot of each
The rule of law relating to the presumption of mental soundness is one of the two documents, in duplicate, on her bed in the sala, in the
well-established, and the testator in the case at bar never having been presence of the attesting witnesses, Dr. Moises B. Abad, Dr. Eladio R.
adjudged insane by the court of competent jurisdiction , this Aldecoa and Atty. Alejandro M. Panis, after which said witnesses
presumption continues, and it is therefore incumbent upon the signed at the foot of the will, in the presence of Encarnacion Neyra,
opponents to overcome this legal presumption by proper evidence. and of each other. The agreement was also signed by Trinidad Neyra,
The opponents failed to do this. The courts have repeatedly held that as party, and by Dr. M. B. Abad and Eustaquio Mendoza, a protegé, as
mere weakness of mind and body , induced by age and disease does witnesses. Father Teodoro Garcia was also present at the signing of
not render a person incapable of making a will. The law does not the two documents, at the request of Encarnacion Neyra.
require that a person shall continue in the full enjoyment and use of
his pristine physical and mental powers in order to execute a valid The foregoing facts have been established by the witnesses presented
will. If such were the legal standard , few indeed would be the number by Trinidad Neyra, who are all trustworthy men, and who had
of wills that could meet such exacting requirements. The authorities, absolutely no interest in the final outcome of this case. Two of them
both medical and legal, are universal in the statement that the are ministers of the Gospel, while three of the attesting witnesses are
question of mental capacity is one of degree, and that there are many professional men of irreproachable character, who had known and
gradations from the highest degree of mental soundness to the seen and actually talked to the testatrix. Petitioner Teodora Neyra,
lowest conditions of diseased mentality which are denominated half sister of Encarnacion, and her young daughter Ceferina de la Cruz,
insanity or idiocy and Presentacion Blanco, daughter of petitioner Maria Jacobo Vda.
de Blanco, substantially corroborated the testimony of the witnesses
NEYRA VS. NEYRA presented by Trinidad Neyra, with reference to the signing of
GR No.L- 8075 March 25, 1946 documents, in the bedroom of Encarnacion Neyra, in the afternoon
Topic/Doctrine: Test of SIGNING BY THUMBMARK; PRESENCE OF of November 3, 1942. Teodora Neyra, Presentacion Blanco and
ATTESTING WITNESSES Ceferina de la Cruz testified, however, that when the thumb mark of
Encarnacion Neyra was affixed to the agreement in question, dated
FACTS: November 3, 1942, she was sleeping on her bed in the sala; and that
the attesting witnesses were not present, as they were in the caida.
That Severo Neyra died intestate in the City of Manila, on May 6,
1938, leaving certain properties and two children, by his first ISSUE: Is the contentions of the petitioners are tenable?
marriage, named Encarnacion Neyra and Trinidad Neyra, and other
children by his second marriage; that after the death of Severo Neyra, HELD: The contention that the attesting witnesses were not present,
the two sisters, Encarnacion Neyra and Trinidad Neyra, had serious at the time E. N. thumbmarked the agreement and will in question,
misunderstandings, in connection with the properties left by their on her bed, in the sala of the house, as they were allegedly in the
deceased father, and so serious were their dissensions that, after caida, is untenable. It has been fully shown that said witnesses were
March 31, 1939, they had two litigations in the Court of First Instance present, at the time of the signing and execution of the agreement
of Manila, concerning said properties. In the first case, filed on March and will in question, in the sala, where the testatrix was lying on her
31, 1939, Trinidad Neyra and others demanded from Encarnacion bed. The true test is not whether they actually saw each other, at the
Neyra and others the annulment of the sale of the property located time of the signing of the documents, but whether they might have
at No. 366 Raon Street, Manila, which was finally decided in favor of seen each other sign, had they chosen to do so; and the attesting
the defendants, in the court of first instance, and in the Court of witnesses actually saw it. all in this case, (Jaboneta vs. Gustilo, 5 Phil.,
Appeals, on December 21, 1943. 541.) And the thumbmark placed by the testatrix on the agreement
and will in question is equivalent to her signature. The petition for
