Sie sind auf Seite 1von 26

Succession

- Roman: to pass under


- Set of rules to determine who, when, how, and in what proportion
- Fulfils a longing for immortality
- Mode of acquiring ownership
- Transmits an inheritance: either property or rights
o Altho not all rights are transmissible
o Transmits obligations, made to the heirs through an estate
o Object therefor is an inheritance
o Future property vs. inheritance

You cannot compromise future inheritance

What triggers succession? D E A T H


Governed by two things: by will or by law

There are forced heirs (compulsory succession)

MODES
1. Legitime
2. Will
3. Intestate
4. Mixed

Two parties:
1. He who dies
2. He who succeeds

There is a very important distinction between a universal heir and a particular heir
- Preterition, if a compulsory heir is pretirited annuls institution of all heirs except devisee
or legatee
- Legatees and devices are respected

774: determined thru special proceedings


775:

782
an heir can be a:
1. Voluntary
2. Compulsory

1. Universal
2. Particular
A testamentary heir is not necessarily a compulsory heir

Only representation in legal succession: NUMBER 1 RULE

Primary compulsory heirs: (preferred over and exclude SCH)


- Share equally
- Children always exclude grandchildren except the rule on representation when proper
1. Legitimate children
2. Legitimate descendants
3. Adopted children
a. Relative to the estate of the adopted, the adopters displace the biological
parents
b. 189, 190 FC
c.
4. Legitimated children

887 : in default thereof, SECONDARY COMPULSORY HEIRS, (excluded generally)


1. Legitimate parents and ascendants
2. Illegitimate parents STOPS AT THE PARENTS (excluded by the whole world except SS)

Concurring (exclusiiiive)
1. (SS) Surviving Spouse (CAN NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER BE REDUCED)
a. SHE CONCURS WITH EVERYONE
b. Must be a valid marriage
2. IC
a. Filiation must be proved

Concurring compulsory: does not include anyone nor each other

COMMON LAW IN 147 DO NOT DISMISS THE SPOUSE KASI CO-OWNERSHIP MUST BE
DISSOLVED FIRST BAGO IPAMANA ANG MGA BAGAY

If spouse dies during nullity proceedings, magpproceed pa rinHEIRS CAN QUESTION IT


DURING ESTATE PROCEEDINGS;

All illegitimate: Art. 176 sa FC no distinction

ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND DESCENDANTS: IRON CURTAIN RULE WITH RESPECT TO THE
RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION
- Look at what 888 tells you: MEMORIZE
o ½ : strict legitime WILL ALWAYS GO TO ONE SET OF HEIRS
- SS comes from the free portion
o Flexible legitime
- IC comes from the free portion
- Free portion vs. FREE DISPOSABLE PORTION

Distinction between the direct line vs. collateral line (brothers and sisters)

Lolo is preferred over kuya

COLLATERAL LINE: ONLY UP TO THE FIFTH DEGREE

Anak is preferred over lolo

Direct excludes collateral: very important in reserva troncal (within the 3 rd degree)

Is the dead person a legit child or an illegit child??

Full blood half blood – irrelevant in testacy

Intestacy 1006 and 1008 (reservable property)


Full blood brother, would get twice sa half blood over the same reservable property

Capacity to succeed 1034


- Determined ONLY at the death of the decedent
- Do not confuse this with judging the validity of the will  AT THE TIME OF EXECUTION
- Ma’am : ADD, article 43(5) FC and 63(4)
o If institution subject to suspensive condition, at the time of fulfillment of
condition
o If final judgment required, at the time of final judgment

1039: one sentence rule, 16(2)  NATIONAL LAW OF THE DEAD PERSON APPLIES
- REGARDLESS, therefore, of public policy  DO NOT APPLY TO FOREIGN DECEDENT

Who may succeed? 1024.


- Not incapacitated by law or by will
- Three types of incapacity: ONLY TYPES OF INCAPACITY (lahat relative incapacity)
o Undue influence (priest, doctor, etc)
o 1028, sex, crime, corruption (applicable in the making of a will)
o unworthiness (1032) (ONLY APPLICABLE TO BOTH TESTATE AND INTESTATE)

1027/28 – specifically testamentary

1026 does not require these organization to have been organized in accordance with law

1029, no juridical personality but soul can inherit??


