DDL Succession 1 PDF

URIBE PROVISIONS CIVIL LAW REVIEW: Succession KKMD Notes
!
I. GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. DEFINITION AND CONCEPTS (Arts. 774, 712, 1311)

BASIS OF THE LAW OF SUCCESSION
LEGAL PHILOSOPHY
FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES
Article 774.
Succession is a mode of acquisition by virtue of which the property, rights and obligations to the extent of the value of the inheritance, of a person
are transmitted through his death to another or others either by his will or by operation of law.
Article 712.
Ownership is acquired by occupation and by intellectual creation.
Ownership and other real rights over property are acquired and transmitted by law, by donation, by testate and intestate succession, and in
consequence of certain contracts, by tradition.
They may also be acquired by means of prescription.
Article 1311.
Contracts take effect only between the parties, their assigns and heirs, except in case where the rights and obligations arising from the contract are
not transmissible by their nature, or by stipulation or by provision of law. The heir is not liable beyond the value of the property he received from
the decedent.
If a contract should contain some stipulation in favor of a third person, he may demand its fulfillment provided he communicated his acceptance to
the obligor before its revocation. A mere incidental benefit or interest of a person is not sufficient. The contracting parties must have clearly and
deliberately conferred a favor upon a third person.
B. LAW GOVERNING FROM:
1. AS TO TIME OF EXECUTION (Art. 795)

2. AS TO PLACE OF EXECUTION (Art. 17, 810, 815-819)
TIME OF EXECUTION PLACE OF EXECUTION
Article 795. The validity of a will Article 17. The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instruments shall be governed by the
as to its form depends upon the laws of the country in which they are executed.
observance of the law in force at
the time it is made. When the acts referred to are executed before the diplomatic or consular officials of the Republic of the
Philippines in a foreign country, the solemnities established by Philippine laws shall be observed in their
execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and those which have for their object public order,
public policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or judgments promulgated, or by
determinations or conventions agreed upon in a foreign country.
Article 810. A person may execute a holographic will, which must be entirely written, dated, and signed by the
hand of the testator himself. It is subject to no other form, and may be made in or out of the Philippines, and
need not be witnessed.
Article 815. When a Filipino is in a foreign country, he is authorized to make a will in any of the forms
established by the law of the country in which he may be. Such will may be probated in the Philippines.
Article 816. The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if made with the formalities
prescribed by the law of the place in which he resides, or according to the formalities observed in his country,
or in conformity with those which this Code prescribes.
Article 817. A will made in the Philippines by a citizen or subject of another country, which is executed in
accordance with the law of the country of which he is a citizen or subject, and which might be proved and
allowed by the law of his own country, shall have the same effect as if executed according to the laws of the
Philippines.
Article 818. Two or more persons cannot make a will jointly, or in the same instrument, either for their
reciprocal benefit or for the benefit of a third person. (669)
Article 819. Wills, prohibited by the preceding article, executed by Filipinos in a foreign country shall not be
valid in the Philippines, even though authorized by the laws of the country where they may have been
executed.
! 1
!
C. LAW GOVERNING CONTENT
1. AS TO TIME (Art. 2263)
2. AS TO SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS, ETC. (Art. 16.2; 1039)
AS TO TIME AS TO SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS

Article 2263. Rights to the inheritance of a person who died, with or Article 16. Real property as well as personal property is subject to the
without a will, before the effectivity of this Code, shall be governed by law of the country where it is stipulated.
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 However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to
beginning of the effectivity of this Code, shall be adjudicated and the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights and to
distributed in accordance with this new body of laws and by the Rules the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by
of Court; but the testamentary provisions shall be carried out insofar as the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration,
they may be permitted by this Code. Therefore, legitimes, betterments, whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the
legacies and bequests shall be respected; however, their amount shall be country wherein said property may be found.
reduced if in no other manner can every compulsory heir be given his
full share according to this Code. Article 1039. Capacity to succeed is governed by the law of the nation of
the decedent.
D. SUBJECTS OF SUCCESSION (Art. 775, 782. 887, 1003)

1. WHO ARE THE SUBJECTS?
2. RELATIONSHIP (Arts. 963-969)
3. CAPACITY TO SUCCEED (Art. 1024)
a. Determination (Art. 1034, 1039, 16.2)
b. Who May Succeed? (Art. 1024-26, 1029-30)
c. Who Are Incapable Of Succeeding? (Art. 1025, 1027-28, 1031-33, 990-992)
d. Effect Of Alienations By The Excluded Heir (Art. 1036)
e. Rights of the Excluded Heir? (Art. 1038)
f. Liabilities of the Excluded Heir (Art. 1038)
g. Prescription of Action (Art. 1040)
SUBJECTS OF SUCCESSION
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.
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.
WHO ARE THE SUBJECTS?
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.
RELATIONSHIP 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.
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 1034. In order to judge the capacity of the heir, devisee or legatee, his
CAPACITY TO SUCCEED qualification at the time of the death of the decedent shall be the criterion.
! 2
!
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
Determination 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. Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the
country where it is stipulated.
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 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
Who May Succeed? 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.
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
! 3
!
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.
Effect Of Alienations By Article 1036. Alienations of hereditary property, and acts of administration
The Excluded Heir 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.
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
Rights of the Excluded descendants, the latter shall acquire his right to the legitime.
Heir? The person so excluded shall not enjoy the usufruct and administration of the
property thus inherited by his children.
Article 1037. The unworthy heir who is excluded from the succession has a right to
demand indemnity or any expenses incurred in the preservation of the hereditary
property, and to enforce such credits as he may have against the estate.
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.
Article 1038. Any person incapable of succession, who, disregarding the prohibition
Liabilities of the stated in the preceding articles, entered into the possession of the hereditary
Excluded Heir 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.
Article 1040. The action for a declaration of incapacity and for the recovery of the
Prescription of Action 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.
E. OBJECT OF SUCCESSION
Arts. 776, 781, 1311, 1429, 1178, 1347
Art. 108, RPC
Article 776. The inheritance includes all the property, rights and obligations of a person which are not extinguished by his death.
Article 780. Mixed succession is that effected partly by will and partly by operation of law.
Article 1131. For the purposes of prescription, just title must be proved; it is never presumed.
Article 1429. When a testate or intestate heir voluntarily pays a debt of the decedent exceeding the value of the property which he received by will
or by the law of intestacy from the estate of the deceased, the payment is valid and cannot be rescinded by the payer.
Article 1178. Subject to the laws, all rights acquired in virtue of an obligation are transmissible, if there has been no stipulation to the contrary.
Article 1347. All things which are not outside the commerce of men, including future things, may be the object of a contract. All rights which are not
intransmissible may also be the object of contracts.
No contract may be entered into upon future inheritance except in cases expressly authorized by law.
All services which are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy may likewise be the object of a contract.
! 4
!
Article 108, RPC. Obligation to make restoration, reparation for damages, or indemnification for consequential damages and actions to demand the
same; Upon whom it devolves. — The obligation to make restoration or reparation for damages and indemnification for consequential damages
devolves upon the heirs of the person liable.chanrobles virtual law library
The action to demand restoration, reparation, and indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of the person injured.chanrobles vir
F. OPENING OF SUCCESSION
Arts. 777, 2263, 2253, 533, 1347, 1461, 130, 132, 390, 391
FC 84, 86
Article 777. The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent.
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.
Article 2253. The Civil Code of 1889 and other previous laws shall govern rights originating, under said laws, from acts done or events which took
place under their regime, even though this Code may regulate them in a different manner, or may not recognize them. But if a right should be
declared for the first time in this Code, it shall be effective at once, even though the act or event which gives rise thereto may have been done or
may have occurred under prior legislation, provided said new right does not prejudice or impair any vested or acquired right, of the same origin.
Article 533. The possession of hereditary property is deemed transmitted to the heir without interruption and from the moment of the death of the
decedent, in case the inheritance is accepted.
One who validly renounces an inheritance is deemed never to have possessed the same.
Article 1347. All things which are not outside the commerce of men, including future things, may be the object of a contract. All rights which are not
intransmissible may also be the object of contracts.
All services which are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy may likewise be the object of a contract.
Article 1461. Things having a potential existence may be the object of the contract of sale.
The efficacy of the sale of a mere hope or expectancy is deemed subject to the condition that the thing will come into existence.
The sale of a vain hope or expectancy is void.
Article 130. The future spouses may give each other in their marriage settlements as much as one-fifth of their present property, and with respect to
their future property, only in the event of death, to the extent laid down by the provisions of this Code referring to testamentary succession.
Article 132. A donation by reason of marriage is not revocable, save in the following cases:
(1) If it is conditional and the condition is not complied with;
(2) If the marriage is not celebrated;
(3) When the marriage takes place without the consent of the parents or guardian, as required by law;
(4) When the marriage is annulled, and the donee acted in bad faith;
(5) Upon legal separation, the donee being the guilty spouse;
(6) When the donee has committed an act of ingratitude as specified by the provisions of this Code on donations in general.
Article 390 & 391 (Presumption of death provisions)
FC 84: Donations of future property shall be governed by the provisions on testamentary succession and the formalities of wills.
FC 86: (Revocation of donations by the donor; grounds)
Requisites for the Transmission of Successional Rights

