OUTLINE OF THE LAW OF SUCCESSION Art.

779
Prof. Ruben F. Balane Testamentary succession is that which results from the
2015
designation of an heir, made in a will executed in the form
With cases, as updated for use by
prescribed by law.
the Succession class of Atty. Divina G E Pedron

Art. 780
I. NATURE AND PURPOSE OF THE LAW ON SUCCESSION Mixed succession is that effected partly by will and partly by
operation of law.
A. To provide a means whereby the property and juridical
relations of a person which are not extinguished by Art. 781
death should be transmitted and distributed. The inheritance of a person includes not only the property and
B. Statutory definition in Article 774: Succession as a the transmissible rights and obligations existing at the time of
mode of acquisition. his death, but also those which have accrued thereto since the
Art. 774 opening of the succession.
Succession is a mode of acquisition by virtue of which the property,
rights and obligations to the extent of the value of the inheritance, Art. 782
of a person are transmitted through his death to another or others An heir is a person called to the succession either by the provision of
either by his will or by operation of law. a will or by operation of law. Devisees and legatees are persons to
whom gifts of real and personal property are respectively given by
C. Succession as part of family law.
D. When does transmission take effect? virtue of a will.
Art. 777
The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the Butte vs Manuel Uy and Sons
death of the decedent. Estate of Hemady vs Luzon Surety (1956)
Transmissibility being the general rule, the contrary should not be
E. Definition of terms and General Concepts easily implied, but must be clearly proved or at the very least,
Art. 775 clearly inferable from the provisions of the contract or law itself.
Lau Hu Niu vs. Collector of Customs (1916)
"Decedent" is the general term applied to the person whose Uson vs. Del Rosario (1953)
property is transmitted through succession whether or not he De Borja vs Vda de de Borja (1972)
left a will. If he left a will he is also called the testator. Bonilla vs Barcena (1976)
Vitug vs CA (1990)
NHA vs Almeida (2007)
Art. 776
The inheritance includes all the property, rights and obligations of a
person which are not extinguished by his death.
II. SYSTEM OF DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY UNDER
PHILIPPINE LAW: THE SYSTEM OF PARTIAL
Art. 777 RESERVATION
The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the
death of the decedent A. The Reserved Portion (Legitime) and the Free Portion.

