C. Law Governing Content
Christensen was a
1. As to time
Article 2263. Rights to the inheritance of a person who died,
with or without a will, before the effectivity of this Code, shall
be governed by the Civil Code of 1889, by other previous laws,
and by the Rules of Court. The inheritance of those who, with
or without a will, die after the beginning of the effectivity of this
Code, shall be adjudicated and distributed in accordance with
this new body of laws and by the Rules of Court; but the
testamentary provisions shall be carried out insofar as they
may be permitted by this Code. Therefore, legitimes,
betterments, legacies and bequests shall be respected;
however, their amount shall be reduced if in no other manner
can every compulsory heir be given his full share according to
this Code. (Rule 12a)
2. As to successional rights, etc.
Article 16 (2). x x x
However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with
respect to the order of succession and to the amount of
successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary
provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person
whose succession is under consideration, whatever may be
the nature of the property and regardless of the country
wherein said property may be found.
Article 1039. Capacity to succeed is governed by the law of
the nation of the decedent.
ESTATE OF CHRISTENSEN
31 Jan 1963 | Labrador, J.
Petitioners: Aznar (Executor) and Lucy Christensen (heir)
Respondent-Oppositor: Helen Christensen Garcia
FACTS:
Helen Christensen Garcia opposed the approval of the
project of partition of the said estate, insofar as it deprives
her (Helen) of her legitime as an acknowledged natural
child.
She was already declared an acknowledged natural child
of the deceased Edward Christensen by the SC in a
previous case.
The legal grounds of opposition are (a) that the distribution
should be governed by the laws of the Philippines, and (b)
that said order of distribution is contrary thereto insofar as
it denies to Helen Christensen, one of two acknowledged
natural children, one-half of the estate in full ownership.
o In amplification of the above grounds it was alleged
that the law that should govern the estate of the
deceased Christensen should not be the internal law
of California alone, but the entire law thereof because
several foreign elements are involved, that the forum
is the Philippines and even if the case were decided
in California, Section 946 of the California Civil Code,
which requires that the domicile of the decedent
should apply, should be applicable.
o It was also alleged that Maria Helen Christensen
having been declared an acknowledged natural child
of the decedent, she is deemed for all purposes
legitimate from the time of her birth.
The Court (CA) ruled that as Edward E.
citizen of the United States and of the State of California at the
time of his death, the successional rights and intrinsic validity
of the provisions in his will are to be governed by the law of
California, in accordance with which a testator has the right to
dispose of his property in the way he desires, because the right
of absolute dominion over his property is sacred and inviolable.
There is no question that Edward E. Christensen was a citizen
of the United States and of the State of California at the time of
his death. But there is also no question that at the time of his
death he was domiciled in the Philippines.
ISSUE:
WON the California Civil Code should be applied in the
execution of the will. (NO)
HELD: No.
The laws of California have prescribed two sets of laws for its
citizens, one for residents therein and another for those
domiciled in other jurisdictions. Reason demands that We
should enforce the California internal law prescribed for its
citizens residing therein, and enforce the conflict of laws rules
for the citizens domiciled abroad. If we must enforce the law of
California as in comity we are bound to go, as so declared in
Article 16 of our Civil Code, then we must enforce the law of
California in accordance with the express mandate thereof and
as above explained, i.e., apply the internal law for residents
therein, and its conflict-of-laws rule for those domiciled abroad.
The Philippine court must apply its own law as directed in the
conflict of laws rule of the state of the decedent, if the question
has to be decided, especially as the application of the internal
law of California provides no legitime for children while the
Philippine law, Arts. 887(4) and 894, Civil Code of the
Philippines, makes natural children legally acknowledged
forced heirs of the parent recognizing them.
The domicile of the deceased Christensen, a citizen of
California, is the Philippines, the validity of the provisions of his
will depriving his acknowledged natural child, the appellant,
should be governed by the Philippine Law, the domicile,
pursuant to Art. 946 of the Civil Code of California, not by the
internal law of California.
Decision reversed.
ESTATE OF AMOS BELLIS
6 Jun 1967 | Bengzon, J.
Petitioners: Peoples Bank and Trust Co (executor), Maria
Cristina Bellis and Miriam Palma Bellis (oppositor appellants)
Heirs-Appellees: Edward Belis, et al.
FACTS:
Amos Bellis was a citizen of the State of Texas, and of the
United States.
By his first wife whom he divorced he had five legitimate
children, by his second wife, who survived him, he had
