SPOUSES ROBERTO AND THELMA AJERO VS.

CA AND
CLEMENTE SAND
G.R. No. 106720 September 15, 1994
Digested by: Lopez, Rochelle O.
FACTS:
November 25, 1982- Annie Sand died
Decedent named as devisees
(Succeed to a particular real property)
On January 20, 1983, petitioners instituted a case for
allowance of decedents holographic will.
They alleged: Annie Sand was of sound and disposing mind
at the time of its execution and not acting under duress, fraud or
undue influence.

Respondent opposed the petition on the grounds that:

1. Neither the testaments body nor the signature was Annies
handwriting.
2. It contained alterations and corrections which were not duly signed
by the decedent; and
3. The will was procured by petitioners through improper pressure and
undue influence

Dr. Ajero, one of the respondents contested that:

The disposition in the will of a house and lot located in
Cabadbaran, Agusan del Norte cannot be conveyed by decedent
because she was not its sole owner.

The trial court:

Admitted the decedents holographic will to probate.
As to the identity of the will:
The probate court finds no reason of all for the disallowance of the
will for its failure to comply with the formalities nor for lack of
testamentary capacity of the testatrix
 No other will was alleged to have been executed by the testatrix
other than the will presented.
That the holographic will was entirely written, dated, and signed in
the handwriting of the testatrix
That the 3 witnesses explicitly identified the handwriting and
signature of the testatrix. Thus, the requirement has been complied
with.

As to the testamentary capacity:

Clement Sand testified that testatrix was completely in her sound
mind when he visited her during her birthday celebration in 1981
which the time the holographic will in question was executed by the
testatrix.

Therefore, the question of identity will, its due execution and

the testamentary capacity of the testatrix has to be resolved in favour
of the allowance of probate of the will submitted therein.

CA reversed and set aside the decision of the RTC, the

petition for probate of decedents will was dismissed.

CA found that:
The holographic will fails to meet the requirements
for its validity specially Art. 813 and 814.

It alluded to certain dispositions in the will which were either

unsigned and undated, or signed but not dated. It also found that the
erasures, alteration and cancellations made had not been
authenticated by decedent.

Respondent CA that the holographic will of Annie Sand was

not executed in accordance of the formalities prescribed by law, it
held that Art. 813, 814 of the NCC were not complied with, hence,
it disallowed the probate of said will.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the said holographic will was executed in
accordance with the formalities prescribed by law and thus may be
admitted to probate.
HELD:
YES, the said holographic will was executed in accordance
with the formalities prescribed by law.
In the case of holographic wills, what assures authenticity is
the requirements that they be totally autographic or handwritten by
the testator himself.
It is subject to any form and may be made in or out of the
Philippines and need not be witnessed.
Failure to observe other formalities will not result in the
disallowance of a holographic will that is unquestionably
handwritten by the testator.
A reading of Art. 813 of the NCC shows that its requirement
affects the validity of the dispositions contained in the holographic
will, but not its probate.
If the testator fails to sign and date some of the dispositions,
the result is that these dispositions cannot be effectuated.
Such failure does not render the whole testament void.
Unless the unauthorized alterations, cancellations or
insertions were made on the date of the holographic will or on
testators signature, the will is not invalidated as a whole but at most
only as respects the particular words erased, corrected or interlined
only. The lack of authenticity will only result in disallowance of
such changes.