In the meanwhile, Encarnacion Neyra had become seriously ill, reconsideration filed by Atty. Lucio Javillonar, on November 23, 1942,
suffering from Addison's disease, and on October 31, 1942, she sent on behalf of a client, Encarnacion Neyra, who had been dead since
for her religious adviser and confessor, Mons. Vicente Fernandez of November 4, 1942, and some of her relatives, who have appeared, in
the Quiapo Church to make confession, Father Garcia talked to accordance with the provisions of section 17 of Rule 3 of the Rules of
Encarnacion Neyra and advised reconciliation between the two Court, is hereby denied; and the decision of the Court of Appeals for
sisters, Encarnacion and Trinidad Neyra. Encarnacion accepted said Manila, dated November 10, 1942, dismissing the appeal, is hereby
advise and, at about noon of the same day (November 1, 1942) the re-affirmed, without costs. So ordered
two sisters became reconciled. only in the afternoon of the following
day, November 2,1942, when Encarnacion gave him instructions for
the preparation of the document embodying their agreement, and
 of unsound mind, it is not necessary that the testator be in full
possession of all his reasoning faculties, or that his mind be wholly
Baltazar vs. Laxa unbroken, unimpaired, or unshattered by disease, injury or other
BALTAZAR vs. LAXA | G.R. No. 174489 | April 11, 2012 | Del Castillo, cause. It shall be sufficient if the testator was able at the time of
J.: making the Will to know the nature of the estate to be disposed of,
FACTS: Paciencia was a 78 y/o spinster when she made her last will the proper objects of his bounty, and the character of the
and testament in the Pampango dialect on Sept. 13, 1981. The will, testamentary act.”
executed in the house of retired Judge Limpin, was read to Paciencia
twice. After which, Paciencia expressed in the presence of the
instrumental witnesses that the document is her last will and FORMALITIES OF WILLS
testament. She thereafter affixed her signature at the end of the said
document on page 3 and then on the left margin of pages 1, 2 and 4 ACOP vs. PIRASO
thereof. 52 Phil 660 January 16, 1929
Childless and without any brothers or sisters, Paciencia bequeathed DOCTRINE: The will must be executed in a language or dialect known
all her properties to respondent Lorenzo Laxa and his wife Corazon to the testator. If the testator resides in ascertain locality, it can be
Laza and their children Luna and Katherine. Lorenzo is Paciencia’s presumed that he knows the language or dialect in said locality.
nephew whom she treated as her own son. Conversely, Lorenzo came Naturally, it is useless to avail of this presumption if the will is not
to know and treated Paciencia as his own mother. written in the dialect of the locality. Moreover, the presumption is
Six days after the execution of the Will (Sept. 19, 1981), Paciencia left only prima facie, and therefore, the contrary may be proved. Thus, it
for USA. There, she resided with Lorenzo and his family until her death may be shown, for example, by proof in court that the testator was
on Jan. 4, 1996. In the interim, the Will remained in the custody of really ignorant of the language of the community or locality, or of the
Judge Limpin. language in which the will had been written.
More than 4 years after the death of Paciencia or on Apr. 27, 2000,
Lorenzo filed a petition with the RTC of Guagua, Pampanga for the FACTS: The CFI of Benguet denied the probate of the last will and
probate of the Will of Paciencia and for the issuance of Letters of testament of the deceased Piraso because the will sought to be
Administration in his favor. probated was written in English. Evidence showed that Piraso knew
On Jun 23, 2000 one of petitioners, Antonio Baltazar filed an how to speak the Ilocano dialect, although imperfectly, and could
opposition to Lorenzo’s petition. Antonio averred that the properties make himself understood in that dialect. Proponent-appellant Sixto
subject of Paciencia’s Will belong to Nicomeda Mangalindan, his Acop alleged that the lower court erred in not holding that the
predecessor-in-interest; hence, Paciencia had no right to bequeath testator did not know the Ilocano dialect well enough to understand
them to Lorenzo. Also, one of the petitioners, Rosie Mateo testified a will drawn up in said dialect.
that Paciencia is in the state of being “mangulyan” or forgetful making
her unfit for executing a will and that the execution of the will had ISSUE: Should the will be probated?
been procured by undue and improper pressure and influence.