three legitimate children, and three illegitimate 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 Philippine law were to be
applied.
ISSUE:
WON the national law of the deceased should determine the
successional rights of the illegitimate children. (YES)
HELD: Yes.
In the present case, it is not disputed that the decedent was
both a national of Texas and a domicile thereof at the time of
his death. So that even assuming Texas has a conflict of law
rule providing that the domiciliary system (law of the domicile)
should govern, the same would not result in a reference back
(renvoi) to Philippine law, but would still refer to Texas law.
Nonetheless, if Texas has a conflicts rule adopting the situs
theory (lex rei sitae) calling for the application of the law of the
place where the properties are situated, renvoi would arise,
since the properties here involved are found in the Philippines.
In the absence, however, of proof as to the conflict of law rule
of Texas, it should not be presumed different from ours.
Appellants' position is therefore not rested on the doctrine of
renvoi. As stated, they never invoked nor even mentioned it in
their arguments. Rather, they argue that their case falls under
the circumstances mentioned in the third paragraph of Article
17 in relation to Article 16 of the Civil Code.
Appellants would also point out that the decedent executed two
wills one to govern his Texas estate and the other his
Philippine estate arguing from this that he intended
Philippine law to govern his Philippine estate.
Assuming that such was the decedent's intention in executing
a separate Philippine will, it would not alter the law, for as this
Court ruled in Miciano v. Brimo, 50 Phil. 867, 870, a provision
in a foreigner's will to the effect that his properties shall be
distributed in accordance with Philippine law and not with his
national law, is illegal and void, for his national law cannot be
ignored in regard to those matters that Article 10 now Article
16 of the Civil Code states said national law should govern.
The parties admit that the decedent, Amos G. Bellis, was a
citizen of the State of Texas, U.S.A., and that under the laws of
Texas, there are no forced heirs or legitimes. Accordingly,
since the intrinsic validity of the provision of the will and the
amount of successional rights are to be determined under
Texas law, the Philippine law on legitimes cannot be applied to
the testacy of Amos G. Bellis.
CAYETANO v. LEONIDES
30 May 1984 | Gutierrez
Petitioner: Polly Cayetano
Private Respondent: Nenita Campos Paguia
FACTS:
Decedent: Adoracion Campos
Surviving heirs:
o Father: Hermogenes - only compulsory heir
o Sisters: Nenita Paguia, Remedios Lopez and Marieta
Medina
Hermogenes executed an Affidavit of
Adjudication whereby he adjudicated unto himself the
ownership of the entire estate of Adoracion
11 months after, Nenita Paguia filed a petition for the
reprobate of a will of Adoracion, which was allegedly
executed in the US and for her appointment as
administratrix of the estate of the deceased testatrix.
An opposition to the reprobate of the will was filed by
Hermogenes:
o will in question is a forgery
o intrinsic provisions of the will are null and void
o even if pertinent American laws on intrinsic provisions
are invoked, the same could not apply inasmuch as
they would work injustice and injury to him
Hermogenes filed a Motion to Dismiss Opposition (With
Waiver of Rights or Interests): confirms validity of will
TC: admitted last will and testament, allowed probate in
RP
Hermogenes filed a petition for relief:
o alleged that withdrawal of his opposition was secured
through fraud (he was made to sign papers, inserted
among them, the withdrawal.)
motion entitled "Motion to Vacate and/or Set Aside the
Order of January 10, 1979, and/or dismiss the case for
lack of jurisdiction.
TC: dismissed: failed to present evidence in support of it
WILL:
o Adoracion was a US citizen, a permanent resident of
Pennsylvania at the time she made the will
o She died in Manila while temporarily residing with her
sister
o Made in accordance with Pennsylvania law, probated
and registered in Penn. after her death
ISSUES/RATIO:
WON the intrinsic validity of the will can be passed upon during
probate of the will. YES.
GR: probate court's authority is limited only to:
the extrinsic validity of the will
due execution
testatrix's testamentary capacity
Compliance with the requisites or
solemnities prescribed by law
Exception: Where practical considerations demand intrinsic
validity to be passed upon
WON the will is valid even if the compulsory heir was deprived
of his legitime. YES.
It was sufficiently established that Adoracion was, at the
time of her death, an American citizen and a permanent
resident of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Capacity to succeed is governed by the law of the
nation of the decedent: law of Pennsylvania, U.S.A.,
which is the national law of the decedent. [Article 16(2)
and 1039 of the Civil Code]
Pennsylvania law: no legitimes, testator could give away
entire estate to strangers!
WON the will (which completely deprived compulsory heir of
share) is against public policy? NO
-cited Bellis v. Bellis: whatever public policy or good customs
may be involved, Congress has not intended to extend the
same to the succession of foreign nationals.