1030, in favor of unknown persons
1. sino at magkano? If answered by the will, IT’S VALID
2. everything else is an implementation of that will

>>>>

Never renunciation ---Idk which but ask

For representation, only as to the legitime or to the intestate portion, never to representation
in testamentary succession

Iron curtain rule 992

(In)Testate(?):
GR: Only by children or descendants
Exc. Collateral line

Testamentary Succession

-results from a designation of an heir in a will by a dead person


-783: free portion lang
testator has to respect the legitime
cannot give to a mistress
if he imposes a fideicomissary – free portion, has to be parent and child

mere recognition of an illegitimate child – not a will

839 : when a will is disallowed


1. failure to comply with formal reqs
2. testator’s want of testamentary capacity
3. consent is vitiated
If any of these grounds are present, WILL IS VOID

No such thing as a voidable will

Right to revoke cannot be waived

796-798: testamentary capacity


2 kinds
1. active: reqs for will making
2. passive: reqs for inheriting

Code does not describe what sound mind is: presumption of sound mind

Presumption of sanity overturned only if testator one month or less was known to be publicly
insane

“sound mind”: object of his bounty, nature of his estate, character

joint wills are prohibited : take note ONLY FOR FILIPINO 819: talks only about Filipinos

784 -785: will making strictly personal

787 prohibits the delegation to a third person whether a disposition should take effect or not
1. who will inherit?
2. What and how much will be inherited?

786 can entrust to a third person the manner of distribution and the designation of persons
within a class;

1030 vis a vis 786: allows 3rd person to decide the poor in his community

Rules of Interpretation
3 defective testamentary
1. Imperfect description of property
2. Imperfect description of person
3. On the face of the will there is uncertainty in the application of any of its disposition

Patent: apparent; from the will


Latent: “I’m going to give to susan” – 4 friends named susan

If you examine will entirety:


Use extrinsic evidence –

Remember: testacy gives the express will of testator


If it can be interpreted that every thing can be given effect (disposition)

793 from 781 (distinguish)

Balane: 793 problematic: time it is made not at the time it is made


781: talks about future property
Balane: 781 stupid provision if he’s already dead, any property which has accrued is owned by
the heir by way of accession
Sebastian the future property refers to the accruals of the inheritance after death
794 with 930 (?)
If he doesn’t know that it did not belong to him, it’s void
If he knew, there is an implied order to acquire it WHY? Because testacy is favored

815 THE FILIPINO ABROAD: for form, extrinsic validity


for form, either the domicile or his national law

816 ALIEN ABROAD who wants to have his will probated in Phil
note: domicile or nationality or Philippine law

817: an alien in the Philippines


either nationality or Philippine law

795 talks about the time of execution: law in force AT THE TIME THE WILL WAS MADE
Succession:
WILL: at the time it was made
Who inherits?: at the time of death

804: the only 2 absolute requirements for the making of a will

presumption that he knew the language

NOTARIAL WILL
805: ATTESTATION NOT PART OF THE WILL (altho most important) wat

if you read 809, SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE APPLIES ONLY TO THE ATTESTATION CLAUSE NOT
ANY OTHER PART OF THE WILL

not required to be dated pero may acknowledgment

difference between jurat and acknowledgment

language requirement only for the testator: NOT THE WITNESSES

logical end: END OF ALL DISPOSITIONS, not necessarily end of the will

HOLOGRAPHIC WILL

Credible witnesses: credible = worthy of belief


How do you prove it? By the judge

Competent: witness complies with 820-821


You can be a rapist but not a liar

What if the will does not state the number of pages? Sometimes fatal sometimes not, depends
on what else might be defective

What if attestation clause fails to state the number of witnesses? If it can be discovered, ok

“ fails to state that the testator instructed an agent to write on his behalf? Fatal if it can be seen
during the estate proceedings: GARCIA v. DELA CUESTA (if iba iba sinasabi ng witnesses, fatal)

if sa side nag sign and not at the bottom ng attestation? Fatal. Void if the witnesses do not sign
below the attestation

LOOK AT AZUELA CASE

What if the witnesses give conflicting testimonies?