1. Express will of the testator or provision of law
2. Death of the person whose property is the subject of succession (Art. 43); Survivorship Rule (R131, Sec. 3(ii), par. 5)
3. Acceptance of the inheritance (Art. 1041-1057)
Article 43. If there is a doubt, as between two or more persons who are called to succeed each other, as to which of them died first, whoever alleges
the death of one prior to the other, shall prove the same; in the absence of proof, it is presumed that they died at the same time and there shall be no
transmission of rights from one to the other.
Article 1041. The acceptance or repudiation of the inheritance is an act which is purely voluntary and free.
Article 1042. The effects of the acceptance or repudiation shall always retroact to the moment of the death of the decedent. (989)
Article 1043. No person may accept or repudiate an inheritance unless he is certain of the death of the person from whom he is to inherit, and of his
right to the inheritance.
Article 1044. Any person having the free disposal of his property may accept or repudiate an inheritance.
Any inheritance left to minors or incapacitated persons may be accepted by their parents or guardians. Parents or guardians may repudiate the
inheritance left to their wards only by judicial authorization.
The right to accept an inheritance left to the poor shall belong to the persons designated by the testator to determine the beneficiaries and distribute
the property, or in their default, to those mentioned in article 1030.
Article 1045. The lawful representatives of corporations, associations, institutions and entities qualified to acquire property may accept any
inheritance left to the latter, but in order to repudiate it, the approval of the court shall be necessary.
Article 1046. Public official establishments can neither accept nor repudiate an inheritance without the approval of the government.
Article 1047. A married woman of age may repudiate an inheritance without the consent of her husband.
! 5
!
Article 1048. Deaf-mutes who can read and write may accept or repudiate the inheritance personally or through an agent. Should they not be able
to read and write, the inheritance shall be accepted by their guardians. These guardians may repudiate the same with judicial approval.
Article 1049. Acceptance may be express or tacit.

An express acceptance must be made in a public or private document.
A tacit acceptance is one resulting from acts by which the intention to accept is necessarily implied, or which one would have no right to do except
in the capacity of an heir.
Acts of mere preservation or provisional administration do not imply an acceptance of the inheritance if, through such acts, the title or capacity of
an heir has not been assumed.
Article 1050. An inheritance is deemed accepted:

(1) If the heirs sells, donates, or assigns his right to a stranger, or to his co-heirs, or to any of them;
(2) If the heir renounces the same, even though gratuitously, for the benefit of one or more of his co-heirs;
(3) If he renounces it for a price in favor of all his co-heirs indiscriminately; but if this renunciation should be gratuitous, and the co-heirs in
whose favor it is made are those upon whom the portion renounced should devolve by virtue of accretion, the inheritance shall not be
deemed as accepted.
Article 1051. The repudiation of an inheritance shall be made in a public or authentic instrument, or by petition presented to the court having
jurisdiction over the testamentary or intestate proceedings.
Article 1052. If the heir repudiates the inheritance to the prejudice of his own creditors, the latter may petition the court to authorize them to accept
it in the name of the heir.
The acceptance shall benefit the creditors only to an extent sufficient to cover the amount of their credits. The excess, should there be any, shall in
no case pertain to the renouncer, but shall be adjudicated to the persons to whom, in accordance with the rules established in this Code, it may
belong.
Article 1053. If the heir should die without having accepted or repudiated the inheritance his right shall be transmitted to his heirs.
Article 1054. Should there be several heirs called to the inheritance, some of them may accept and the others may repudiate it.
Article 1055. If a person, who is called to the same inheritance as an heir by will and ab intestato, repudiates the inheritance in his capacity as a
testamentary heir, he is understood to have repudiated it in both capacities.
Should he repudiate it as an intestate heir, without knowledge of his being a testamentary heir, he may still accept it in the latter capacity.
Article 1056. The acceptance or repudiation of an inheritance, once made, is irrevocable, and cannot be impugned, except when it was made
through any of the causes that vitiate consent, or when an unknown will appears.
Article 1057. Within thirty days after the court has issued an order for the distribution of the estate in accordance with the Rules of Court, the heirs,
devisees and legatees shall signify to the court having jurisdiction whether they accept or repudiate the inheritance.
If they do not do so within that time, they are deemed to have accepted the inheritance.
G. KINDS OF SUCCESSION (Art. 778)

1. TESTAMENTARY (Art. 779)
2. LEGAL OR INTESTATE (Art. 960)
3. MIXED (Art. 780)
4. CONTRACTUAL (Art. 130, 1347, 752; FC 84)
5. COMPULSORY
KINDS OF SUCCESSION
Article 778. Succession may be:
(1) Testamentary;
(2) Legal or intestate; or
(3) Mixed.
TESTAMENTARY Article 779. Testamentary succession is that which results from the designation of an heir, made in a will executed in the
form prescribed by law.
Article 960. Legal or intestate succession takes place:

LEGAL OR (1) If a person dies without a will, or with a void will, or one which has subsequently lost its validity;
INTESTATE (2) When the will does not institute an heir to, or dispose of all the property belonging to the testator. In such case,
legal succession shall take place only with respect to the property of which the testator has not disposed;
(3) If the suspensive condition attached to the institution of heir does not happen or is not fulfilled, or if the heir dies
before the testator, or repudiates the inheritance, there being no substitution, and no right of accretion takes place;
(1) (4) When the heir instituted is incapable of succeeding, except in cases provided in this Code.
MIXED Article 780. Mixed succession is that effected partly by will and partly by operation of law.
Article 130. The future spouses may give each other in their marriage settlements as much as one-fifth of their present
property, and with respect to their future property, only in the event of death, to the extent laid down by the provisions of
this Code referring to testamentary succession.
CONTRACTUAL
Article 1347. All things which are not outside the commerce of men, including future things, may be the object of a contract.
All rights which are not intransmissible may also be the object of contracts.
All services which are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy may likewise be the object of
a contract.
Article 752. The provisions of article 750 notwithstanding, no person may give or receive, by way of donation, more than he
may give or receive by will.
The donation shall be inofficious in all that it may exceed this limitation.
COMPULSORY
! 6
!
TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION
II. WILLS
A. DEFINITION
B. CHARACTERISTICS
C. INTERPRETATION OF WILLS
Article 783. A will is an act whereby a person is permitted, with the formalities prescribed by law, to control to a certain
DEFINITION degree the disposition of this estate, to take effect after his death.
Art. 783
Article 839. The will shall be disallowed in any of the following cases:
CHARACTERISTICS (3) If it was executed through force or under duress, or the influence of fear, or threats;
(4) If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and influence, on the part of the beneficiary or of some other
person;
Article 828. A will may be revoked by the testator at any time before his death. Any waiver or restriction of this right is
void.
Article 796. All persons who are not expressly prohibited by law may make a will.
Article 797. Persons of either sex under eighteen years of age cannot make a will.
Article 798. In order to make a will it is essential that the testator be of sound mind at the time of its execution.
Article 777. The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent.
Article 818. Two or more persons cannot make a will jointly, or in the same instrument, either for their reciprocal benefit
or for the benefit of a third person.
Article 784. The making of a will is a strictly personal act; it cannot be left in whole or in part to the discretion of a third
person, or accomplished through the instrumentality of an agent or attorney.
Article 785. The duration or efficacy of the designation of heirs, devisees or legatees, or the determination of the portions
which they are to take, when referred to by name, cannot be left to the discretion of a third person.
Article 786. The testator may entrust to a third person the distribution of specific property or sums of money that he may
leave in general to specified classes or causes, and also the designation of the persons, institutions or establishments to
which such property or sums are to be given or applied.
Article 787. The testator may not make a testamentary disposition in such manner that another person has to determine
whether or not it is to be operative.
Article 788. If a testamentary disposition admits of different interpretations, in case of doubt, that interpretation by which
the disposition is to be operative shall be preferred.
Article 788
INTERPRETATION Article 789. When there is an imperfect description, or when no person or property exactly answers the description,
OF WILLS mistakes and omissions must be corrected, if the error appears from the context of the will or from extrinsic evidence,
excluding the oral declarations of the testator as to his intention; and when an uncertainty arises upon the face of the will,
as to the application of any of its provisions, the testator's intention is to be ascertained from the words of the will, taking
into consideration the circumstances under which it was made, excluding such oral declarations.
Article 790. The words of a will are to be taken in their ordinary and grammatical sense, unless a clear intention to use
them in another sense can be gathered, and that other can be ascertained.
Technical words in a will are to be taken in their technical sense, unless the context clearly indicates a contrary intention,
or unless it satisfactorily appears that the will was drawn solely by the testator, and that he was unacquainted with such
technical sense.
Article 791. The words of a will are to receive an interpretation which will give to every expression some effect, rather
than one which will render any of the expressions inoperative; and of two modes of interpreting a will, that is to be
preferred which will prevent intestacy.
Article 792. The invalidity of one of several dispositions contained in a will does not result in the invalidity of the other
dispositions, unless it is to be presumed that the testator would not have made such other dispositions if the first invalid
disposition had not been made.
Article 793. Property acquired after the making of a will shall only pass thereby, as if the testator had possessed it at the
time of making the will, should it expressly appear by the will that such was his intention.
Article 794. Every devise or legacy shall cover all the interest which the testator could device or bequeath in the property
disposed of, unless it clearly appears from the will that he intended to convey a less interest.
Article 930. The legacy or devise of a thing belonging to another person is void, if the testator erroneously believed that
the thing pertained to him. But if the thing bequeathed, though not belonging to the testator when he made the will,
afterwards becomes his, by whatever title, the disposition shall take effect.
III. TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY AND INTENT
A. WHO MAY MAKE A WILL?