Was Hermogenes Campos denied due process?
There was no denial of due process in this case. As regards
the alleged absence of notice of hearing for the petition for
relief, the records will bear that what was repeatedly scheduled
for hearing on separate dates was Hermogenes petition for
relief and not his motion to vacate order. There is no reason
why he was led to believe otherwise. The Court even
admonished Hermogenes for his failure to adduce evidence
when his petition for relief was repeatedly set for hearing.
There was no denial of due process.
D. Subjects of Succession
1. Who are the subjects?
Article 775. In this Title, "decedent" is the general term applied
to the person whose property is transmitted through
succession, whether or not he left a will. If he left a will, he is
also called the testator.
Article 782. An heir is a person called to the succession either
by the provision of a will or by operation of law.
Devisees and legatees are persons to whom gifts of real and
personal property are respectively given by virtue of a will.
Article 887. The following are compulsory heirs:
(1) Legitimate children and descendants, with respect to their
legitimate parents and ascendants;
(2) In default of the foregoing, legitimate parents and
ascendants, with respect to their legitimate children and
descendants;
(3) The widow or widower;
(4) Acknowledged natural children, and natural children by
legal fiction;
(5) Other illegitimate children referred to in article 287.
Compulsory heirs mentioned in Nos. 3, 4, and 5 are not
excluded by those in Nos. 1 and 2; neither do they exclude one
another.
In all cases of illegitimate children, their filiation must be duly
proved.
The father or mother of illegitimate children of the three classes
mentioned, shall inherit from them in the manner and to the
extent established by this Code.
Article 1003. If there are no descendants, ascendants,
illegitimate children, or a surviving spouse, the collateral
relatives shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased in
accordance with the following articles.
2. Relationship
Article 963. Proximity of relationship is determined by the
number of generations. Each generation forms a degree.
Article 964. A series of degrees forms a line, which may be
either direct or collateral.
A direct line is that constituted by the series of degrees among
ascendants and descendants.
A collateral line is that constituted by the series of degrees
among persons who are not ascendants and descendants, but
who come from a common ancestor.
Article 965. The direct line is either descending or ascending.
The former unites the head of the family with those who
descend from him.
The latter binds a person with those from whom he descends.
Article 966. In the line, as many degrees are counted as there
are generations or persons, excluding the progenitor.
In the direct line, ascent is made to the common ancestor.
Thus, the child is one degree removed from the parent, two
from the grandfather, and three from the great-grandparent.
In the collateral line, ascent is made to the common ancestor
and then descent is made to the person with whom the
computation is to be made. Thus, a person is two degrees
removed from his brother, three from his uncle, who is the
brother of his father, four from his first cousin, and so forth.
Article 967. Full blood relationship is that existing between
persons who have the same father and the same mother.
Half blood relationship is that existing between persons who
have the same father, but not the same mother, or the same
mother, but not the same father.
Article 968. If there are several relatives of the same degree,
and one or some of them are unwilling or incapacitated to
succeed, his portion shall accrue to the others of the same
degree, save the right of representation when it should take
place.
Article 969. If the inheritance should be repudiated by the
nearest relative, should there be one only, or by all the nearest
relatives called by law to succeed, should there be several,
those of the following degree shall inherit in their own right and
cannot represent the person or persons repudiating the
inheritance.
3. Capacity to Succeed
Article 1024. Persons not incapacitated by law may succeed
by will or ab intestato.
The provisions relating to incapacity by will are equally
applicable to intestate succession.
a. Determination
Article 1034. In order to judge the capacity of the heir, devisee
or legatee, his qualification at the time of the death of the
decedent shall be the criterion.
In cases falling under Nos. 2, 3, or 5 of article 1032, it shall be
necessary to wait until final judgment is rendered, and in the
case falling under No. 4, the expiration of the month allowed
for the report.
If the institution, devise or legacy should be conditional, the
time of the compliance with the condition shall also be
considered.
Article 1039. Capacity to succeed is governed by the law of
the nation of the decedent.
Article 16 (2). x x x
However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with
respect to the order of succession and to the amount of
successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary
provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person
whose succession is under consideration, whatever may be
the nature of the property and regardless of the country
wherein said property may be found.