The will must be acknowledged by a notary public

First one to be acknowledged: testator

Not required na acknowledged all at the same time, but what needs to remain in the last day
(or to continue): THE TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY OF ALL THE WITNESSES AND THE TESTATOR
SHOULD BE PRESENT

Can a notary public be an instrumental witness: pwede if may 3 other witnesses, if not VOID

WITNESSES:

820-821 qualification and dq of witnesses


1. Sound mind
2. 18 years
3. not blind deaf dumb (mute, not stupid)
4. able to read and write
5. domiciled in the Philippines
6. must not have been convicted of lying lol
can a creditor be a witness: yes
can a debtor be a legatee: yes
can a creditor be a legatee: yes

LEGACY OF A CREDIT: the obligation has been extinguished

What do witnesses do? Attest, and subscribed the act of signing


Can a witness sign by thumbmark: no, kasi kailangan read or write
808: applicable to illiterates

809: JBL Reyes: liberalization running right, does not provide sufficient guidelines to limit the
discretion of a judge

details can be supplied by examination of a will


executed in compliance with 805
= VALID

fails to sign in each other’s presence? Might be a fatal flaw

Bad faith, forgery, fraud, undue pressure, etc = must be ruled out, 809 presumes that witnesses
are in good faith

If the attestation clause does not state that the testator sign the will, fatal defect Mauciano
case

Total number of pages (?) and signed in the presence of each other = must appear

Holographic will
Written, dated, signed by hand

What if there is a typewritten dispositions below the signature and then signed subsequently by
testator? VOID WILL, ma’am: the whole thing must be the handwriting, UNLESS, it has nothing
to do with dispositions

Where must testator sign? After all of the dispositions

Can a testator sign by a thumbark: NO, kasi it means di marunong magread or write (ENTIRELY
HANDWRITTEN)

812 ADDITIONAL DISPOSITION = ADDITIONAL PIRMA

813: only with respect to the date, but each disposition MUST BE SIGNED
date you can have at the end and at the beginning

811: at least one witness who knows, handwriting and signature + explicit declaration,
contested: 3 witnesses
- rule of evidence
- doesn’t state that the will must be presented
- implies the need for presenting the will itself
- DOES NOT REFER TO GROUNDS OF FRAUD AND VITIATION OF CONSENT
- Probate has 2 steps
839: 2 cases
if holographic will is uncontested only one witness is unnecessary. If contested, 2 views:
1. 3 witnesses are required : codoy
a. all witnesses in codoy are useless, none of the knew the handwriting
b. so the reason for denying probate: witnesses were of poor quality
c. Balane: the rule requiring 3 witnesses is not mandatory and Azaula case is still
preserved
2. Azaula : 3 witnesses are directory

Gan vs. Yap: will must be produced for probate


Rodelas: allows Xerox copy of will should the original will be lost

814: cancellation without following it, whole will is void, if signed valid
- Whole thing is void unless everything is signed
- If di main portion, hindi void yung will (who and what)

Can you incorporate documents by reference to a holographic will? NO


810

827 CAN ONLY APPLY TO A NOTARIAL WILL

can you have a notarial codicil to a holographic will – yes. Treated as a different will.
A notarial will can have a holographic codicil

Revocation: at anytime before the testator’s death


- 829 not domiciled in the Philippines
lex loci celebrationis or domicile
-829 does not talk about domiciled in the Philippines but abroad

doctrine of dependent relative revocation: revocation of the first will is conditional and
dependent on the efficacy of the second will or the capacity of the new heirs

ratio: presumed na did not want to die intestate

Exc: 837, express revocation of the first, hindi na siya marerevive

Probate of holographic: corpus + animus


Exc. Xerox copy

Cannot find it? Presumption of revocation of holographic will


--
Revival
835: use it if will is void as to form, YOU NEED TO MAKE A NEW WILL COMPLETELY
836: IF THE WILL IS VOID BECAUSE of a not formal defect or because it was previously revoked,
their reference to the original would be sufficient

--
Probate
1. ante-mortem
2. post-mortem
3. reprobate: after it’s been probated abroad