B. SUPERVENING INCAPACITY
! 7
!
WHO MAY MAKE A WILL? SUPERVENING INCAPACITY
Article 796. All persons who are not expressly prohibited by law may make a will. Article 801. Supervening incapacity does
not invalidate an effective will, nor is the
Article 797. Persons of either sex under eighteen years of age cannot make a will. will of an incapable validated by the
supervening of capacity.
Article 798. In order to make a will it is essential that the testator be of sound mind at the time of its
execution.
Article 799. To be of sound mind, it is not necessary that the testator be in full possession of all his
reasoning faculties, or that his mind be wholly unbroken, unimpaired, or unshattered by disease,
injury or other cause.
It shall be sufficient if the testator was able at the time of making the will to know the nature of the
estate to be disposed of, the proper objects of his bounty, and the character of the testamentary act.
Article 800. The law presumes that every person is of sound mind, in the absence of proof to the
contrary.
The burden of proof that the testator was not of sound mind at the time of making his dispositions is
on the person who opposes the probate of the will; but if the testator, one month, or less, before
making his will was publicly known to be insane, the person who maintains the validity of the will
must prove that the testator made it during a lucid interval.
Article 801. Supervening incapacity does not invalidate an effective will, nor is the will of an incapable
validated by the supervening of capacity.
Article 802. A married woman may make a will without the consent of her husband, and without the
authority of the court.
Article 803. A married woman may dispose by will of all her separate property as well as her share of
the conjugal partnership or absolute community property.
! 8
!
IV. SOLEMNITIES OF WILLS
A. KINDS OF WILLS
B. NOTARIAL WILLS
1. General Requirements
2. Specific Requirements
3. Witnesses to a Will
i. Who are Competent?
ii. Supervening Incompetency
iii. Competency of Interested Witness
4. Special Requirements for Deaf, Deaf-Mute & Blind Testators
5. Substantial Compliance
C. HOLOGRAPHIC WILLS
1. General Requirements
2. Specific Requirements
KINDS OF WILLS
Article 804. Every will must be in writing and executed in a language or dialect known to the testator.
Article 810. A person may execute a holographic will which must be entirely written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is
subject to no other form, and may be made in or out of the Philippines, and need not be witnessed.
General Requirements Article 804. Every will must be in writing and executed in a language or dialect known to the
testator.
NOTARIAL WILLS Article 805. Every will, other than a holographic will, must be subscribed at the end thereof by
Specific Requirements the testator himself or by the testator's name written by some other person in his presence, and
by his express direction, and attested and subscribed by three or more credible witnesses in the
presence of the testator and of one another.
The testator or the person requested by him to write his name and the instrumental witnesses
of the will, shall also sign, as aforesaid, each and every page thereof, except the last, on the left
margin, and all the pages shall be numbered correlatively in letters placed on the upper part of
each page.
The attestation shall state the number of pages used upon which the will is written, and the
fact that the testator signed the will and every page thereof, or caused some other person to
write his name, under his express direction, in the presence of the instrumental witnesses, and
that the latter witnessed and signed the will and all the pages thereof in the presence of the
testator and of one another.
If the attestation clause is in a language not known to the witnesses, it shall be interpreted to
them.
Article 806. Every will must be acknowledged before a notary public by the testator and the
witnesses. The notary public shall not be required to retain a copy of the will, or file another
with the office of the Clerk of Court.
Article 820. Any person of sound mind and of the age of eighteen years
Witnesses to a Will or more, and not blind, deaf or dumb, and able to read and write, may
Competent be a witness to the execution of a will mentioned in article 805 of this
Code.
Article 821. The following are disqualified from being witnesses to a

will:
(1) Any person not domiciled in the Philippines;
(2) Those who have been convicted of falsification of a
document, perjury or false testimony.
Article 824. A mere charge on the estate of the testator for the payment
of debts due at the time of the testator's death does not prevent his
creditors from being competent witnesses to his will.
Supervening Article 822. If the witnesses attesting the execution of a will are
Incompetence competent at the time of attesting, their becoming subsequently
incompetent shall not prevent the allowance of the will.
Article 823. If a person attests the execution of a will, to whom or to

Competency of whose spouse, or parent, or child, a devise or legacy is given by such
Interested Witness will, such devise or legacy shall, so far only as concerns such person, or
spouse, or parent, or child of such person, or any one claiming under
such person or spouse, or parent, or child, be void, unless there are
three other competent witnesses to such will. However, such person so
attesting shall be admitted as a witness as if such devise or legacy had
not been made or given.
Article 807. If the testator be deaf, or a deaf-mute, he must personally read the will, if able to
Special Requirements do so; otherwise, he shall designate two persons to read it and communicate to him, in some
for Deaf, Deaf-Mute & practicable manner, the contents thereof.
Blind Testators
Article 808. If the testator is blind, the will shall be read to him twice; once, by one of the
subscribing witnesses, and again, by the notary public before whom the will is acknowledged.
Article 809. In the absence of bad faith, forgery, or fraud, or undue and improper pressure and
Substantial influence, defects and imperfections in the form of attestation or in the language used therein
! 9
!
Compliance shall not render the will invalid if it is proved that the will was in fact executed and attested in
substantial compliance with all the requirements of article 805.
General Requirements Article 804. Every will must be in writing and executed in a language or dialect known to the
HOLOGRAPHIC testator.
WILLS
Article 810. A person may execute a holographic will which must be entirely written, dated,
and signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is subject to no other form, and may be made
in or out of the Philippines, and need not be witnessed.
Specific Requirements
Article 812. In holographic wills, the dispositions of the testator written below his signature
must be dated and signed by him in order to make them valid as testamentary dispositions.
Article 813. When a number of dispositions appearing in a holographic will are signed without
being dated, and the last disposition has a signature and a date, such date validates the
dispositions preceding it, whatever be the time of prior dispositions.
V. INCORPORATION OF DOCUMENT BY REFERENCE
Article 827. If a will, executed as required by this Code, incorporates into itself by reference any document or paper, such document or paper shall
not be considered a part of the will unless the following requisites are present:
(1) The document or paper referred to in the will must be in existence at the time of the execution of the will;
(2) The will must clearly describe and identify the same, stating among other things the number of pages thereof;
(3) It must be identified by clear and satisfactory proof as the document or paper referred to therein; and
(4) It must be signed by the testator and the witnesses on each and every page, except in case of voluminous books of account or inventories.
VI. CODICILS
A. DEFINITION (Arts. 825, 830)