Art. 778 1. The concept of and reasoning behind legitime: limitation

upon the freedom of the testator to dispose of his property
Succession may be:
by will
(1) Testamentary;
(2) Legal or intestate; or
Spouses Joaquin vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 126376,
(3) Mixed. November 20, 2003
 Dizon-Rivera vs. Dizon, et al, G.R. No. L-24561 June 30, 1970 1. Compulsory heirs
Arellano vs. Pascual, G.R. No. 189776, December 15, 2010 2. Voluntary, testamentary or testate heirs
3. Legal or Intestate heirs
RE: Claims For Benefits Of The Heirs Of The Late Mario V.
Chanliongco, A.M. No. 190, October 18, 1977 Art. 887
Rosales v. Rosales, 148 SCRA 69 (1987) The following are compulsory heirs:
Lapuz v. Eufemio – 43 SCRA 177 (1972) 1. Legitimate children and descendants, with respect to their
legitimate parents and ascendants
Baritua v. Court of Appeals, 183 SCRA 565 (1990)
2. In default of the foregoing, legitmate parents and ascendants,
Solivio v. CA, 182 SCRA 119 (1990) with respect to their legitimate children and descendants
Padura v. Baldovino, GR No. 11960, 27 December 1958 3. The widow or widower
Florentino v. Florentino, 40 Phil. 480 (1919) 4. Acknowledged natural children and natural children by legal
fiction
5. Other illegitmate children referred to in Art. 287
Edroso v. Sablan, 25 Phil. 295 (1913)
Compulsory heirs mentioned in Nos. 3, 4, and 5 are not excluded by
Sienes v. Esparcia, 1 SCRA 750 (1961) those in Nos. 1 and 2; neither do they exclude one another.
Gonzales v. CFI, 104 SCRA 479 (1981) In all cases of illegitimate children, their filation must be duly
Cano v. Director, 105 Phil. 1 (1959) proved.
The father or mother of illegitimate children of the 3 classes
Vizconde v. CA, 286 SCRA 217 (1998)
mentioned, shall inherit from them in the manner and to the extent
In re: Adoption of Stephanie Garcia (2005) established by this Code.
Francisco v. Francisco –Alfonso (2001)
Carlos v. Sandoval (2008) Rosales v Rosales, 148 SCRA 69 (1987)
Francisco v Francisco-Alfonso, 354 SCRA 112 (2001)
Baritua v Court of Appeals, 183 SCRA 565 (1990)
2. Kinds of Succession Under the System of Partial Testamentary Succession (779; 783 – 856)
Reservation. Vitug vs. CA, G.R. No. 82027 March 29, 1990 – 183 SCRA 755
a. Compulsory Succession (886 – 907) (1990)
Garcia v Caparas, G.R. No. 180843, Apr 17, 2013 – 696 SCRA 649
Art. 886 (2013)
Legitime is that part of the testator’s property which he cannot Solla V Ascueta, 49 Phil. 333 (1926)
dispose of because the law has reserved it for certain heirs who are, Dizon-Rivera v Dizon, G.R. No. L-24561, 30 June 1970 – 33 SCRA
therefore called compulsory heirs 554 (1970)
Vda. De Villanueva v. Juico, G.R. No. L-15737, 28 February 1962
3 principal systems of distribution of hereditary property – 4 SCRA 550 (1962)
1. Absolute freedom of disposition Baltazar v. Laxa, G.R. No. 174489, April 11, 2012 – 669 SCRA 249
2. Total reservation (2012)
3. Partial reservation Torres vs. Lopez, G.R. No. L-24569, February 26, 1926
Old  New Civil Code Changes
b. Intestate Succession (960 – 1014)
1. Legitime of surviving spouse:
- Usufruct  Full ownership Dela Puerta vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 77867, February 6,
2. Illegitimate children other than acknowledged 1990
natural: Regular legitime Corpuz vs. Corpuz, 85 SCRA 567 (1978)
- 4/5 of an acknowledged natural child Bicomong vs. Almanza, 80 SCRA 421 (1977)
3. Mejora/Betterment  Abolished
- Free Portion  1/2

Kinds of Heirs
III. COMPULSORY SUCCESSION (886 – 907; 854; 915 – 923, 1032 354 SCRA 112 (2001)
– 1040; 970 – 977; 992; 891) Carlos vs. Sandoval, G.R. No. 179922, December 16, 2008 – 574
SCRA 116 (2008)
A. Why Compulsory?
B. The reserved portion – the legitime, defined in
Art. 855 C. Kinds of Compulsory Heirs: Article 887
The designation of the day or time when the effects of the 1. Primary
institution of an heir shall commence or cease shall be valid. a. Legitimate children and/or
b. Legitimate descendants
In both cases, the legal heir shall be considered as called to
the succession until the arrival of the period or its expiration.
2. Secondary
But in the first case he shall not enter into possession of the
a. Legitimate parents
property until after having given sufficient security, with the b. Other legitimate ascendants
intervention of the instituted heir. c. Illegitimate parents

Art. 886 3. Concurring

Legitime is that part of the testator’s property which he cannot a. Surviving spouse
dispose of because the law has reserved it for certain heirs who are, b. Illegitimate children
therefore called compulsory heirs
Santillon v. Miranda, G.R. No. L-19281, June 30, 1965
Solano vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-41971, November 29,
Art. 904 1983
The testator cannot deprive his compulsory heirs of their Republic vs. Manotoc, G.R. No. 171701, February 8, 2012
legitime, except in cases expressly specified by law. Neither
can he impose upon the same any burden, encumbrance,
condition, or substitution of any kind whatsoever. D. Legitimate shares of compulsory heirs.

Art. 905
1. Basic legitime – 1/2 of the estate.
Every renunciation or compromise as regards a future Three exceptions:
legitime between the person owing it and his compulsory
a. Marriage in articulo mortis –
heirs is void, and the latter may claim the same upon the
Art. 900 par. 2.
death of the former; but they must bring to collation whatever
they may have received by virtue of the renunciation or
b. Surviving spouse and illegitimate
compromise.
children
Art. 906 Art. 894.