REMEMBER:
2 STEPS IN PROBATE
1. Formal
2. Disposition

IF and when probate court issues decree of probate, which refers to extrinsic validity of a will,
(proper form, capacity, vitiated consent) FINAL AND EXECUTORY RES JUDICATA YOU CANNOT
QUESTION IT
- conclusive as to due execution

^remedy: declare him unworthy

exception: if it appears on the face of the will that it is also intrinsically void

IF THERE IS A WILL, IT MUST BE PROBATED

--
codicil – has to follow the form of the will (add and alters)

Legitimes

Important: what if the question is, a testator is survived by 3 legitimate children,


Heridatory estate is 50k
Will: A – ½
B – 1/3
C – 1/6

LC – 25k (strict legitime). 25k/3 pinakaminimum legitime, so dapat yung dispositions niya sa will
meets the minimum

Give 866 a consistent interpretation


- Refers to the entire net hereditary estate

EVERYTIME YOU SEE A LEGITIMATE CHILD, strict legitime


Is an adopted child entitled to a legitime, your answer is always yes 189 par 3 of the Domestic
Adoption Code

GR: the nearer excludes the more remote


Exc: representation when proper

889: ascending line, secondary compulsory heirs


- Does not matter how far

890 if it is the parents who inherit, the grandparents, the legitime is divided equally by line

Even if all children renounce in favor of the mother, still compute the legitime on the basis of
the child (?)

175, FC – talks about an action, so we cannot understand, do you mean that illegitimate
children would always have to bring an action?? Ma’am: IGNORE IT BECAUSE OF THE CONCEPT
OF VOLUNTARY RECOGNITION

WHEN IC CONCURS WITH ILLEGIT, THEY GET ½ SHARE OF LC, IF CONCURS WITH SS, ¼ OF SS

903: you don’t go beyond the illegitimate parents

there is a premium on legitimacy and blood relations

For the IC, they are subject to reduction pro rata

904: vis a vis 872


- You cannot impose any charge burden condition substitution any encumbrance
- Legitime is not within the testator’s complete control EXCEPT disinheritance

Exceptions
1080(2) – condition to impose burdens on legitimes?
- Industrial, agriculture, manufacturing (Chinese), that’s an encumbrance/burden because
that can do so much better than plain cash
1083(1)
- 20 years prohibition against partition

159, FC
- Patricio v. Dario
- The law does not allow a family home of the deceased for as long as there are
beneficiaries living there
- There is an encumbrance by law

891, FC
- Cannot dispose of it in his will

905
- Vis a vis 1347(2), 2035 – that’s how void it is
- Compromises or renunciation between dead person and future heirs
- Repeated 1347 also prohibits renunciations/comp bet prospective compulsory heir and
another person/another heir (NOT EVEN A FUNNY VOID)
o CAN ALWAYS BE QUESTIONED EVEN AFTER THE DEATH
- Future legitime IS NOT future property
o Just a portion of the estate belonging to someone who is still alive, that’s why
you cant do anything with it

907/906
- Read with 911

- What you’re talking about in 1409 so void against public policy

Funny voids – void pero continuing offer, donation ng cellphone

IMPAIRMENT
- Reduction from free disposable, pro rata
- Get the intent, and the legitime
- Get book of Sebastian

SUMMARY OF LEGITIME RULES


- Legitime is reserved for compulsory heirs
- Legitime is just the minimum amount a compulsory heir should get
- Compulsory heirs which are entitled are enumerated by law
- Legitimate children/descendants divide it equally among themselves
o Always inherit in their own right
- Representation
o Incapacity
o Pre-deceased
o One more
- It is the legitime of the leg parents and leg ascendants which may be burdened by
reserve troncal
- IP are excluded by all children
- In the ascending line, you divide the legitime in two
o No representation in ascending
- SS right to inherit is premised upon a valid marriage
o If prior to death ongoing case for annulment, terminated – there is SS
o “ for jdn – continuous
- SS legitime is flexible
- A testator cannot deprive legitime except for a valid disinheritance
- IC are barred from inheriting from their illegitimate relatives
- Compulsory heirs to whom property is left are entitled to completion
- No waiver or compromise over future legitime
- Donation Mortis Causa: DEAD LETTER LAW MUST BE IN THE FORM OF A WILL
- ONE LC, SS gets 1/4 , if more than one, same