Petitioners also opposed the issuance of the Letters of Administration HELD: NO. The will is not valid. The testator is presumed to know the
in Lorenzo’s favor arguing that Lorenzo was disqualified to be dialect of the locality where he resides, unless there is proof to the
appointed as such, he being a citizen and resident of the USA. contrary. The decedent‘s alleged will, being written in English, a
Petitioners prayed that Letters of Administration be instead issued in language unknown to the decedent, cannot be probated because it is
favor of Antonio. prohibited by the law, which clearly requires that the will be written
RTC denies the petition for probate of the will and concluded that in the language or dialect known the testator. Nor can the
when Paciencia signed the will, she was no longer possessed of the presumption in favor of a will established by the SC in the case of
sufficient reason or strength of mind to have the testamentary Abangan vs. Abanganto the effect that the testator is presumed to
capacity. On appeal, CA reversed the decision of the RTC and granted know the dialect of the locality where he resides, unless there is proof
the probate of the will. The petitioner went up to SC for a petition for to the contrary. First, it was not proven that English is the language of
review on Certiorari. Baguio where the deceased lived and where the will was drawn. The
record contains positive proof that the testator knew no other
ISSUE: Whether the authenticity and due execution of the will was language other than the Igorrote dialect, with a smattering of Ilocano.
sufficiently established to warrant its allowance for probate. He did not know the English language in which the will was written.

HELD: Yes. A careful examination of the face of the Will shows JABONETA VS. GUSTILO
faithful compliance with the formalities laid down by law. The No. 1641. January 19, 1906
signatures of the testatrix, Paciencia, her instrumental witnesses and
the notary public, are all present and evident on the Will. Further, the Topic/Doctrine:WILLS; PRESENCE OF TESTATOR AND WITNESSES;
attestation clause explicitly states the critical requirement that the VALIDITY.—The true test of presence of the testator and the
testatrix and her instrumental witnesses attested and subscribed to witnesses in the execution of a will is not whether they actually saw
the Will in the presence of the testator and of one another. In fact, each other sign, but whether they might have seen each other sign,
even the petitioners acceded that the signature of Paciencia in the had they chosen to do so, considering their mental and physical
Will may be authentic although they question of her state of mind condition and position with relation to each other at the moment of
when she signed the same as well as the voluntary nature of said act. inscription of each signature.
The burden to prove that Paciencia was of unsound mind at the time
of the execution of the will lies on the shoulders of the petitioners. FACTS: Probate of the last will and testament of Macario Jaboneta,
The SC agree with the position of the CA that the state of being deceased, was denied by the lower court because the latter was of
forgetful does not necessarily make a person mentally unsound so as the opinion from the evidence adduced at the hearing that Julio
to render him unfit to execute a Will. Forgetfulness is not equivalent Javellana, one of the witnesses, did not attach his signature thereto
to being of unsound mind. Besides, Art. 799 of the NCC states: “To be in the presence of Isabelo Jena, another of the witnesses, as required
by the provisions of section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure. HELD: a. When the petitioners for probate of a will is contested the
According to the testimony of Jena, he left the room seeing Javellana proponent should introduce all three of the attesting witnesses, if
holding the pen in position to sign the last will and testament of the alive and within reach of the process of the court; and the execution
testator. of the will cannot be considered sufficiently proved by the testimony
of only one, without satisfactory explanation of the failure to produce
ISSUE: Whether or not the last will and testament of Macario the other two. b. A will otherwise properly executed in accordance
Jaboneta complied with the requirement of the provisions of section with the requirement of existing law is not rendered invalid by the
618 of the Code of Civil Procedure. fact that the paginal signatures of the testator and attesting witnesses
appear in the right margin instead of the left.