Any compulsory heir to whom the testator has left by any c. Surviving spouse and illegitimate
title less than the legitime belonging to him may demand that parents
the same be fully satisfied.
Art. 903.
Art. 907 2. Legitimate children and/or Descendants.
Testamentary dispositions that impair or diminish the a. 1/2 of the estate
legitime of the compulsory heirs shall be reduced on petition Art. 888.
of the same, insofar as they may be inofficious or excessive
b. Principle: The nearer exclude the
Sienes vs. Esparcia, 1 SCRA 750 (1961) farther, without prejudice to
Cano vs. Director, 105 Phil. 1 (1959) representation.
Francisco vs. Francisco-Alfonso, G.R. No. 138774, March 8, 2001 –
 c. Adopted children – same rights as
legitimate children Sec. 18, R.A. Art. 895, par. 3
8552 (Domestic Adoption Act of
1998) Sayson vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
89224, January 23, 1992
3. Legitimate Parents or Ascendants.
a. 1/2 of the estate
Art. 889
5. Illegitimate Children and/or Descendants.
Art. 890.
a. If they are the only compulsory heirs:
b. Three rules: 1/2 of the estate
1. The nearer exclude the farther. Art. 901
2. Division by line.
3. Equal division within the line.
b. If concurring with the surviving
4. Surviving Spouse: Most variable share. spouse: 1/3 of the estate
a. If alone: 1/2 of the estate Art. 894
Exception: marriage in articulo mortis:
1/3 of the estate (Art. 900, par. 2) c. If concurring with legitimate parents
Art. 900, par. 2
or ascendants: 1/4 of the estate
Art. 896
b. If concurring with illegitimate
children: 1/3 of the estate d. If concurring with legitimate
Art. 894 children or descendants: ratio of 2:1.
c. If concurring with one legitimate Art. 176, FC
child: 1/4 of the estate
Art. 892 [But if decedent died before
effectivity of FC – 10:5:4].
d. If concurring with legitimate parents Art. 895, CC
or ascendants: 1/4 of the estate
Art. 896 e. Descendants of Illegitimate Children
Art. 902

e. If concurring with illegitimate 6. Illegitimate Parents.

a. If alone: 1/2 of the estate
parents: 1/4 of the estate
Art. 903
Art. 903

f. If concurring with legitimate b. If concurring with spouse – 1/4 of

ascendants and illegitimate children: the estate
1/8 of the estate Art. 903
Art. 899
7. Various combinations: found passim in
g. If concurring with several legitimate Articles 888 – 903. (333 – 335)
children: a share equal to that of one Rosales vs. Rosales, G.R. No. L-40789 February 27, 1987 – 148
legitimate child SCRA 69 (1987)
Art. 892 Lapuz vs. Eufemio, G.R. No. L-30977 January 31, 1972 – 43 SCRA
 177 (1972) Art. 1039
Baritua vs. CA, G.R. No. 82233 March 22, 1990 – 183 SCRA 565 Art. 1040
(1990)
Tumbokon vs. Legaspi, G.R. No. 153736, August 12, 2010 H. Representation – (Arts. 970 – 977)
Art. 970
F. Preterition (Art. 854) – Caution in drawing up will. Art. 971
Art. 972
Art. 973
1. What is preterition? Art. 974
2. Who can be preterited? Art. 975
3. Effect of preterition. Art. 976
Art. 977
Reyes vs. Datu, 19 SCRA 85 (1967)
Aznar vs. Duncan, 17 SCRA 590 (1966) Teotico v. Del Val, 13 SCRA 406 (1965)
Seangio vs. Reyes, G.R. No. 140372, November 27, 2006 Bicomong v. Almanza, 80 SCRA 421 (1977)
Acain vs. IAC, G.R. No. L-72706, October 27, 1987 I. The Successional Bar – (Art. 992).
Nuguid v. Nuguid, G.R. No. L-23445, 23 June 1966
Art. 922
Palacios vs. Ramirez, 111 SCRA 704 (1982)
PCIB vs. Escolin, G.R. No. L-50402 August 19, 1982 Aguinaldo-Suntay vs. Cojuangco-Suntay, G.R. No. 183053,
June 16, 2010

F. Disinheritance (Arts. 915 – 923).

J. Special Rule:
Art. 915 1.The Reserva Troncal

Art. 916 Art. 892

Art. 917 Balane, R., “ The Reserva Troncal: Prospect & Restrospect”, 58
Philippine Law Journal, 387 (1983).
Art. 918
Art. 919 a. Purpose – pp. 329 – 330
b. Requisites –p. 330
Art. 920 Chua v. CFI, G.R. No. L29901, August
Art. 921 31, 1977