Fastest way to compute:


1. Get the value of all the assets at death - e.g. Php 100
2. Deduct (Taxes and Debts) – e.g. 10, 10 (20)
3. Net hereditary estate of Php 80
4. DO NOT COMPUTE LEGITIMES ON THIS NO NO NO
5. Add (all collationable donations – donations inter vivos) – Php 40
6. Theoretical hereditary estate - php 120 (why theoretical? Because your cash in hand is
80)
a. In order not to be prejudiced, calculate your legitime based on THE
b. These collationable donations would need to be imputed against somebody
c. Collation has three meanings
i. Computation – simple accounting arithmetical process where the value of
all donations intervivos is added to available assets to arrive at the value
of the theoretical hereditary estate (908 talks about net estate DO NOT
DO IT THAT WAY)
ii. Imputation - process, donations inter vivos are charged either to legitime
or disposable portion
iii. Return - takes place when DIV found to be inofficious or exceeds
disposable portion (only as much as the value which is inofficious is
returned)
d. Donee returns ownership of the property donated (kasi intervivos, ownership
already acquired) donee only has to restitute THAT’S ALL
7. Never add legacies and devices in this computation

Problem Decedent survived by 2 LC and SS – Php 1M estate


Gave his bff DIV running a foundation for abused women – Php 750k
Tax due 50k

1M – 50k
950k NHE  no free portion look only at this, kasi cash on hand

LC 1 -425k
LC 2 -425k
SS - 425k
-------------
1.275M
-950k (cash on hand)
Return is 325k

911 – DONATIONS MC, DEVISES LEGACIES, NOT GIVEN UNTIL LEGITIMES ARE COVERED
All non-collationable means, cannot be imputed to the legitime, but to the free portion
- Reduce first the devices and legacies before you reduce donation intervivos (kasi
owners na yung binigyan)

Art. 51, FC
- All donations intervivos, ADVANCES OF THE LEGITIME, unless non-collationable
-

912
- Vis a vis 1027

Purpose of collation: preserve legitime of compulsory heirs


- Read De Roma v. CA

1063 very confusing


- Legacy devices charged to free portion unless sinabi na part of the legitime
- Refers to legacies and devices only in the will

1064
- Collation you bring yours what was given to you what was given to your parents

1065
- Parents do not collate whatever is given to their children

1067

194 – meaning of education; support includes up to a profession

there is now a conflict between 194 and 1968 (parents can decide that anything, can be
imputed to your legitime)

Balane: what should be brought to collation is if you were sent to Harvard and your siblings
went to PUP

The only thing you would bring to collation is the sum of money/balance

Wedding gift (10% of that is not collationable; very limited; jewelry/clothing; donor must be a
parent or ascendant; can be given at anytime) different from DPN (treated as an ordinary
donation: chargeable to the legitime; can be given by anyone)
In his lifetime, A the father, gave wedding gifts when his 3 daughters got married

A- Died intestate 250k net estate


B- gold necklace 70k
C – broach 80k
D – gold watch 100k

1. Get the value of all the assets at death - e.g. Php 100
2. Deduct (Taxes and Debts) – e.g. 10, 10 (20)
3. Net hereditary estate of Php 80
4. DO NOT COMPUTE LEGITIMES ON THIS NO NO NO
5. Add (all collationable donations – donations inter vivos) – Php 40
6. Theoretical hereditary estate - php 120 (why theoretical? Because your cash in hand is
80)
a. In order not to be prejudiced, calculate your legitime based on THE
b. These collationable donations would need to be imputed against somebody
c. Collation has three meanings
i. Computation – simple accounting arithmetical process where the value of
all donations intervivos is added to available assets to arrive at the value
of the theoretical hereditary estate (908 talks about net estate DO NOT
DO IT THAT WAY)
ii. Imputation - process, donations inter vivos are charged either to legitime
or disposable portion
iii. Return - takes place when DIV found to be inofficious or exceeds
disposable portion (only as much as the value which is inofficious is
returned)
d. Donee returns ownership of the property donated (kasi intervivos, ownership
already acquired) donee only has to restitute THAT’S ALL
7. Never add legacies and devices in this computation