HELD: Yes. The fact that Jena was still in the room when he saw
Javellana moving his hand and pen in the act of affixing his signature Icasiano vs. Icasiano
to the will, taken together with the testimony of the remaining G.R. No. L-18979 June 30, 1964
witnesses which shows that Javellana did in fact there and then sign
his name to the will, convinces us that the signature was affixed in the Facts:
presence of Jena. The fact that he was in the act of leaving, and that 1. Celso Icasiano, filed a petition for the probate of the will of Josefa
his back was turned while a portion of the name of the witness was Villacorte and for his appointment as executor thereof. It appears
being written, is of no importance. He, with the other witnesses and from the evidence that the testatrix died on September 12, 1958. She
the testator, had assembled for the purpose of executing the executed a will in Tagalog, and through the help of her lawyer, it was
testament, and were together in the same room for that purpose, and prepared in duplicates, an original and a carbon copy.
at the moment when the witness Javellana signed the document he
was actually and physically present and in such position with relation 2. On the day that it was subscribed and attested, the lawyer only
to Javellana that he could see everything which took place by merely brought the original copy of the will while the carbon duplicate
casting his eyes in the proper direction, and without any physical (unsigned) was left in Bulacan. One of the witnesses failed to sign one
obstruction to prevent his doing so, therefore we are of opinion that of the pages in the original copy but admitted he may have lifted 2
the document was in fact signed before he finally left the room. We pages simultaneously instead when he signed the will. Nevertheless,
are of opinion that the statutory requisites as to the execution of the he affirmed that the will was signed by the testator and other
instrument were complied with, and that the lower court erred in witnesses in his presence.
denying probate to the will on the ground stated in the ruling
appealed from. Issue: Whether or not the failure of one of the subscribing witnesses
to affix his signature to a page is sufficient to deny probate of the
AVERA vs. GARCIA. will
G.R. No. 15566 September 14, 1921
RULING: No, the failure to sign was entirely through pure oversight or
Topic/ Doctrines: Forms of Will mere inadvertence. Since the duplicated bore the required
signatures, this proves that the omission was not intentional. Even if
FACTS: In proceedings in the court below, instituted by Eutiquia Avera the original is in existence, a duplicate may still be admitted to
for probate of the will of one Esteban Garcia, contest was made by probate since the original is deemed to be defective, then in law,
Marino Garcia and Juan Rodriguez, the latter in the capacity of there is no other will bu the duly signed carbon duplicate and the
guardian for the minors Jose Garcia and Cesar Garcia. Upon the date same can be probated.
appointed for the hearing, the proponent of the will introduced one
of the three attesting witnesses who testified - with details not The law should not be strictly and literally interpreted as to penalize
necessary to be here specified - that the will was executed with all the testatrix on account of the inadvertence of a single witness over
necessary external formalities, and that the testator was at the time whose conduct she has no control of. Where the purpose of the law
in full possession of disposing faculties. Upon the latter point the is to guarantee the identity of the testament and its component
witness was corroborated by the person who wrote the will at the pages, and there is no intentional or deliberate deviation existed.
request of the testator. Two of the attesting witnesses were not
introduced, nor was their absence accounted for by the proponent of Note that this ruling should not be taken as a departure from the rules
the will. When the proponent rested the attorney for the opposition that the will should be signed by the witnesses on every page. The
introduced a single witness whose testimony tended to show in a carbon copy duplicate was regular in all respects.
vague and indecisive manner that at the time the will was made the
testator was so debilitated as to be unable to comprehend what he
was about. After the cause had been submitted for determination Testate Estate of Cagro vs. Cagro
upon the proof thus presented, the trial judge found that the testator G.R. L-5826
at the time of the making of the will was of sound mind and disposing
memory and that the will had been properly executed. He accordingly Facts:
admitted the will to probate. 1. The case is an appeal interposed by the oppositors from a decision
of the CFI of Samar which admitted to probate a will allegedly
ISSUE: a. whether or not a will can be admitted to probate, where executed by Vicente Cagro who died in Pambujan, Samar on Feb. 14,
opposition is made, upon the proof of a single attesting witness, 1949.
without producing or accounting for the absence of the other two;
b. whether or not the will in question is rendered invalid by reason of 2. The appellants insisted that the will is defective because the
the fact that the signature of the testator and of the three attesting attestation was not signed by the witnesses at the bottom although
witnesses are written on the right margin of each page of the will the page containing the same was signed by the witnesses on the left
instead of the left margin. hand margin.
3. Petitioner contended that the signatures of the 3 witnesses on the CANEDA V. CA
left hand margin conform substantially to law and may be deemed as 222 SCRA 781
their signatures to the attestation clause.