Art. 922 c. Process

Art. 923 d. Parties

1. Two Basic Rules

Ching vs. Hon. Rodriguez,G.R. No. 192828,November 28, 2011 2. Sibling as mediate source
3. Should Origin and
G. Unworthiness Reservista belong to
Art. 1032
different lines?
Art. 1033
Art. 1034
Art. 1034 Solivio vs. CA, G.R. No. 83484 February 12,
Art. 1035 1990 – 182 SCRA 119 (1990)
Art. 1036
Art. 1037
Art. 1038 4. Must reservatario be related to
 Origin? Bellis vs. Bellis, G.R. No. L-23678, June 6, 1967 – 20 SCRA 358
Florentino vs. Florentino, G.R. No. L14856, (1967)
November 15, 1919
1. Two kinds of wills.
e. Juridical Nature a. Attested
b. Holographic
Edroso vs. Sablan, G.R. No. 6878,
September 13, 1913 Cruz vs. Villasor, 54 SCRA 31 (1973)
Garcia vs. Gatchalian, G.R. No. L-20357, November
f. Property Reserved
25, 1967
Neyra vs. Neyra, 76 Phil 333 (1946)
1. Not part of the reservista’s estate Ortega vs. Valmonte, 478 SCRA 247 (2005)
Garcia vs. Vasquez, 32 SCRA 489 (1970)
Alvarado vs. Gaviola, G.R. No. 74695, September 14,
1993
Cano vs. Director, G.R. No. L-10701, Lopez vs. Lopez, 685 SCRA 209 (2012)
January 16, 1959 – 105 Phil. 1 (1959) Cagro vs. Cagro, 92 Phil 1032 (1953)

g. Rights and Obligations – 378 2. Common requirements:

a. As to testamentary capacity
h. Extinguishment - 379 Art. 796
Art. 797
IV. TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION (783 – 885; 915 – 923; 924– 959) Art. 798
Art. 799
Art. 800
A. Statutory definition: Art. 802
Art. 779 Art. 803.
Testamentary succession is that which results from the
designation of an heir, made in a will executed in the form Ortega vs. Valmonte, 478 SCRA 247 (2005)
prescribed by law. Baltazar vs. Laxa, 669 SCRA 249 (2012)

B. Testamentary succession subsidiary to compulsory b. As to form – Art. 804.

succession.

1. Will operates only to the extent that legitimes Payad vs. Tolentino, G.R. No. 42258, September
are not impaired.
5, 1936 – 63 Phil. 395 (1936
2. Wills can dispose only of free portion. Garcia vs. Lacuesta, G.R. No. L-4067, November
29, 1951- 90 Phil. 489 (1951)
C. Wills – defined in Art. 783.
Barut vs. Cabacungan, G.R. No. L-6285,