CAYETANO v. LEONIDES
supra
b. Who may succeed?
Article 1024. Persons not incapacitated by law may succeed
by will or ab intestato.
The provisions relating to incapacity by will are equally
applicable to intestate succession.
Article 1025. In order to be capacitated to inherit, the heir,
devisee or legatee must be living at the moment the
succession opens, except in case of representation, when it is
proper.
A child already conceived at the time of the death of the
decedent is capable of succeeding provided it be born later
under the conditions prescribed in article 41.
Article 1026. A testamentary disposition may be made to the
State, provinces, municipal corporations, private corporations,
organizations, or associations for religious, scientific, cultural,
educational, or charitable purposes.
All other corporations or entities may succeed under a will,
unless there is a provision to the contrary in their charter or the
laws of their creation, and always subject to the same.
Article 1029. Should the testator dispose of the whole or part
of his property for prayers and pious works for the benefit of his
soul, in general terms and without specifying its application, the
executor, with the court's approval shall deliver one-half thereof
or its proceeds to the church or denomination to which the
testator may belong, to be used for such prayers and pious
works, and the other half to the State, for the purposes
mentioned in article 1013.
Article 1030. Testamentary provisions in favor of the poor in
general, without designation of particular persons or of any
community, shall be deemed limited to the poor living in the
domicile of the testator at the time of his death, unless it should
clearly appear that his intention was otherwise.
The designation of the persons who are to be considered as
poor and the distribution of the property shall be made by the
person appointed by the testator for the purpose; in default of
such person, by the executor, and should there be no
executor, by the justice of the peace, the mayor, and the
municipal treasurer, who shall decide by a majority of votes all
questions that may arise. In all these cases, the approval of the
Court of First Instance shall be necessary.
The preceding paragraph shall apply when the testator has
disposed of his property in favor of the poor of a definite
locality.
PARISH PRIEST OF VICTORIA v. RIGOR
30 Apr 1979 | Aquino
Petitioner: Testate Estate of Late Rev. Fr. Pascual Rigor
Respondent: Belina Rigor, Nestora Rigor, et al.
FACTS:
1935: Father Pascual Rigor, the parish priest of Pulilan,
Bulacan, died. He left a will. This was probated. He named as
devisees his 3 sisters (who are his nearest relatives), and to
his cousin.
In addition, the will devised rice lands in favor of his nearest
male relative who would study for priesthood. The relative
would be entitled to the possession of the ricelands once he
has entered the seminary. His rights to the ricelands would be
taken away once he drops out or is excommunicated. The will
stated that during the interval of time that there is no qualified
devisee, the administration of the ricelands would be under the
administration of the incumbent parish priest of Victoria.
1940: This will was probated. A project of partition was also
approved to implement the bequests stated above. The lower
court ordered the administratix to delived to the devisees their
respective shares.
1954: The parish priest of Victoria filed a petition to compel the
administrator to deliver to them the ricelands as there is no
person qualified to inherit them. He argues that a trust was
created in favor of the parish priest. Father Rigors legal heirs
opposed.
Rigors legal heirs contention:
-The devise re: the ricelands is inoperative. There was no one
studying priesthood at the time of Rigors death. The ricelands
should go back to the estate.
Parish Priest contention:
-They have the right to administed the property in trust as long
as there is no one qualified to inherit in accordance with the
terms of the will.
The lower court eventually declared the bequest inoperative
and adjudicated the ricelands to Father Rigors legal heirs.
ISSUE:
Whether or not a device in favour of a person whose identity at
the time of the testators death cannot be ascertained, may be
efficacious. (NO)
RATIO: No.
The Supreme Court held that the said bequest refers to the
testator's nearest male relative living at the time of his death
and not to any indefinite time thereafter. "In order to be
capacitated to inherit, the heir, devisee or legatee must be
living at the moment the succession opens, except in case of
representation, when it is proper" (Art. 1025, Civil Code).
The said testamentary provisions should be sensibly or
reasonably construed. To construe them as referring to the
testator's nearest male relative at anytime after his death would
render the provisions difficult to apply and create uncertainty
as to the disposition of his estate. That could not have been his
intention.
The reasonable view is that he was referring to a situation
whereby his nephew living at the time of his death, who would
like to become a priest, was still in grade school or in high
school or was not yet in the seminary. In that case, the parish
priest of Victoria would administer the ricelands before the
nephew entered the seminary. But the moment the testator's
nephew entered the seminary, then he would be entitled to
enjoy and administer the ricelands and receive the fruits
thereof. In that event, the trusteeship would be terminated.
Following that interpretation of the will the inquiry would be
whether at the time Father Rigor died in 1935 he had a
nephew who was studying for the priesthood or who had
manifested his desire to follow the ecclesiastical career. That