1070 – you deduct it from the disposable free portion

1071 – you only look at values in collation; what value should be computed and thereafter
collated
you compute the estate, the value of the thing donated at time of donation
you impute the value of the legitime, “
donation is a mode of acquiring ownership,

1072 – it assumes that property donated by parents to children form part of the ACP/CPG
(IMPORTANT TINATANONG SA BAR)
what is the child going to collate? Only 1/2
1073 – collation equalizes the shares of the compulsory heirs because you deduct from the
legitimes whatever they have received

one of the requirements of succession is to attain equality

1075 – donation: inofficious; you return everything not just pro rata
what is donee entitled to if it’s total return: entitled to necessary and useful expenses dahil GF

914: testator has complete freedom to dispose of the free portion

del Castillo: PRINCIPLES OF LAW UP TO THE BEGINNING OF THE BAR (CHECK MACKY’S POST ON
9262)

SEVEN THINGS TESTATOR CANNOT DO


1. Cannot delegate to a third person (784)
2. Cannot dispose by will to dq persons (842)
3. Imposes a fideicommissary he must follow 863
4. He cannot declare his estate inalienable in exces of 20 years
5. He cannot prohibit marriage
6. ..
7. dispose in favor of a common law spouse (IN RELATION TO 739, SEX CRIME
CORRUPTION)

Ma’am: if it’s a 147 situation, he can dispouse to a common law spouse (KASI DONATION TO A
STRANGER)

Presumptive Legitime: if you look at Art. 51, both parents have to give from their separate
properties (collated against the legitimes of the compulsory heir)
- problem is really huge: kasi both still alive
- what if you are incapacitated/disinherited? What will happen?

PRETERITION
854
PRINCIPLES YOU MUST REMEMBER:
1. compulsory heir in the direct line (heir must come from the direct line) (a spouse cannot
be preterited; you can call her omitted)

Spouse vs. Directline


S- can be omitted
D – preterited
S- No DIV (FC 87)
D- pwede D inter vivos
S- L/D
D- Legacy/Device

When no preterition (less than his legitime): all you do is completion


- doesn’t have to be not mentioned
- basta if 0 nakuha

906-907:

if omitted compulsory heir dies before preterition, it becomes moot (854 applies because the
omitted descendants of the deceased were preterited) X is dad, A dies before X, A’s
descendants not mentioned in will

If there are no legacies and devices, it’s as if walang will

Preterition can be total or partial intestacy

Disinheritance and preterition

D- nullity is limited just to that portion of the estate which the heir was illegally deprived of
P-complete nullity of all

855 is stupid; because 854 is complete in itself


two inaccuracies: coverage not limited to children and descendants; should include all
compulsory heirs because of 906

dapat di borne by CH, dapat by legatees and devicees if any


otherwise, you will reduce compulsory legitime

855 actually applies only to completion of legitime

Reserva Troncal

1. everyone has to be legitimate


2. follow rules on intestate succession
3. bimby has to die twice
a. 1st death: by operation of law
b. 2nd death: when james yap dies, he dies again, because they inherit from him
(sina PNOY and his sisters)

Mary and John


Daughter: Teresa
Teresa married James
Two children: Andrew and Robert

John gave 105k in his will to Andrew

M J and Teresa died

James married Sandra = Dorothy Philip and Fred

Then Andrew died

Who gets the property?


- Goes to James

James dies: estate 395k including the 105k

2nd transmission of title is by operation of law (legitime or by intestate succession)

what can reservista do? Can she sell it? Can she register it? Can she encumber? YES

Succession is a mode of acquiring ownership

What about reserves? Can they sell, can they register? YES. But they sell it with a condition:
that the reservista dies and that they are still alive,