Vitug vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 82027, March 29, 1990 – February 15, 1912
183 SCRA 755 (1990) Nera vs Rimando, G.R. No. L-5971, February 27,
Herreros vs. Gil, 88 Phil. 260 (1951)
191
Rabadilla vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 113725, June 29, 2000
1) In writing
– 334 SCRA 522 (2000) 2) In a language known to the
Testate Estate of Catalina dela Cruz vs. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. testator.
L-24819, May 30, 1969 – 28 SCRA 42 (1969)
 Suroza vs. Honrado, A.M. No. 2026 CFI 2008 – 544 SCRA 393 (2008)
December 19, 1981 – 110 SCRA 388 (1981)
Abangan vs. Abangan, G.R. No. L013431, e. All pages numbered in letters on
November 12, 1919 – 40 Phil. 476 (1919) upper part.
De Roma vs. Court of Appeals, 152 SCRA
205 (1987)
Cagro vs. Cagro, G.R. No. L5826, April 29, 1953
Vda. De Villanueva vs. Juico, 4 SCRA 550
– 92 Phil. 1032 (1953)
(1962)
Salla vs. Ascueta, 49 Phil 333 (1926)
Balanay vs. Martinez, 64 SCRA 454 (1975) f. Attestation clause.
f.1 Stating number of pages of will.
Garcia vs. Vasquez, 32 SCRA 489 (1975)
f.2 Stating fact that testator or agent
Lopez vs. Liboro, 81 Phil 429 (1948) signed as required by law in witnesses’
Reyes vs. Vda. De Vidal, G.R. No. L-2862, presence
April 21, 1952 – 91 Phil. 909 (1952) f.3 Stating that witnesses witnessed and
signed as required by law in testator’s and
one another’s presence.
Gonzales vs. Court of Appeals, 90 SCRA 183 (1979)
3. Special requirements for attested wills –
Vda. De Ramos vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-
Art. 805 40804 January 31, 1978 – 81 SCRA 393 (1978)
Art. 806
Art. 820 g. Notarization.
Art. 821 Gonzales vs. Court of Appeals, 90 SCRA 183 (1979)
Art. 822 Vda. De Ramos vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-
40804 January 31, 1978 – 81 SCRA 393 (1978)
Art. 823
Art. 824
h. If testator is deaf or a deaf-mute –
a. Signed by testator or his agent in his Art. 807.
presence and by his express direction Art. 892
at the end thereof in witnesses’
presence. Alvarado vs. Gaviola, G.R. No. 74695 September 14,
b. Attested and signed by at least 3 1993– 226 SCRA 347 (1993)
credible witnesses in testator’s
presence and of one another. i. If testator is blind
c. Testator must sign each and every Art. 808
page except the last on left margin
and in witnesses’ presence.
j. Witnesses
Art. 820
Icasiano vs. Icasiano, G.R. No. L-18979, June
Art. 821
30, 1964 – 11 SCRA 422 (1964)
Art. 822
Art. 823
d. Witnesses must sign each and every Art. 824
page on left margin, in testator’s
presence and of one another.
k. Substantial COmpliance
Lee vs. Tambago A.C. No. 5281, February 12,
 Caneda vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 103554, May Art. 815
28, 1993 Art. 816
Azuela vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122880, April Art. 817
12, 2006
Lopez vs. Lopez, G.R. No. 189984, November 12, 2012 7. Joint wills

Art. 818
Art. 819
4. Special requirements for holographic wills
Art. 810 8. Codicils and Incorporation
Art. 811 Art. 825
Art. 812 Art. 826
Art. 813 Art. 827
Art. 814

Azuela vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122880, April Alsua Betts vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. L-
4643031, July 30, 1979
12, 2006
Codoy vs. Calugay, G.R. No. 123486, August 12, 1999
– 312 SCRA 333 (1999)
D. 2 modes of testamentary succession
Gan vs. Yap, G.R. No. L-12190, August 30, 1958 – 104
1. Institution of heir
Phil. 509 (1958)
Rodelas vs. Aranza, G.R. No. L-58509, December 7, Art. 840
1982
Art. 841
a. Entirely written, dated and signed by
testator. Art. 842

Roxas vs. De Jesus, G.R. No. L-38338, January 28, Art. 843
1985 – 134 SCRA 245 (1985)
Art. 844
Labrador vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 58168,
December 19, 1989 – 180 SCRA 266 (1989) Art. 845
Kalaw vs. Relova, G.R. No. L-40207 September 28,
1984 – 132 SCRA 237 (1984) Art. 846

Art. 847
5. Purpose of requirements – to close the door to
bad faith and fraud, to avoid substitution of Art. 848
wills, and to guarantee their truth and
authenticity. Art. 849

Bagtas vs. Paguio, G.R. No. L-6801, March 14, 1912 Art. 850
Torres vs. Torres, 48 Phil 77
De Guzman vs. Estate of Benitez, 169 SCRA 284 Art. 851
(1989)
Art. 852

6. Formal Validity of Wills executed by Filipinos Art. 853

abroad, or an alien abroad, or an alien in the
Philippines
 Art. 854 Art. 955
Art. 956
Art. 855 Art. 957
Art. 958
Art. 856
Art. 959

Seangio vs. Reyes, G.R. No. 140372, November 27, 3. Distinction between heirs, legatees and
2006 – 508 SCRA 177 (2006) devisees
Austria vs. Reyes, G.R. No. L-23079 February 27, 1970
Art. 782
– 31 SCRA 754 (1970)