query is categorically answered in paragraph 4 of appellant
priest's petitions of February 19, 1954 and January 31, 1957.
He unequivocally alleged therein that "not male relative of the
late (Father) Pascual Rigor has ever studied for the
priesthood."
Inasmuch as the testator was not survived by any nephew who
became a priest, the unavoidable conclusion is that the
bequest in question was ineffectual or inoperative. Therefore,
the administration of the ricelands by the parish priest of
Victoria, as envisaged in the wilt was likewise inoperative.
It should be understood that the parish priest of Victoria could
become a trustee only when the testator's nephew living at the
time of his death, who desired to become a priest, had not yet
entered the seminary or, having been ordained a priest, he
was excommunicated. Those two contingencies did not arise,
and could not have arisen in this case because no nephew of
the testator manifested any intention to enter the seminary or
ever became a priest.
The Court of Appeals correctly ruled that this case is covered
by article 888 of the old Civil Code, now article 956, which
provides that if "the bequest for any reason should be
inoperative, it shall be merged into the estate, except in cases
of substitution and those in which the right of accretion exists."
This case is also covered by article 912(2) of the old Civil
Code, now article 960 (2), which provides that legal succession
takes place when the will "does not dispose of all that belongs
to the testator." There being no substitution nor accretion as to
the said ricelands the same should be distributed among the
testator's legal heirs. The effect is as if the testator had made
no disposition as to the said ricelands.
c. Who are incapable of succeeding?
Article 1025. In order to be capacitated to inherit, the heir,
devisee or legatee must be living at the moment the
succession opens, except in case of representation, when it is
proper.
A child already conceived at the time of the death of the
decedent is capable of succeeding provided it be born later
under the conditions prescribed in article 41.
Article 1027. The following are incapable of succeeding:
(1) The priest who heard the confession of the testator during
his last illness, or the minister of the gospel who extended
spiritual aid to him during the same period;
(2) The relatives of such priest or minister of the gospel within
the fourth degree, the church, order, chapter, community,
organization, or institution to which such priest or minister may
belong;
(3) A guardian with respect to testamentary dispositions given
by a ward in his favor before the final accounts of the
guardianship have been approved, even if the testator should
die after the approval thereof; nevertheless, any provision
made by the ward in favor of the guardian when the latter is his
ascendant, descendant, brother, sister, or spouse, shall be
valid;
(4) Any attesting witness to the execution of a will, the spouse,
parents, or children, or any one claiming under such witness,
spouse, parents, or children;
(5) Any physician, surgeon, nurse, health officer or druggist
who took care of the testator during his last illness;
(6) Individuals, associations and corporations not permitted by
law to inherit.
Article 1028. The prohibitions mentioned in article 739,
concerning donations inter vivos shall apply to testamentary
provisions.
Article 1031. A testamentary provision in favor of a disqualified
person, even though made under the guise of an onerous
contract, or made through an intermediary, shall be void.
Article 1032. The following are incapable of succeeding by
reason of unworthiness:
(1) Parents who have abandoned their children or induced their
daughters to lead a corrupt or immoral life, or attempted
against their virtue;
(2) Any person who has been convicted of an attempt against
the life of the testator, his or her spouse, descendants, or
ascendants;
(3) Any person who has accused the testator of a crime for
which the law prescribes imprisonment for six years or more, if
the accusation has been found groundless;
(4) Any heir of full age who, having knowledge of the violent
death of the testator, should fail to report it to an officer of the
law within a month, unless the authorities have already taken
action; this prohibition shall not apply to cases wherein,
according to law, there is no obligation to make an accusation;
(5) Any person convicted of adultery or concubinage with the
spouse of the testator;
(6) Any person who by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue
influence should cause the testator to make a will or to change
one already made;
(7) Any person who by the same means prevents another from
making a will, or from revoking one already made, or who
supplants, conceals, or alters the latter's will;
(8) Any person who falsifies or forges a supposed will of the
decedent.
Article 1033. The cause of unworthiness shall be without
effect if the testator had knowledge thereof at the time he
made the will, or if, having known of them subsequently, he
should condone them in writing.
Article 990. The hereditary rights granted by the two preceding
articles to illegitimate children shall be transmitted upon their
death to their descendants, who shall inherit by right of
representation from their deceased grandparent.
Article 991. If legitimate ascendants are left, the illegitimate
children shall divide the inheritance with them, taking one-half
of the estate, whatever be the number of the ascendants or of
the illegitimate children.
Article 992. An illegitimate child has no right to inherit ab
intestato from the legitimate children and relatives of his father
or mother; nor shall such children or relatives inherit in the
same manner from the illegitimate child.
 d. Effect of alienations by the excluded heir