Florentino case and Gonzales case very important

Florentino: same seller, same property  two buyers

DO NOT INQUIRE BEYOND ORIGIN


Recap
1st transfer: must be by gratuitous title
2ND: BIMBY dies withut legitimate issue
3rd: that property left by cory is inherited by another ascendant BY OPERATION OF LAW
4TH: when james dies, bimby dies again, find out of there are other relatives at bimby’s 2nd
death, if there is…
5th : reservatrios: 3rd degree of consanguinity NOT AFFINITY
6th” preference among reservatarios: nearer exclude the more remote
Ranking
LC
LA
IC
SS
B/S
N/N
Other collaterals

Reserva:

Bimby is the arbiter of reserve, he can decide if the property is reserved

1st challenge: if gratuitious yung first ransfer


2nd “ : if bimby does something with the property

Disinheritance
1. Can only be made in will
2. Cause specified in law (will must state which cause)
3. Must be unconditional
4. Must be total
5. Must be true (the cause must be true)

Burden of proof: lies on the proponent

Grounds:
9192, 9203, 9212 (THE SAME)

9193, 9204 (the same)

9194, 9205, 9213 (the same)

9195 9207, 9216 (the same)

spouses: judicial decree of separation NOT REQUIRED

if proceedings ongoing at the time of death, terminated na BUT considered incapacitated

there is representation in disinheritance

------
institution of heirs

freedom to dispose of his property is limited


1. Incapacity of heir
2. Dq of heir
3. There are void testamentary provisions

843 and 844: incomplete name is ok as long as identifiable


if not possible to determine, intestacy

patent and latent ambiguity (check notes)

unknown does not mean a stranger

you can make dispositions in favor of strangers = person who tops the 2018 bar

if the will answers, kanino and magkano = VALID

846 = equality, collective designation then every person in that designation inherits equally

if the testator intends unequal apportionment, he should specify

FULL BLOOD – HALF BLOOD (2:1) – reserva troncal

If the testator intends the members of the class to inherit as a group, then he should say so

Article 849 illustrates the principle of equality and individuality = “his children” = instituted
simultaneously

Law does not like successive institution

The only exception is the fidei commissary substitution

850 talks about institution based on false cause

false cause = not written


the only time it annuls the testamentary institution “if Mr. Manicad did not save him from the
jaws of death”

Austria case = only tells you the requisites

The summary of 851: if the testator institutes only 1 heir to an aliquot part of the inheritance,
that’s all he gets

If estate 100k and testator says he wants a to get 25k, then that’s all he gets
If testator institutes more than one heir that’s all they get, and the rest becomes freely
disposable (not remainder of estate but remainder of disposable portion goes into intestacy)

851 causes of partial intestacy: (predecease, repudiation)  other causes

1. There is more than one inst heir


2. Testator wanted them to get whole estate/whole of disp portion
3. He did that by specifically indicating who is to get what

Without art 852 the undisposed balance would pass to the testator’s legal heirs under intestacy

856 vis a vis art 43 = exactly the same, 856 however is another inaccurate provision because it
doesn’t matter if voluntary or compulsory heir, if you die before testator, YOU TRANSMIT
NOTHING TO YOUR OWN HEIRS = rule of non-transmission IS ABSOLUTE – exception is not an
exception – it is by representation and representation IS NOT A TRANSMISSION BUT
SUBROGATION

REPRESENTATION DOES NOT EXIST IN RENUNCIATION

There are three kinds of inst


1. Simple
2. 871: conditional (read with art 1179(1)) why? Because if it depends on a future or
uncertain event it is conditional (read with 873-877), 883(2), 879-880 and 884 
conditional institutions
3. modal institution
a. 882, 883(1)
4. disposition with a term 871, 878, 872, 885

when a caution mauciana or when it’s not

condition: stop drinking, you stop drinking but you have to give security in case you drink again
(resolutory condition)

a conditional institution must be expressly stated in the will, must be extremely clear

read 871 with 876: article 876 refers to a testamentary disposition which is subject to a…

877 tells you w/n a condition is casual or mixed


potestative – completely up to the heir
casual – completely dependent on luck or third person
mixed – heir luck 3p

872: THE LEGITIME CANNOT BE BURDENED

873: vis a vis 867 (4) VOID (one of those contrary to law or good customs)
- it just says shall not be considered imposed but the disposition continues
- 867(4) may be a problem…(they ask this in the bar)
875: VOID EVERYTHING,

something about oblicon


874: ma’am, I don’t understand, how does the spouse of the deceased or his ascendants or
descendants can stop you from getting married?