4. Rules common to both.

2. Legacies and devises – Arts. 924 – 959 a. Capacity to succeed Arts. 1024 – 1040.
Art. 924
Art. 925 a.1 Incapacity and
Art. 926 Unworthiness –
Art. 927 Arts. 823, 1027, 1028, 1032.
Art. 928
Art. 929 b. Subsidiary Institution (substitutions)
Art. 930 – Arts. 857 – 870.
Art. 931 PCI Bank vs. Escolin, 56 SCRA 266 – 56 SCRA 265
Art. 932 (1974)
Art. 933
Art. 934 Ramirez vs. Vda. De Ramirez, G.R. No. 27952, February 15,
Art. 935 1982 – 111 SCRA 704 (1982)
Art. 936 Vda. De Mapa vs. Court of Appeals, 154 SCRA 294
Art. 937 (1987)
Art. 938
Crisologo vs. Singson, 4 SCRA 491 (1962)
Art. 939
Art. 940
Art. 941
c. Conditions, terms, and modes – Arts.
Art. 942
871 – 885.
Art. 943
Art. 944 d. Accretion – Arts 1015 – 1023.
Art. 945
Art. 946 E. Revocability of Wills – Ways of Revoking:
Art. 947 Arts. 828 – 834.
Art. 948
Art. 949
Art. 950 Testate Estate of the Late Adriana Maloto vs. Court of
Art. 951 Appeals, G.R. No. 76464, February 29, 1988 – 158 SCRA 451 (1988)
Art. 952 Gago vs. Mamuyac, G.R. No. L-26317, January 29, 1927 – 49 Phil.
Art. 953 902 (1927)
Art. 954
 Molo vs. Molo, G.R. No. L-2538, September 21, 1951 – 90 Phil. 37 Gonzales vs. Court of Appeals, 90 SCRA 183 (1979)
(1951)
Roxas vs. De Jesus, G.R. No. L-38338, January 28, 1985
Diaz vs. De Leon, G.R. No. 17714, May 31, 1922 – 43 Phil. 413 – 134 SCRA 245 (1985)
(1922)
Labrador vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 83843-44, April 5, 1990
– 184 SCRA 170 (1990)
F. Republication and Revival – Arts. 835 – 837. Gan vs. Yap, 104 Phil 509 (1958)

G. Executors and Administrators – Arts. 1058 – Ajero vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 106720 September 15,
1060. 1994 – 236 SCRA 488 (1994)

H. Formal and Intrinsic Validity.

3. Intrinsic validity – the efficacy of the
dispositions themselves.
1. Probate – Arts. 838 – 839.
a. For Filipino citizens – Art. 2263.
Guevarra vs. Guevarra, G.R. No. L-48840 December 29,
1943 b. For aliens – Arts. 16, par. 2 &
1039.
Dela Cerna vs. Rebaca-Potot, - 12 SCRA 676 (1964)

Gallanosa vs. Arcangel, G.R. No. L-29300 June 21, 1978 - 83

SCRA 676 (1978) V. INTESTATE SUCCESSION (960 – 1014)
Nepomuceno vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-62952
October 9, 1985 – 139 SCRA 206 (1985) A. Definition: That which takes place by operation of law
in default of a valid will.
Baltazar vs Laxa, G.R. No. 174489, April 11, 2012 – 669 SCRA
249 (2012) 1. Specific instances – Art. 960.

Sayson vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 89224, 23 June 1992 –

1.a. Special rule for probate of
205 SCRA 321 (1992)
holographic will – Art. 811

B. Basic principle: Same as compulsory succession –

exclusion and concurrence.
2. Formal Validity – Arts. 795, 815 –
C. Four Basic Rules of Intestate Succession:
819, 820 – 824.

a. As to the will itself. 1. Intestate heir must be related to deceased,

either by:
b. As to testamentary capacity. a. jus familiae

c. As to capacity of witnesses. b. jus sanguinis

c. jus conjugis
 8. State.
d. jus imperii
D.a. Rules on Computation of Degrees of Relationship
2. Rule of preference of lines. (978 / 985) – Arts. 963 – 969.

E. Various combinations: Found passim in Arts. 978 –

3. Rule of proximity of degree, subject to right 1014. [443-446]
of representation (962).
Various combinations are possible because of
4. Rule of equality, subject to 5 exceptions; (962) simultaneous operation of rules of exclusion and
concurrence.
a. Preference of lines.
E.a. Succession to estate of adopted – Sec. 18, R.A.
b. Limitation as to kind of heir in 8552.
descending line.
F. Intestate Succession in Relation to Compulsory
c. Rule of division by line in ascending line Succession.
– Art. 987. 1. Note that with the exception of Par. D, nos. 6,
7 and 8, intestate heirs are also compulsory
d. Full-and half-blood relationship in heirs. Ergo, there will be overlapping of
collateral line – Arts. 1006 & 1008. compulsory and intestate succession.

e. Representation. 2. Compulsory succession is supreme. The rules

of intestate succession can operate only to the
D. Intestate Heirs. extent that the legitimes are not impaired.