B. SOLEMNITIES (Art. 826)
Article 825. A codicil is supplement or addition to a will, made after the execution of a will and annexed to be taken as a part thereof, by which
disposition made in the original will is explained, added to, or altered.
Article 830. No will shall be revoked except in the following cases:

(1) By implication of law; or
(2) By some will, codicil, or other writing executed as provided in case of wills; or
(3) By burning, tearing, cancelling, or obliterating the will with the intention of revoking it, by the testator himself, or by some other person
in his presence, and by his express direction. If burned, torn, cancelled, or obliterated by some other person, without the express direction
of the testator, the will may still be established, and the estate distributed in accordance therewith, if its contents, and due execution, and
the fact of its unauthorized destruction, cancellation, or obliteration are established according to the Rules of Court.
Article 826. In order that a codicil may be effective, it shall be executed as in the case of a will.
! 10
!
VII. REVOCATION OF WILLS AND TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS
A. DEFINITION OF REVOCATION
B. WHEN MAY REVOCATION BE EFFECTED (Art. 828)
C. LAW GOVERNING REVOCATION (Art. 829)
D. MODES OF REVOCATION (Art. 830)
E. EFFECT OF REVOCATION (Art. 831-834)
F. DOCTRINE OF DEPENDENT RELATIVE REVOCATION
Article 828. A will may be revoked by the testator at any time before his death. Any waiver or restriction of this right is void.
Article 829. A revocation done outside the Philippines, by a person who does not have his domicile in this country, is valid when it is done
according to the law of the place where the will was made, or according to the law of the place in which the testator had his domicile at the time;
and if the revocation takes place in this country, when it is in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
Article 830. No will shall be revoked except in the following cases:

(1) By implication of law; or
(2) By some will, codicil, or other writing executed as provided in case of wills; or
(3) By burning, tearing, cancelling, or obliterating the will with the intention of revoking it, by the testator himself, or by some other person
in his presence, and by his express direction. If burned, torn, cancelled, or obliterated by some other person, without the express direction
of the testator, the will may still be established, and the estate distributed in accordance therewith, if its contents, and due execution, and
the fact of its unauthorized destruction, cancellation, or obliteration are established according to the Rules of Court.
Article 831. Subsequent wills which do not revoke the previous ones in an express manner, annul only such dispositions in the prior wills as are
inconsistent with or contrary to those contained in the later wills.
Article 832. A revocation made in a subsequent will shall take effect, even if the new will should become inoperative by reason of the incapacity of
the heirs, devisees or legatees designated therein, or by their renunciation.
Article 833. A revocation of a will based on a false cause or an illegal cause is null and void.
Article 834. The recognition of an illegitimate child does not lose its legal effect, even though the will wherein it was made should be revoked.
VIII. REPUBLICATION AND REVIVAL OF WILLS
Article 835. The testator cannot republish, without reproducing in a subsequent will, the dispositions contained in a previous one which is void as
to its form.
Article 836. The execution of a codicil referring to a previous will has the effect of republishing the will as modified by the codicil.
Article 837. If after making a will, the testator makes a second will expressly revoking the first, the revocation of the second will does not revive the
first will, which can be revived only by another will or codicil.
! 11
!
IX. ALLOWANCE OF WILLS
Article 838. No will shall pass either real or personal property unless it is proved and allowed in accordance with the Rules of Court.
The testator himself may, during his lifetime, petition the court having jurisdiction for the allowance of his will. In such case, the pertinent
provisions of the Rules of Court for the allowance of wills after the testator's a death shall govern.
The Supreme Court shall formulate such additional Rules of Court as may be necessary for the allowance of wills on petition of the testator.
Subject to the right of appeal, the allowance of the will, either during the lifetime of the testator or after his death, shall be conclusive as to its due
execution.
CONCEPT OF PROBATE
NECESSITY OF
PROBATE
MODES OF PROBATE
REQUIREMENTS FOR Article 811. In the probate of a holographic will, it shall be necessary that at least one witness who knows the
PROBATE handwriting and signature of the testator explicitly declare that the will and the signature are in the handwriting of
the testator. If the will is contested, at least three of such witnesses shall be required.
In the absence of any competent witness referred to in the preceding paragraph, and if the court deem it necessary,
expert testimony may be resorted to.
EFFECT OF ALLOWANCE
OF WILLS
X. DISALLOWANCE OF WILLS
Article 839. The will shall be disallowed in any of the following cases:
(1) If the formalities required by law have not been complied with;
(2) If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally incapable of making a will, at the time of its execution;
(3) If it was executed through force or under duress, or the influence of fear, or threats;
(4) If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and influence, on the part of the beneficiary or of some other person;
(5) If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud;
(6) If the testator acted by mistake or did not intend that the instrument he signed should be his will at the time of affixing his signature
thereto.
Article 1335. There is violence when in order to wrest consent, serious or irresistible force is employed.
There is intimidation when one of the contracting parties is compelled by a reasonable and well-grounded fear of an imminent and grave evil upon
his person or property, or upon the person or property of his spouse, descendants or ascendants, to give his consent.
To determine the degree of intimidation, the age, sex and condition of the person shall be borne in mind.
A threat to enforce one's claim through competent authority, if the claim is just or legal, does not vitiate consent.
Article 1337. There is undue influence when a person takes improper advantage of his power over the will of another, depriving the latter of a
reasonable freedom of choice. The following circumstances shall be considered: the confidential, family, spiritual and other relations between the
parties, or the fact that the person alleged to have been unduly influenced was suffering from mental weakness, or was ignorant or in financial
distress.
Article 1338. There is fraud when, through insidious words or machinations of one of the contracting parties, the other is induced to enter into a
contract which, without them, he would not have agreed to.
! 12
!
XI. LEGITIME
A. CONCEPT
B. WHO ARE ENTITLED TO LEGITIMES: COMPULSORY HEIRS
C. CONCURRENCE OF COMPULSORY HEIRS AND THEIR CORRESPONDING LEGITIMES
D. RESTRICTIONS REGARDING THE LEGITIME
E. DETERMINATION OR COMPUTATION
Collation
F. FREEDOM TO DISPOSE FREE PORTION
Article 886. Legitime is that part of the testator's property which he cannot dispose of because the law has
A. CONCEPT reserved it for certain heirs who are, therefore, called compulsory heirs.
Article 887. The following are compulsory heirs:

B. WHO ARE ENTITLED TO (1) Legitimate children and descendants, with respect to their legitimate parents and ascendants;
LEGITIMES: COMPULSORY (2) In default of the foregoing, legitimate parents and ascendants, with respect to their legitimate children
HEIRS 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.
Article 902. The rights of illegitimate children set forth in the preceding articles are transmitted upon their death
to their descendants, whether legitimate or illegitimate.
Article 888. The legitime of legitimate children and descendants consists of one-half of the hereditary estate of
the father and of the mother.
C. CONCURRENCE OF
COMPULSORY HEIRS AND The latter may freely dispose of the remaining half, subject to the rights of illegitimate children and of the
THEIR CORRESPONDING surviving spouse as hereinafter provided.
LEGITIMES
Article 889. The legitime of legitimate parents or ascendants consists of one-half of the hereditary estates of their
children and descendants.
The children or descendants may freely dispose of the other half, subject to the rights of illegitimate children and
of the surviving spouse as hereinafter provided.
Article 890. The legitime reserved for the legitimate parents shall be divided between them equally; if one of the
parents should have died, the whole shall pass to the survivor.
If the testator leaves neither father nor mother, but is survived by ascendants of equal degree of the paternal and
maternal lines, the legitime shall be divided equally between both lines. If the ascendants should be of different
degrees, it shall pertain entirely to the ones nearest in degree of either line.
Article 892. If only one legitimate child or descendant of the deceased survives, the widow or widower shall be
entitled to one-fourth of the hereditary estate. In case of a legal separation, the surviving spouse may inherit if it
was the deceased who had given cause for the same.
If there are two or more legitimate children or descendants, the surviving spouse shall be entitled to a portion
equal to the legitime of each of the legitimate children or descendants.
In both cases, the legitime of the surviving spouse shall be taken from the portion that can be freely disposed of
by the testator.
Article 893. If the testator leaves no legitimate descendants, but leaves legitimate ascendants, the surviving
spouse shall have a right to one-fourth of the hereditary estate.
This fourth shall be taken from the free portion of the estate.
Article 894. If the testator leaves illegitimate children, the surviving spouse shall be entitled to one-third of the
hereditary estate of the deceased and the illegitimate children to another third. The remaining third shall be at
the free disposal of the testator.
Article 895. The legitime of each of the acknowledged natural children and each of the natural children by legal
fiction shall consist of one-half of the legitime of each of the legitimate children or descendants.
The legitime of an illegitimate child who is neither an acknowledged natural, nor a natural child by legal fiction,
shall be equal in every case to four-fifths of the legitime of an acknowledged natural child.
The legitime of the illegitimate children shall be taken from the portion of the estate at the free disposal of the
testator, provided that in no case shall the total legitime of such illegitimate children exceed that free portion,
and that the legitime of the surviving spouse must first be fully satisfied.
Article 896. Illegitimate children who may survive with legitimate parents or ascendants of the deceased shall be
entitled to one-fourth of the hereditary estate to be taken from the portion at the free disposal of the testator.
(841a)
Article 897. When the widow or widower survives with legitimate children or descendants, and acknowledged
natural children, or natural children by legal fiction, such surviving spouse shall be entitled to a portion equal to
the legitime of each of the legitimate children which must be taken from that part of the estate which the testator
can freely dispose of.
Article 898. If the widow or widower survives with legitimate children or descendants, and with illegitimate
children other than acknowledged natural, or natural children by legal fiction, the share of the surviving spouse
! 13
!
shall be the same as that provided in the preceding article.
Article 899. When the widow or widower survives with legitimate parents or ascendants and with illegitimate
children, such surviving spouse shall be entitled to one-eighth of the hereditary estate of the deceased which
must be taken from the free portion, and the illegitimate children shall be entitled to one-fourth of the estate
which shall be taken also from the disposable portion. The testator may freely dispose of the remaining one-
eighth of the estate.
Article 900. If the only survivor is the widow or widower, she or he shall be entitled to one-half of the hereditary
estate of the deceased spouse, and the testator may freely dispose of the other half.
If the marriage between the surviving spouse and the testator was solemnized in articulo mortis, and the testator
died within three months from the time of the marriage, the legitime of the surviving spouse as the sole heir
shall be one-third of the hereditary estate, except when they have been living as husband and wife for more than
five years. In the latter case, the legitime of the surviving spouse shall be that specified in the preceding
paragraph.
Article 901. When the testator dies leaving illegitimate children and no other compulsory heirs, such illegitimate
children shall have a right to one-half of the hereditary estate of the deceased.
The other half shall be at the free disposal of the testator.
Article 903. The legitime of the parents who have an illegitimate child, when such child leaves neither legitimate
descendants, nor a surviving spouse, nor illegitimate children, is one-half of the hereditary estate of such
illegitimate child. If only legitimate or illegitimate children are left, the parents are not entitled to any legitime
whatsoever. If only the widow or widower survives with parents of the illegitimate child, the legitime of the
parents is one-fourth of the hereditary estate of the child, and that of the surviving spouse also one-fourth of the
estate.
Article 904. The testator cannot deprive his compulsory heirs of their legitime, except in cases expressly specified
D. RESTRICTIONS by law.
REGARDING THE
LEGITIME Neither can he impose upon the same any burden, encumbrance, condition, or substitution of any kind
whatsoever.
Article 872. The testator cannot impose any charge, condition, or substitution whatsoever upon the legitimes
prescribed in this Code. Should he do so, the same shall be considered as not imposed.
Article 905. Every renunciation or compromise as regards a future legitime between the person owing it and his
compulsory heirs is void, and the latter may claim the same upon the death of the former; but they must bring to
collation whatever they may have received by virtue of the renunciation or compromise.
Article 906. Any compulsory heir to whom the testator has left by any title less than the legitime belonging to
him may demand that the same be fully satisfied.
Article 907. Testamentary dispositions that impair or diminish the legitime of the compulsory heirs shall be
reduced on petition of the same, insofar as they may be inofficious or excessive.
Article 1347. All things which are not outside the commerce of men, including future things, may be the object of
a contract. All rights which are not intransmissible may also be the object of contracts.
All services which are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy may likewise be
the object of a contract.
Article 908. To determine the legitime, the value of the property left at the death of the testator shall be
E. DETERMINATION OR considered, deducting all debts and charges, which shall not include those imposed in the will.
COMPUTATION
To the net value of the hereditary estate, shall be added the value of all donations by the testator that are subject
to collation, at the time he made them.
Article 909. Donations given to children shall be charged to their legitime.
Donations made to strangers shall be charged to that part of the estate of which the testator could have disposed
by his last will.
Insofar as they may be inofficious or may exceed the disposable portion, they shall be reduced according to the
rules established by this Code.
Article 910. Donations which an illegitimate child may have received during the lifetime of his father or mother,
shall be charged to his legitime.
Should they exceed the portion that can be freely disposed of, they shall be reduced in the manner prescribed by
this Code.
Article 911. After the legitime has been determined in accordance with the three preceding articles, the reduction
shall be made as follows:
(1) Donations shall be respected as long as the legitime can be covered, reducing or annulling, if
necessary, the devises or legacies made in the will;
(2) The reduction of the devises or legacies shall be pro rata, without any distinction whatever.
If the testator has directed that a certain devise or legacy be paid in preference to others, it shall not suffer any
reduction until the latter have been applied in full to the payment of the legitime.
(3) If the devise or legacy consists of a usufruct or life annuity, whose value may be considered greater
! 14
!
than that of the disposable portion, the compulsory heirs may choose between complying with the
testamentary provision and delivering to the devisee or legatee the part of the inheritance of which the
testator could freely dispose.
Article 912. If the devise subject to reduction should consist of real property, which cannot be conveniently
divided, it shall go to the devisee if the reduction does not absorb one-half of its value; and in a contrary case, to
the compulsory heirs; but the former and the latter shall reimburse each other in cash for what respectively
belongs to them.
The devisee who is entitled to a legitime may retain the entire property, provided its value does not exceed that
of the disposable portion and of the share pertaining to him as legitime.
Article 913. If the heirs or devisees do not choose to avail themselves of the right granted by the preceding
article, any heir or devisee who did not have such right may exercise it; should the latter not make use of it, the
property shall be sold at public auction at the instance of any one of the interested parties.
Article 1061. Every compulsory heir, who succeeds with other compulsory heirs, must bring into
the mass of the estate any property or right which he may have received from the decedent,
Collation during the lifetime of the latter, by way of donation, or any other gratuitous title, in order that it
may be computed in the determination of the legitime of each heir, and in the account of the
partition.
Article 1062. Collation shall not take place among compulsory heirs if the donor should have so
expressly provided, or if the donee should repudiate the inheritance, unless the donation should
be reduced as inofficious.
Article 1063. Property left by will is not deemed subject to collation, if the testator has not
otherwise provided, but the legitime shall in any case remain unimpaired.
Article 1064. When the grandchildren, who survive with their uncles, aunts, or cousins, inherit
from their grandparents in representation of their father or mother, they shall bring to collation
all that their parents, if alive, would have been obliged to bring, even though such grandchildren
have not inherited the property.
They shall also bring to collation all that they may have received from the decedent during his
lifetime, unless the testator has provided otherwise, in which case his wishes must be respected,
if the legitime of the co-heirs is not prejudiced.
Article 1065. Parents are not obliged to bring to collation in the inheritance of their ascendants
any property which may have been donated by the latter to their children.
Article 1066. Neither shall donations to the spouse of the child be brought to collation; but if they
have been given by the parent to the spouses jointly, the child shall be obliged to bring to
collation one-half of the thing donated.
Article 1067. Expenses for support, education, medical attendance, even in extraordinary illness,
apprenticeship, ordinary equipment, or customary gifts are not subject to collation.
Article 1068. Expenses incurred by the parents in giving their children a professional, vocational
or other career shall not be brought to collation unless the parents so provide, or unless they
impair the legitime; but when their collation is required, the sum which the child would have
spent if he had lived in the house and company of his parents shall be deducted therefrom.
Article 1069. Any sums paid by a parent in satisfaction of the debts of his children, election
expenses, fines, and similar expenses shall be brought to collation.
Article 1070. Wedding gifts by parents and ascendants consisting of jewelry, clothing, and outfit,
shall not be reduced as inofficious except insofar as they may exceed one-tenth of the sum which
is disposable by will.
Article 1071. The same things donated are not to be brought to collation and partition, but only
their value at the time of the donation, even though their just value may not then have been
assessed.
Their subsequent increase or deterioration and even their total loss or destruction, be it
accidental or culpable, shall be for the benefit or account and risk of the donee.
Article 1072. In the collation of a donation made by both parents, one-half shall be brought to the
inheritance of the father, and the other half, to that of the mother. That given by one alone shall
be brought to collation in his or her inheritance.
Article 1073. The donee's share of the estate shall be reduced by an amount equal to that already
received by him; and his co-heirs shall receive an equivalent, as much as possible, in property of
the same nature, class and quality.
Article 1074. Should the provisions of the preceding article be impracticable, if the property
donated was immovable, the co-heirs shall be entitled to receive its equivalent in cash or
securities, at the rate of quotation; and should there be neither cash or marketable securities in
the estate, so much of the other property as may be necessary shall be sold at public auction.
If the property donated was movable, the co-heirs shall only have a right to select an equivalent
of other personal property of the inheritance at its just price.
Article 1075. The fruits and interest of the property subject to collation shall not pertain to the
estate except from the day on which the succession is opened.
For the purpose of ascertaining their amount, the fruits and interest of the property of the estate
! 15
!
of the same kind and quality as that subject to collation shall be made the standard of
assessment.
Article 1076. The co-heirs are bound to reimburse to the donee the necessary expenses which he
has incurred for the preservation of the property donated to him, though they may not have
augmented its value.
The donee who collates in kind an immovable which has been given to him must be reimbursed
by his co-heirs for the improvements which have increased the value of the property, and which
exist at the time the partition if effected.
As to works made on the estate for the mere pleasure of the donee, no reimbursement is due him
for them; he has, however, the right to remove them, if he can do so without injuring the estate.
Article 1077. Should any question arise among the co-heirs upon the obligation to bring to
collation or as to the things which are subject to collation, the distribution of the estate shall not
be interrupted for this reason, provided adequate security is given.
F. FREEDOM TO DISPOSE
FREE PORTION Article 914. The testator may devise and bequeath the free portion as he may deem fit.
! 16
!
PRINCIPLES AFFECTING LEGITIME
Article 854. The preterition or omission of one, some, or all of the compulsory heirs in the direct line,
whether living at the time of the execution of the will or born after the death of the testator, shall annul the
XII. PRETERITION institution of heir; but the devises and legacies shall be valid insofar as they are not inofficious.
If the omitted compulsory heirs should die before the testator, the institution shall be effectual, without
prejudice to the right of representation.
Article 906. Any compulsory heir to whom the testator has left by any title less than the legitime belonging
to him may demand that the same be fully satisfied.
Article 855. The share of a child or descendant omitted in a will must first be taken from the part of the
estate not disposed of by the will, if any; if that is not sufficient, so much as may be necessary must be
taken proportionally from the shares of the other compulsory heirs.
Article 918. Disinheritance without a specification of the cause, or for a cause the truth of which, if
contradicted, is not proved, or which is not one of those set forth in this Code, shall annul the institution of
heirs insofar as it may prejudice the person disinherited; but the devises and legacies and other
testamentary dispositions shall be valid to such extent as will not impair the legitime.
XIII. RESERVA TRONCAL Article 891. The ascendant who inherits from his descendant any property which the latter may have
acquired by gratuitous title from another ascendant, or a brother or sister, is obliged to reserve such
property as he may have acquired by operation of law for the benefit of relatives who are within the third
degree and who belong to the line from which said property came.
XIV. RESERVA ADOPTIVA
XV. DISINHERITANCE Article 915. A compulsory heir may, in consequence of disinheritance, be deprived of his legitime, for
causes expressly stated by law.
Article 916. Disinheritance can be effected only through a will wherein the legal cause therefor shall be
specified.
Article 917. The burden of proving the truth of the cause for disinheritance shall rest upon the other heirs
of the testator, if the disinherited heir should deny it.
Article 918. Disinheritance without a specification of the cause, or for a cause the truth of which, if
contradicted, is not proved, or which is not one of those set forth in this Code, shall annul the institution of
heirs insofar as it may prejudice the person disinherited; but the devises and legacies and other
testamentary dispositions shall be valid to such extent as will not impair the legitime.
Article 919. The following shall be sufficient causes for the disinheritance of children and descendants,
legitimate as well as illegitimate:
(1) When a child or descendant has been found guilty of an attempt against the life of the testator,
his or her spouse, descendants, or ascendants;
(2) When a child or descendant 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;
(3) When a child or descendant has been convicted of adultery or concubinage with the spouse of
the testator;
(4) When a child or descendant by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue influence causes the
testator to make a will or to change one already made;
(5) A refusal without justifiable cause to support the parent or ascendant who disinherits such child
or descendant;
(6) Maltreatment of the testator by word or deed, by the child or descendant;
(7) When a child or descendant leads a dishonorable or disgraceful life;
(8) Conviction of a crime which carries with it the penalty of civil interdiction.
Article 920. The following shall be sufficient causes for the disinheritance of parents or ascendants,
whether legitimate or illegitimate:
(1) When the parents have abandoned their children or induced their daughters to live a corrupt or
immoral life, or attempted against their virtue;
(2) When the parent or ascendant has been convicted of an attempt against the life of the testator,
his or her spouse, descendants, or ascendants;
(3) When the parent or ascendant has accused the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes
imprisonment for six years or more, if the accusation has been found to be false;
(4) When the parent or ascendant has been convicted of adultery or concubinage with the spouse of
the testator;
(5) When the parent or ascendant by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue influence causes the
testator to make a will or to change one already made;
(6) The loss of parental authority for causes specified in this Code;
(7) The refusal to support the children or descendants without justifiable cause;
(8) An attempt by one of the parents against the life of the other, unless there has been a
reconciliation between them.
Article 921. The following shall be sufficient causes for disinheriting a spouse:
(1) When the spouse has been convicted of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her
descendants, or ascendants;
(2) When the spouse has accused the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment
of six years or more, and the accusation has been found to be false;
(3) When the spouse by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue influence cause the testator to make
a will or to change one already made;
(4) When the spouse has given cause for legal separation;
(5) When the spouse has given grounds for the loss of parental authority;
(6) Unjustifiable refusal to support the children or the other spouse.
! 17
!
Article 922. A subsequent reconciliation between the offender and the offended person deprives the latter
of the right to disinherit, and renders ineffectual any disinheritance that may have been made.
Article 923. The children and descendants of the person disinherited shall take his or her place and shall
preserve the rights of compulsory heirs with respect to the legitime; but the disinherited parent shall not
have the usufruct or administration of the property which constitutes the legitime.
! 18
!
PRINCIPLES AFFECTING THE FREELY DISPOSABLE PORTION
XVI. INSTITUTION OF HEIRS
A. GENERAL
(1) Definition Article 840. Institution of heir is an act by virtue of which a testator designates in his will the person or persons who
are to succeed him in his property and transmissible rights and obligations.
(2) Requisites for Valid Article 785. The duration or efficacy of the designation of heirs, devisees or legatees, or the determination of the
Institution portions which they are to take, when referred to by name, cannot be left to the discretion of a third person.
Article 787. The testator may not make a testamentary disposition in such manner that another person has to
determine whether or not it is to be operative.
Article 841. A will shall be valid even though it should not contain an institution of an heir, or such institution
(3) Effect If Will should not comprise the entire estate, and even though the person so instituted should not accept the inheritance or
Institutes No Heir should be incapacitated to succeed.
In such cases the testamentary dispositions made in accordance with law shall be complied with and the remainder
of the estate shall pass to the legal heirs.
Article 842. One who has no compulsory heirs may dispose by will of all his estate or any part of it in favor of any
(4) Freedom of person having capacity to succeed.
Disposition
One who has compulsory heirs may dispose of his estate provided he does not contravene the provisions of this
Code with regard to the legitime of said heirs.
(5) Manner of Article 843. The testator shall designate the heir by his name and surname, and when there are two persons having
Designating an Heir the same names, he shall indicate some circumstance by which the instituted heir may be known.
Even though the testator may have omitted the name of the heir, should he designate him in such manner that there
can be no doubt as to who has been instituted, the institution shall be valid.
Article 844. An error in the name, surname, or circumstances of the heir shall not vitiate the institution when it is
possible, in any other manner, to know with certainty the person instituted.
If among persons having the same names and surnames, there is a similarity of circumstances in such a way that,
even with the use of other proof, the person instituted cannot be identified, none of them shall be an heir.
Article 789. When there is an imperfect description, or when no person or property exactly answers the description,
mistakes and omissions must be corrected, if the error appears from the context of the will or from extrinsic
evidence, excluding the oral declarations of the testator as to his intention; and when an uncertainty arises upon the
face of the will, as to the application of any of its provisions, the testator's intention is to be ascertained from the
words of the will, taking into consideration the circumstances under which it was made, excluding such oral
declarations.
(6) Disposition in Favor Article 845. Every disposition in favor of an unknown person shall be void, unless by some event or circumstance
of an Unknown his identity becomes certain. However, a disposition in favor of a definite class or group of persons shall be valid.
Person
(7) Disposition in Favor Article 845.