Relative prohibition, pwede. Absolute yung bawal. “you cant marry another lawyer” = VALID

Negative condition, you need to post a caucion mauciana

875: THE WHOLE THING IS VOID, disposition captatoria (not just the condition but the whole
disposition)

879: positive potestative, no need for caucion mauciana (up to you completely), if negative
ptestative, (cauciano mauciana)

880: remove something

institutions with a term 885(2)

SUSPENSIVE TERM: legal heirs yung may caucion mauciana

Resolutory term: NO NEED FOR CAUCION MAUCIANA

3 Caucion mauciana:
1. negative potestative
2. modal
3. supensive term

WHO ARE THESE LEGAL HEIRS, they are covered by intestate succession

Legal =/= compulsory heirs

Here you have to decide whether the instituted heir under a res con/susp term is an LC or IC
If LC
The ranking is
LC and descendants first, default?
LP and LA
IC ID
SS
Brothers/sis
N/N
Collateral relatives
State

If IC,
IP come first
Collateral no longer included stops at illegit siblings

878

if condition or mode and you aren’t sure, go for mode

if mode, he will enter the property immediately, not suspended

if he decides to accept the property and there is a “I need prayers” thing, otherwise you will
lose your security

the obligation must be clearly imposed

substitution of heirs
857: not a complete definition because it forgets the fidei commissary substitution

ignore 858: only two kinds talaga


1. simple
2. fidei commissary

all of these in 858 are kinds of simple and fidei comm

a simple substitution: A CONDITIONAL INSTITUTION OF AN HEIR

it’s simple if you follow 859, predecease/renounces/incapacitated

conditional if testator puts in another reason, if she should die before me, B will get

but if testator says, if A fails the bar I want B to get it

fine line, but there’s a difference

one is conditional/one is substitution

if it’s brief then there would be two or more substitutes

in a compendious substitution
1st heirs: A/B/C
if one of them p/r/I, does D already have a right? NO.ACCRETION KAY B AND C.
Normally, all the original heirs must default before D can come in

But the testator can say if any one of the predeceases, D will get it
863: fidei commissary law specifically allows representation to a testamentary heir (866! If
you don’t believe maam daw lol)

WILLIAM HAS A VESTED EXPETANCY

Fidei commissary asked in the bar

869: FC stops at William, Charles cannot impose on W the duty to transmit or preserve

867:
1. no dual obligation, no FC
2. dfs
3. there can only be two beneficiaries of one pension
4. contrary to law and considered as not imposed

legacies and devices

929 – if he knew that he did not own it, then estate should try to acquire it, if not give monetary
equivalent

L/D always asked

If he did not realize that he didn’t own it, THEN DISP IS VOID

If later, testator acquired it, it becomes valid

931: different from 930 bec. 931 t knew that he wasn’t an owner

931 is diff from 929, in both of these, the t knew that he did not own the property but for all,
there is an implied order to acquire, otherwise the testator’s wishes will be dashed

if T owned it and then sold it to heir, revoked

932(2): legacy to remove an encumbrance = valid

if the estate removes encumbrance, the heir receives by gratuitous title

if T orders heir to remove enc, heir does not receive by grat title

934: legacy of thing pledged/mort = valid,


935-937: ALWAYS ASKED

x owes o, php 100k


o bequeaths that loan in his will to x
o dies

merger/cond/legacy of remission

as far as X is concerned, IT IS EXTINGUISHED

for a generic device, valid only if property exists at the time of death of testator

194 alive, 944 dead

946: impt
934(3)
so if your dad gives you rice land, you have to respect usufruct if any

compare 950 to 911:


911 is applicable ONLY when legitimes have been impaired by the devices and legacies
- non preferred
- then preferred

950 applied when reduction is due to other reasons


950 is asked

Ranking Succession

LC
1. LCs/LDs
2. In default, LPs/Las
3. IC
4. SS
5. B/S;N/N
6. Other collateral
7. State
IC
1. LC = LDs
2. IC
3. IP
4. SS
5. B/S
6. State

Accretion