FACTS:
Issue: Whether or not the will is valid On December 5, 1978, Mateo Caballero, a widower without any
children and already in the twilight years of his life, executed a last
HELD: Will is not valid. The attestation clause is a memorandum of the will and testament at his residence before 3 witnesses.
facts attending the execution of the will. It is required by law to be He was assisted by his lawyer, Atty. Emilio Lumontad.
made by the attesting witnesses and it must necessarily bear their
signatures. In the will, it was declared that the testator was leaving by way of
An unsigned attestation clause cannot be considered as an act of the legacies and devises his real and personal properties to several people
witnesses since the omission of their signatures at the bottom all of whom do not appear to be related to the testator.
negatives their participation. 4 months later, Mateo Caballero himself filed a case seeking the
probate of his last will and testament, but numerous postponements
Moreover, the signatures affixed on the let hand margin is not pushed back the initial hearing of the probate court regarding the will.
substantial conformance to the law. The said signatures were merely
in conformance with the requirement that the will must be signed on On May 29, 1980, the testator passed away before his petition could
the left-hand margin of all its pages. If the attestation clause is finally be heard by the probate court.
unsigned by the 3 witnesses at the bottom, it would be easier to add
clauses to a will on a subsequent occasion and in the absence of the Thereafter one of the legatees, Benoni Cabrera, sought his
testator and any or all of the witnesses. appointment as special administrator of the testator’s estate.

The probate of the will is denied. Thereafter, the petitioners, claiming to be nephews and nieces of the
testator, instituted a second petition for intestate proceedings. They
Nera v. Rimando also opposed the probate of the testator’s will and the appointment
G.R. L-5971 February 27, 1911 of a special administrator for his estate.
Ponente: Carson, J.:
Benoni Cabrera died and was replaced by William Cabrera as special
Facts: administrator and gave an order that the testate proceedings for the
1. At the time the will was executed, in a large room connecting with probate of the will had to be heard and resolved first.
a smaller room by a doorway where a curtain hangs across, one of the In the course of the proceedings, petitioners opposed to the
witnesses was in the outside room when the other witnesses were allowance of the testator’s will on the ground that on the alleged date
attaching their signatures to the instrument. of its execution, the testator was already in poor state of health such
2. The trial court did not consider the determination of the issue as to that he could not have possibly executed the same. Also the
the position of the witness as of vital importance in determining the genuineness of the signature of the testator is in doubt.
case. It agreed with the ruling in the case of Jaboneta v. Gustillo that On the other hand, one of the attesting witnesses and the notary
the alleged fact being that one of the subscribing witnesses was in public testified that the testator executed the will in question in their
the outer room while the signing occurred in the inner room, would presence while he was of sound and disposing mind and that the
not be sufficient to invalidate the execution of the will. testator was in good health and was not unduly influenced in any way
3. The CA deemed the will valid. in the execution of his will.

Probate court then rendered a decision declaring the will in question

Issue: Whether or not the subscribing witness was able to see the as the last will and testament of the late Mateo Caballero.
testator and other witnesses in the act of affixing their signatures.
CA affirmed the probate court’s decision stating that it substantially
HELD: YES complies with Article 805. Hence this appeal.
The Court is unanimous in its opinion that had the witnesses been
proven to be in the outer room when the testator and other witnesses ISSUE:
signed the will in the inner room, it would have invalidated the will W/N the attestation clause in the will of the testator is fatally
since the attaching of the signatures under the circumstances was not defective or can be cured under the art. 809.
done 'in the presence' of the witnesses in the outer room. The line of
vision of the witness to the testator and other witnesses was blocked HELD:
by the curtain separating the rooms. No. It does not comply with the provisions of the law.

The position of the parties must be such that with relation to each Ordinary or attested wills are governed by Arts. 804 to 809. The will
other at the moment of the attaching the signatures, they may see must be acknowledged before a notary public by the testator and the
each other sign if they chose to. attesting witnesses. The attestation clause need not be written in a
language known to the testator or even to the attesting witnesses.
In the Jaboneta case, the true test of presence is not whether or not It is a separate memorandum or record of the facts surrounding the
they actualy saw each other sign but whether they might have seen conduct of execution and once signed by the witnesses it gives
each other sign if they chose to doso considering their physical, affirmation to the fact that compliance with the essential formalities
mental condition and position in relation to each other at the required by law has been observed.
moment of the inscription of the signature.