3. will be no conflict with legitimes.

1. Legitimate children and/or descendants.
Exception: Concurrence in intestacy of
2. Illegitimate children and/or descendants. legitimate and illegitimate descend-ants:

a. Get legitimes first.

3. Legitimate parents and/or ascendants.

b. Distribute excess in pro-portion of

4. Illegitimate parents.
2:1 [Note: if under the Civil Code –
10:5:4]
5. Surviving spouse.
G. Intestate Succession in Relation to Testamentary
Succession:
6. Brothers, sisters, nephews and nieces.
[Exclude uncles / aunts] [1009] 1. If will disposes of part of the free portion: The
problem of Partial Intestacy

Bacayo v. Borromeo, 145 SCRA 986 – 14 SCRA 986 a. Rule: Trace where the intestate
(1965) portion went in case of total
intestacy and let recipient thereof
7. Other collaterals – up to the 5th degree.
suffer the reduction.
 b. Apply in Articles 991, 994, 997, 998,
a. Determine value of property left at
1000 and 1001.
the death of the testator.
H. Special Rules.
b. Deduct all debts and obligations.

1. The Successional Bar – Art. 992.

Corpus vs. Corpus - 85 SCRA 567 (1978)

Leonardo vs. Court of Appeals, 120 SCRA 890 (1983)

Diaz vs. IAC, 150 SCRA 645 (1987)

Diaz vs. IAC, 182 SCRA 427 (1990)

2. Accretion – Arts. 1015 –1023.

3. Capacity and Unworthiness – Arts. 1024 –
1025; 1032 – 1040.
4. Representation – Arts. 970 – 977.

Teotico vs. Del Val, 13 SCRA 406 (1965)

VI. ACCEPTANCE AND REPUDIATION – Articles 1041 – 1057

Imperial vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 112483, October 8, 1999

– 316 SCRA 393 (1999)

Intestate Estate of Borromeo vs. Borromeo, G.R. No. L-41171,

July 23, 1987 – 152 SCRA 171 (1987)

Heirs of Sandejas vs. Lina, G.R. No. 141634, February 5, 2011 –

351 SCRA 183 (2001)

VII. PARTITION AND DISTRIBUTION

OF ESTATE:
SUBSTANTIVE ASPECTS

A. If compulsory succession takes place-

1. Net hereditary estate must be determined.

Purpose: To be able to compute legitimes.

2. Method of determination (collation) (Art. 908).

 c. Add the value of all donations inter vivos.

3. Donations are included in legitime but testamentary dispositions are excluded – Arts.
909 – 910, 1061 – 1062, 1063.

4. If legitimes impaired – first reduce testamentary dispositions pro rata (907, 911, but
cf. 950), 912 – 914, then reduce donations in inverse order of dates (911, 773).

A.1 Collation – Three Concepts: Arts. 1061 – 1077.

B. If testamentary succession takes place -

1. Will must be probated.

2. Two kinds of probate:

a. Ante Mortem
b. Post Mortem

3. Probate determinative only of formal validity.

C. Actual Partition (Arts. 1078 – 1105).

1. Before partition – co-ownership among heirs.

2. Partition – Separation, division and assignment of a thing held in common among

those to whom it may belong (Art. 1079).

3. Kinds of Partition:

a. Extra-judicial
b. Judicial

Santos vs. Dela Cruz, 37 SCR 555 (71) (1971)

Chavez vs. IAC, G.R. No. L-68282 November 8, 1990 – 191 SCRA 211 (1990)
Fajardo vs. Fajardo, G.R. No. L-32195, August 19, 1930
Neri vs. Uy, G.R. No. 194366, October 10, 2012 – 683 SCRA 553 (2012)
Basa vs. Aguilar, G.R. No. L-30994, September 30, 1982 – 117 SCRA 128 (1982)

4. General Rule: Observe the portions given by the rules on intestacy