of a Definite Class Article 786. The testator may entrust to a third person the distribution of specific property or sums of money that he
may leave in general to specified classes or causes, and also the designation of the persons, institutions or
establishments to which such property or sums are to be given or applied.
(8) Equality of Heirs Article 846. Heirs instituted without designation of shares shall inherit in equal parts.
Article 848. If the testator should institute his brothers and sisters, and he has some of full blood and others of half
blood, the inheritance shall be distributed equally unless a different intention appears.
(9) Individuality of Article 847. When the testator institutes some heirs individually and others collectively as when he says, "I designate
Institution as my heirs A and B, and the children of C," those collectively designated shall be considered as individually
instituted, unless it clearly appears that the intention of the testator was otherwise.
(10) Simultaneity of Article 849. When the testator calls to the succession a person and his children they are all deemed to have been
Institution instituted simultaneously and not successively.
(11) Institution based on
a False Cause Article 850. The statement of a false cause for the institution of an heir shall be considered as not written, unless it
appears from the will that the testator would not have made such institution if he had known the falsity of such
cause.
(12) Shares in the Article 851. If the testator has instituted only one heir, and the institution is limited to an aliquot part of the
Institution inheritance, legal succession takes place with respect to the remainder of the estate.
The same rule applies if the testator has instituted several heirs, each being limited to an aliquot part, and all the
parts do not cover the whole inheritance.
Article 852. If it was the intention of the testator that the instituted heirs should become sole heirs to the whole
estate, or the whole free portion, as the case may be, and each of them has been instituted to an aliquot part of the
inheritance and their aliquot parts together do not cover the whole inheritance, or the whole free portion, each part
shall be increased proportionally.
Article 853. If each of the instituted heirs has been given an aliquot part of the inheritance, and the parts together
exceed the whole inheritance, or the whole free portion, as the case may be, each part shall be reduced
proportionally.
(13) Predecease of Heirs Article 856. A voluntary heir who dies before the testator transmits nothing to his heirs.
! 19
!
A compulsory heir who dies before the testator, a person incapacitated to succeed, and one who renounces the
inheritance, shall transmit no right to his own heirs except in cases expressly provided for in this Code.
B. KINDS OF INSTITUTION
1. Simple or Pure Article 777. The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent.
2. Conditional Article 871. The institution of an heir may be made conditionally, or for a certain purpose or cause.
a. Kinds Vda. De Kilayko v. Tengco
Article 872. The testator cannot impose any charge, condition, or substitution whatsoever
b. Inoperative upon the legitimes prescribed in this Code. Should he do so, the same shall be considered as
Conditions not imposed.
Article 873. Impossible conditions and those contrary to law or good customs shall be
considered as not imposed and shall in no manner prejudice the heir, even if the testator
should otherwise provide.
Article 874. An absolute condition not to contract a first or subsequent marriage shall be
considered as not written unless such condition has been imposed on the widow or widower
by the deceased spouse, or by the latter's ascendants or descendants.
Nevertheless, the right of usufruct, or an allowance or some personal prestation may be