The attestation clause, therefore, provides strong legal guaranties for
the due execution of a will and to insure the authenticity thereof.
 himself his having signed the said will. An acknowledging officer
It is contended by petitioners that the attestation clause in the will cannot serve as witness at the same time.
failed to specifically state the fact that the attesting witnesses
witnessed the testator sign the will and all its pages in their presence To acknowledge before means to avow, or to own as genuine, to
and that they, the witnesses, likewise signed the will and every page assent, admit, and 'before' means in front of or preceding in space or
thereof in the presence of the testator and of each other. And the ahead of. The notary cannot split his personality into two so that one
Court agrees. will appear before the other to acknowledge his participation int he
making of the will. To permit such situation would be absurd.
The attestation clause does not expressly state therein the
circumstance that said witnesses subscribed their respective Finally, the function of a notary among others is to guard against any
signatures to the will in the presence of the testator and of each illegal or immoral arrangements, a function defeated if he were to be
other. one of the attesting or instrumental witnesses. He would be
The phrase, “and he has signed the same and every page thereof, on interested in sustaining the validity of the will as it directly involves
the space provided for his signature and on the left hand margin,” himself and the validity of his own act. he would be in an inconsistent
obviously refers to the testator and not the instrumental witnesses as position, thwarting the very purpose of the acknowledgment, which
it is immediately preceded by the words” as his last will and is to minimize fraud.
testament.”

Clearly lacking is the statement that the witnesses signed the will and LOPEZ V. LOPEZ
every page thereof in the presence of the testator and of one another. G.R. No. 189984,
That the absence of the statement required by law is a fatal defect or November 12, 2012.
imperfection which must necessarily result in the disallowance of the FACTS
will that is here sought to be probated. The RTC disallowed the probate of the will for failure to comply with
the required statement in the attestation clause as to the number of
Also, Art. 809 does not apply to the present case because the pages used upon which the will is written. While the acknowledgment
attestation clause totally omits the fact that the attesting witnesses portion stated that the will consists of 7 pages including the page on
signed each and every page of the will in the presence of the testator which the ratification and acknowledgment are written, the RTC
and of each other. The defect in this case is not only with respect to observed that it has 8 pages including the acknowledgment portion.
the form or the language of the attestation clause. The defects must As such, it disallowed the will for not having been executed and
be remedied by intrinsic evidence supplied by the will itself which is attested in accordance with law.
clearly lacking in this case.
ISSUE
Therefore, the probate of the will is set aside and the case for the Whether or not the discrepancy between the number of pages in the
intestate proceedings shall be revived. attestation clause and the actual number of pages in the will that
would warrant its disallowance.
Article 809 cannot be used to cure the defects of the will when it does
not pertain to the form or language of the will. This is because there RULING
is not substantial compliance with Article 805. YES. The provisions of the Civil Code on Forms of Wills, particularly,
Articles 805 and 809 of the Civil Code provide that the attestation
CRUZ V. VILLASOR must state the number of pages used upon which the will is written.
G.R. L-32213 November 26, 1973 The purpose of the law is to safeguard against possible interpolation
Ponente: Esguerra, J.: or omission of one or some of its pages and prevent any increase or
decrease in the pages. Here, the will actually consists of 8 pages
Facts: including its acknowledgment which discrepancy cannot be explained
1. The CFI of Cebu allowed the probate of the last will and testament by mere examination of the will itself but through the presentation of
of the late Valenti Cruz. However, the petitioner opposed the evidence aliunde.
allowance of the will alleging that it was executed through fraud,
deceit, misrepresentation, and undue influence. He further alleged HOLOGRAPHIC WILLS
that the instrument was executed without the testator having been
informed of its contents and finally, that it was not executed in Labrador v. CA
accordance with law.
184 SCRA 170
2. One of the witnesses, Angel Tevel Jr. was also the notary before FACTS:
whom the will was acknowledged. Despite the objection, the lower Melecio died leaving behind a parcel of land to his heirs. However,
court admitted the will to probate on the ground that there is during probate proceedings, Jesus and Gaudencio filed an opposition
substantial compliance with the legal requirements of having at least on the ground that the will has been extinguished by implication of
3 witnesses even if the notary public was one of them. law alleging that before Melecio’s death, the land was sold to them
evidenced by TCT No. 21178. Jesus eventually sold it to Navat.
