Gonzales v CA

G.R. No. L-37453

25 May 1979

Facts: Isabel Gabriel died on June 7, 1961 without issue. Lutgarda Santiago (respondent),
niece of Isabel, filed a petition for probate of Isabels will designating her as the principal
beneficiary and executrix. The will was typewritten in Tagalog (a language known to
decedent) and was executed 2 months prior to death of Isabel.

The petition was opposed by Rizalina Gonzales (petitioner), also a niece of Isabel, on the
following grounds: 1. the will is not genuine, 2. will was not executed and attested as
required by law, 3. the decedent at the time of the making of the will did not have
testamentary capacity due to her age and sickness, and 4. the will was procured through
undue influence.

The trial court disallowed the probate of the will but the Court of Appeals Reversed the said
decision of the trial court. The petitioner filed a petition for review with SC claiming that the
CA erred in holding that the will of the decedent was executed and attested as required by
law when there was absolutely no proof that the 3 instrumental witnesses are credible.
According to petitioner, unless the qualifications of the witnesses are first established, his
testimony may not be favorably considered. Petitioner contends that the term credible is
not synonymous with competent for a witness may be competent under 820 and 821 of
the Civil Code and still not be credible as required by 805 of the same code. It is further
argued that the term credible as used in the Civil Code should receive the same settled
well-known meaning it has under the Naturalization Law, the latter being a kindred
legislation with the Civil Code provision on wills with respect to the qualifications of
witnesses

ISSUE:

WON the credibility of a witness is sufficient under 820 and 821.

HELD: Yes.

RATIO: Art. 820 of the Civil Code provides the qualifications of a witness to the execution
of wills while, Art. 821 sets forth the disqualifications from being a witness to a will. Under
the law, there is no mandatory requirement that the witness testify initially or at any time
during the trial as to his good standing in the community, his reputation for trustworthiness
and reliableness, his honesty and uprightness in order that his testimony may be believed
and accepted but the trial court. It is enough that the qualifications enumerated in Art. 820
of the Civil Code are complied with, such that the soundness of his mind can be shown by or
deduced from his answers to the questions propounded to him, that his age (18 years or
more) is shown from his appearance, testimony, or competently proved otherwise, as well
as the fact that he is not blind, deaf or dumb and that he is able to read and write to the
satisfaction of the Court, and that he has none of the disqualifications under Art. 821. The
SC also rejected petitioners claims that it must be first established in the record the good
standing of the witness in the community, his reputation for trustworthiness and
reliableness, his honesty and uprightness as well as their contention that the term
credible should be given the same meaning it has under the Naturalization Law. In
probate proceedings, the instrumental witness are not character witnesses for they merely
attest the execution of a will or testament and affirm the formalities attendant to said
execution.