Article 1036. Alienations of hereditary property, and acts of

administration performed by the excluded heir, before the
judicial order of exclusion, are valid as to the third persons who
acted in good faith; but the co-heirs shall have a right to
recover damages from the disqualified heir.

e. Rights of the excluded heir

Article 1035. If the person excluded from the inheritance by

reason of incapacity should be a child or descendant of the
decedent and should have children or descendants, the latter
shall acquire his right to the legitime.

The person so excluded shall not enjoy the usufruct and

administration of the property thus inherited by his children.

Article 1937. Movable or immovable property may be the

object of commodatum.

Article 1014. If a person legally entitled to the estate of the

deceased appears and files a claim thereto with the court
within five years from the date the property was delivered to
the State, such person shall be entitled to the possession of
the same, or if sold, the municipality or city shall be
accountable to him for such part of the proceeds as may not
have been lawfully spent.

f. Liabilities of the excluded heir

Article 1038. Any person incapable of succession, who,

disregarding the prohibition stated in the preceding articles,
entered into the possession of the hereditary property, shall be
obliged to return it together it its accessions.

He shall be liable for all the fruits and rents he may have
received, or could have received through the exercise of due
diligence.

g. Prescription of Action

Article 1040. The action for a declaration of incapacity and for

the recovery of the inheritance, devise or legacy shall be
brought within five years from the time the disqualified person
took possession thereof. It may be brought by any one who
may have an interest in the succession.