Issue: Whether or not the will is valid in accordance with Art. 805 Trial court admitted the will to probate and declared the TCT null and
and 806 of the NCC void. However, the CA on appeal denied probate on the ground that
it was undated.
HELD: NO. ISSUE:
The will is not valid. The notary public cannot be considered as the W/N the alleged holographic will is dated, as provided for in Article
third instrumental witness since he cannot acknowledge before 810 of CC.
HELD: It is also proper to note that he requirements of authentication of
YES. The law does not specify a particular location where the date changes and signing and dating of dispositions appear in provisions
should be placed in the will. The only requirements are that the date (Article 813 and 814) separate from that which provides for the
be in the will itself and executed in the hand of the testator. necessary conditions for the validity of the holographic will (Article
The intention to show March 17 1968 as the date of the execution is 810).
plain from the tenor of the succeeding words of the paragraph. It This separation and distinction adds support to the interpretation
states that “this being in the month of March 17th day, in the year that only the requirements of Article 810 of the NCC – and not those
1968, and this decision and or instruction of mine is the matter to be found in Articles 813 and 814 – are essential to the probate of a
followed. And the one who made this writing is no other than Melecio holographic will.
Labrador, their father.” This clearly shows that this is a unilateral act
of Melecio who plainly knew that he was executing a will. Section 9, Rule 76 of the Rules of Court and Article 839 of the Civil
Code enumerate the grounds for disallowance of wills. These lists are
exclusive; no other grounds can serve to disallow a will.
AJERO V. CA
236 SCRA 488 In a petition to admit a holographic will, the only issues to be resolved
are:
FACTS: 1.whether the instrument submitted is, indeed, the decedent’s last
The holographic will of Annie San was submitted for probate. will and testament;
2.whether said will was executed in accordance with the formalities
Private respondent opposed the petition on the grounds that: neither prescribed by law;
the testament’s body nor the signature therein was in decedent’s 3.whether the decedent had the necessary testamentary capacity at
handwriting; it contained alterations and corrections which were not the time the will was executed; and
duly signed by decedent; and, the will was procured by petitioners 4.whether the execution of the will and its signing were the voluntary
through improper pressure and undue influence. acts of the decedent.

The petition was also contested by Dr. Ajero with respect to the The object of the solemnities surrounding the execution of wills is to
disposition in the will of a house and lot. He claimed that said property close the door against bad faith and fraud; accordingly, laws on this
could not be conveyed by decedent in its entirety, as she was not its subject should be interpreted to attain these primordial ends.
sole owner.
In the case of holographic wills, what assures authenticity is the
However, the trial court still admitted the decedent’s holographic will requirement that they be totally authographic or handwritten by the
to probate. testator himself. Failure to strictly observe other formalities will not
result in the disallowance of a holographic will that is unquestionable
The trial court held that since it must decide only the question of the handwritten by the testator.
identity of the will, its due execution and the testamentary capacity
of the testatrix, it finds no reason for the disallowance of the will for KALAW V. RELOVA
its failure to comply with the formalities prescribed by law nor for lack G.R. No. L-40207 September 28, 1984
of testamentary capacity of the testatrix. Melencio-Herrera, J. (Ponente)

On appeal, the CA reversed said Decision holding that the decedent Facts:
did not comply with Articles 313 and 314 of the NCC. It found that
certain dispositions in the will were either unsigned or undated, or 1. Gregorio Kalaw, the private respondent, claiming to be the sole heir
signed by not dated. It also found that the erasures, alterations and of sister Natividad, filed a peition for probate of the latter's
cancellations made had not been authenticated by decedent. holographic will in 1968. The will contained 2 alterations: a) Rosa's
name, designated as the sole heir was crossed out and instead
ISSUE: "Rosario" was written above it. Such was not initialed, b) Rosa's name
Whether the CA erred in holding that Articles 813 and 814 of the NCC was crossed out as sole executrix and Gregorio's ma,e was written
were not complies with. above it. This alteration was initialed by the testator.

HELD: 2. Rosa contended that the will as first written should be given effect
YES. A reading of Article 813 shows that its requirement affects the so that she would be the sole heir. The lower court denied the probate
validity of the dispositions contained in the holographic will, but not due to the unauthenticated alterations and additions.
its probate. If the testator fails to sign and date some of the
dispositions, the result is that these dispositions cannot be Issue: Whether or not the will is valid
effectuated. Such failure, however, does not render the whole
testament void. RULING: No, the will is voided or revoked since nothing remains in the
will which could remain valid as there was only one disposition in it.
Likewise, a holographic will can still be admitted to probate Such was altered by the substitution of the original heir with another.
notwithstanding non-compliance with the provisions of Article 814. To rule that the first will should be given effect is to disregard the
testatrix' change of mind. However, this change of mind cannot be
Unless the authenticated alterations, cancellations or insertions were given effect either as she failed to authenticate it in accordance with
made on the date of the holographic will or on testator’s signature, Art. 814, or by affixing her full signature.
their presence does not invalidate the will itself. The lack of
authentication will only result in disallowance of such changes.
VDA DE PEREZ v. TOLETE  Why need to present evidence of the contents of
the foreign law? RP courts cannot take JN of
Summary: Specpro case. Mother in law claims that since her son in foreign laws
law made her daughter the heir for all the remainder of the real and  Wills of the Cunanan Spouses should be
personal property, wherever it was situated, she was the sole heir and probated jointly (but it doesn't mean that it's a
so she should receive all the properties. Heirs of the son in law joint will):
contested the acts of the mother in law. Court held that the heirs of a. construe rules liberally in order to
the son in law should be given notice of the proceedings in RP and the promote their object and to assist the
wills should be proven as made in accordance with NY law in RP. parties in obtaining just, speedy and
Facts: inexpensive determination of every
-Jose and Evelyn Cunanan lived in NY w/ 3 children (already action and proceeding
naturalized, working as doctors). Jose executed a will wherein he b. No Joint wills: the Cunanan spouses
bequeathed all the remainder of the real and personal property executed SEPARATE WILLS. Since the 2
"wherever situated" to his wife wills contain essentially the same
-if ever Evelyn dies first, Jose's properties would go to his children and provisions and pertain to property
grandchildren upon his death, with his brother Rafael as trustee which in all probability are conjugal,
-Evelyn also executed her own will. In both wills, it was stated that if joint probate na!
the two of them died at the same time, it would be presumed that  NOTICE should have been given by Mrs. Perez to
Jose died first. the other Cunanan Heirs:
-Sadly, the whole Cunanan family died in a fire in 1982.
 they are also heirs of Jose Cunanan
-Rafael filed separate proceedings for the probate of the 2 wills (Jose's
and Evelyn's) in NY  As regard to notices, the will probated
-both wills admitted to probate, letters testamentary issued to Rafael abroad should be treated as if it were
-in 1983, Salud Perez (mother of Evelyn) filed a petition to reprobate an "original will" or a will that is
the wills, asked that she be appointed the administratrix presented for probate for the first time
TC of Bulacan: Approved the petition, made her the administratrix of
the Cunanan's properties
Acts of administration:
 Motion praying that the proceeds of the
insurance made by Jose in favor of Evelyn and
their children be delivered to her
 Motion that Rafael be ordered to give her bank
deposits and certificates amounting to about
P38k
-Rafael contested proceedings in RP:
 Salud is not an heir
 Wills of Jose and Evelyn, who were both American
citizens, were executed in accordance with the
formalities of NY law
WON the wills of the Cunanan spouses may be made effective in RP?
YES, provided follow rules of court!
 When are wills executed by aliens abroad
effective in RP? Art 816: if made with the
formalities prescribed
a. by the law of the place in which he
resides
b. in his country
c. By NCC
 Evidence necessary for the reprobate or
allowance of wills
a. Due execution of the will in accordance
with the foreign laws
b. Testator has his domicile in the foreign
country (not in RP)
c. The will has been admitted to probate
in such country
d. The fact that the foreign tribunal is a
probate court
e. The laws of a foreign country on
procedure and allowance of wills
 HERE: all except first and last were proven by
evidence