devised or bequeathed to any person for the time during which he or she should remain
unmarried or in widowhood.
Article 1183. Impossible conditions, those contrary to good customs or public policy and
those prohibited by law shall annul the obligation which depends upon them. If the
obligation is divisible, that part thereof which is not affected by the impossible or unlawful
condition shall be valid.
The condition not to do an impossible thing shall be considered as not having been agreed
upon.
c. Disposition Article 875. Any disposition made upon the condition that the heir shall make some
Captatoria provision in his will in favor of the testator or of any other person shall be void.
d. Compliance Article 876. Any purely potestative condition imposed upon an heir must be fulfilled by him
as soon as he learns of the testator's death.
This rule shall not apply when the condition, already complied with, cannot be fulfilled
again.
Article 877. If the condition is casual or mixed, it shall be sufficient if it happen or be fulfilled
at any time before or after the death of the testator, unless he has provided otherwise.
Should it have existed or should it have been fulfilled at the time the will was executed and
the testator was unaware thereof, it shall be deemed as complied with.
If he had knowledge thereof, the condition shall be considered fulfilled only when it is of
such a nature that it can no longer exist or be complied with again.
e. Effect 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 879. If the potestative condition imposed upon the heir is negative, or consists in not
doing or not giving something, he shall comply by giving a security that he will not do or
give that which has been prohibited by the testator, and that in case of contravention he will
return whatever he may have received, together with its fruits and interests.
Article 880. If the heir be instituted under a suspensive condition or term, the estate shall be
placed under administration until the condition is fulfilled, or until it becomes certain that it
cannot be fulfilled, or until the arrival of the term.
The same shall be done if the heir does not give the security required in the preceding article.
Article 881. The appointment of the administrator of the estate mentioned in the preceding
article, as well as the manner of the administration and the rights and obligations of the
administrator shall be governed by the Rules of Court.
Article 884. Conditions imposed by the testator upon the heirs shall be governed by the rules
established for conditional obligations in all matters not provided for by this Section.
3. Institution with a Term a. Kinds Article 885. The designation of the day or time when the effects of the institution of an heir
shall commence or cease shall be valid.
! 20
!
In both cases, the legal heir shall be considered as called to the succession until the arrival of
the period or its expiration. But in the first case he shall not enter into possession of the
property until after having given sufficient security, with the intervention of the instituted
heir.
Article 878. A disposition with a suspensive term does not prevent the instituted heir from
b. Effect acquiring his rights and transmitting them to his heirs even before the arrival of the term.
Article 885. The designation of the day or time when the effects of the institution of an heir
shall commence or cease shall be valid.
In both cases, the legal heir shall be considered as called to the succession until the arrival of
the period or its expiration. But in the first case he shall not enter into possession of the
property until after having given sufficient security, with the intervention of the instituted
heir.
Article 880. If the heir be instituted under a suspensive condition or term, the estate shall be
placed under administration until the condition is fulfilled, or until it becomes certain that it
cannot be fulfilled, or until the arrival of the term.
The same shall be done if the heir does not give the security required in the preceding article.
Article 882. The statement of the object of the institution, or the application of the property left by the testator, or the
4. Modal Institution charge imposed by him, shall not be considered as a condition unless it appears that such was his intention.
That which has been left in this manner may be claimed at once provided that the instituted heir or his heirs give
security for compliance with the wishes of the testator and for the return of anything he or they may receive,
together with its fruits and interests, if he or they should disregard this obligation.
Article 883. When without the fault of the heir, an institution referred to in the preceding article cannot take effect in
the exact manner stated by the testator, it shall be complied with in a manner most analogous to and in conformity
with his wishes.
If the person interested in the condition should prevent its fulfillment, without the fault of the heir, the condition
shall be deemed to have been complied with.
! 21
!
XVII. SUBSTITUTION OF HEIRS
A. CONCEPT OF SUBSTITUTION
Article 857. Substitution is the appointment of another heir so that he may enter into the inheritance in default of the heir originally instituted.
B. KINDS OF SUBSTITUTION
Article 858. Substitution of heirs may be:
(1) Simple or common;
(2) Brief or compendious;
(3) Reciprocal; or
(4) Fideicommissary.
Article 859. The testator may designate one or more persons to substitute the heir or heirs instituted in case
(1) Simple or Common such heir or heirs should die before him, or should not wish, or should be incapacitated to accept the
inheritance.
A simple substitution, without a statement of the cases to which it refers, shall comprise the three
mentioned in the preceding paragraph, unless the testator has otherwise provided.
(2) Brief or Compendious Article 860. Two or more persons may be substituted for one; and one person for two or more heirs.
Article 861. If heirs instituted in unequal shares should be reciprocally substituted, the substitute shall
(3) Reciprocal acquire the share of the heir who dies, renounces, or is incapacitated, unless it clearly appears that the
intention of the testator was otherwise. If there are more than one substitute, they shall have the same
share in the substitution as in the institution.
(4) Fideicommissary Article 863. A fideicommissary substitution by virtue of which the fiduciary or first heir instituted is
entrusted with the obligation to preserve and to transmit to a second heir the whole or part of the
inheritance, shall be valid and shall take effect, provided such substitution does not go beyond one degree
from the heir originally instituted, and provided further, that the fiduciary or first heir and the second heir
are living at the time of the death of the testator.
Article 864. A fideicommissary substitution can never burden the legitime.
Article 865. Every fideicommissary substitution must be expressly made in order that it may be valid.
The fiduciary shall be obliged to deliver the inheritance to the second heir, without other deductions than
those which arise from legitimate expenses, credits and improvements, save in the case where the testator
has provided otherwise.
Article 866. The second heir shall acquire a right to the succession from the time of the testator's death,
even though he should die before the fiduciary. The right of the second heir shall pass to his heirs.
Article 867. The following shall not take effect:

(1) Fideicommissary substitutions which are not made in an express manner, either by giving them
this name, or imposing upon the fiduciary the absolute obligation to deliver the property to a
second heir;
(2) Provisions which contain a perpetual prohibition to alienate, and even a temporary one, beyond
the limit fixed in article 863;
(3) Those which impose upon the heir the charge of paying to various persons successively, beyond
the limit prescribed in article 863, a certain income or pension;
(4) Those which leave to a person the whole or part of the hereditary property in order that he may
apply or invest the same according to secret instructions communicated to him by the testator.
Article 868. The nullity of the fideicommissary substitution does not prejudice the validity of the
institution of the heirs first designated; the fideicommissary clause shall simply be considered as not
written.
Article 869. A provision whereby the testator leaves to a person the whole or part of the inheritance, and to
another the usufruct, shall be valid. If he gives the usufruct to various persons, not simultaneously, but
successively, the provisions of article 863 shall apply.
C. Time-limitation on Inalienability Article 870. The dispositions of the testator declaring all or part of the estate inalienable for more than
twenty years are void.
! 22
!
XVIII. LEGACIES AND DEVISES
Article 924. All things and rights which are within the commerce of man be bequeathed or devised.
Article 925. A testator may charge with legacies and devises not only his compulsory heirs but also the legatees and devisees.
The latter shall be liable for the charge only to the extent of the value of the legacy or the devise received by them. The compulsory heirs shall not
be liable for the charge beyond the amount of the free portion given them.
Article 926. When the testator charges one of the heirs with a legacy or devise, he alone shall be bound.
Should he not charge anyone in particular, all shall be liable in the same proportion in which they may inherit.
Article 927. If two or more heirs take possession of the estate, they shall be solidarily liable for the loss or destruction of a thing devised or
bequeathed, even though only one of them should have been negligent.
Article 928. The heir who is bound to deliver the legacy or devise shall be liable in case of eviction, if the thing is indeterminate and is indicated
only by its kind.
Article 929. If the testator, heir, or legatee owns only a part of, or an interest in the thing bequeathed, the legacy or devise shall be understood
limited to such part or interest, unless the testator expressly declares that he gives the thing in its entirety.
Article 930. The legacy or devise of a thing belonging to another person is void, if the testator erroneously believed that the thing pertained to him.
But if the thing bequeathed, though not belonging to the testator when he made the will, afterwards becomes his, by whatever title, the disposition
shall take effect.
Article 931. If the testator orders that a thing belonging to another be acquired in order that it be given to a legatee or devisee, the heir upon whom
the obligation is imposed or the estate must acquire it and give the same to the legatee or devisee; but if the owner of the thing refuses to alienate
the same, or demands an excessive price therefor, the heir or the estate shall only be obliged to give the just value of the thing.
Article 932. The legacy or devise of a thing which at the time of the execution of the will already belonged to the legatee or devisee shall be
ineffective, even though another person may have some interest therein.
If the testator expressly orders that the thing be freed from such interest or encumbrance, the legacy or devise shall be valid to that extent.
Article 933. If the thing bequeathed belonged to the legatee or devisee at the time of the execution of the will, the legacy or devise shall be without
effect, even though it may have subsequently alienated by him.
If the legatee or devisee acquires it gratuitously after such time, he can claim nothing by virtue of the legacy or devise; but if it has been acquired by
onerous title he can demand reimbursement from the heir or the estate.
Article 934. If the testator should bequeath or devise something pledged or mortgaged to secure a recoverable debt before the execution of the will,
the estate is obliged to pay the debt, unless the contrary intention appears.
The same rule applies when the thing is pledged or mortgaged after the execution of the will.
Any other charge, perpetual or temporary, with which the thing bequeathed is burdened, passes with it to the legatee or devisee.
Article 935. The legacy of a credit against a third person or of the remission or release of a debt of the legatee shall be effective only as regards that
part of the credit or debt existing at the time of the death of the testator.
In the first case, the estate shall comply with the legacy by assigning to the legatee all rights of action it may have against the debtor. In the second
case, by giving the legatee an acquittance, should he request one.
In both cases, the legacy shall comprise all interests on the credit or debt which may be due the testator at the time of his death.
Article 936. The legacy referred to in the preceding article shall lapse if the testator, after having made it, should bring an action against the debtor
for the payment of his debt, even if such payment should not have been effected at the time of his death.
The legacy to the debtor of the thing pledged by him is understood to discharge only the right of pledge.
Article 937. A generic legacy of release or remission of debts comprises those existing at the time of the execution of the will, but not subsequent
ones.
Article 938. A legacy or devise made to a creditor shall not be applied to his credit, unless the testator so expressly declares.
In the latter case, the creditor shall have the right to collect the excess, if any, of the credit or of the legacy or devise.
Article 939. If the testator orders the payment of what he believes he owes but does not in fact owe, the disposition shall be considered as not
written. If as regards a specified debt more than the amount thereof is ordered paid, the excess is not due, unless a contrary intention appears.
The foregoing provisions are without prejudice to the fulfillment of natural obligations.
Article 940. In alternative legacies or devises, the choice is presumed to be left to the heir upon whom the obligation to give the legacy or devise
may be imposed, or the executor or administrator of the estate if no particular heir is so obliged.
If the heir, legatee or devisee, who may have been given the choice, dies before making it, this right shall pass to the respective heirs.
Once made, the choice is irrevocable.
In the alternative legacies or devises, except as herein provided, the provisions of this Code regulating obligations of the same kind shall be
observed, save such modifications as may appear from the intention expressed by the testator.
! 23
!
Article 941. A legacy of generic personal property shall be valid even if there be no things of the same kind in the estate.
A devise of indeterminate real property shall be valid only if there be immovable property of its kind in the estate.
The right of choice shall belong to the executor or administrator who shall comply with the legacy by the delivery of a thing which is neither of
inferior nor of superior quality.
Article 942. Whenever the testator expressly leaves the right of choice to the heir, or to the legatee or devisee, the former may give or the latter may
choose whichever he may prefer.
Article 943. If the heir, legatee or devisee cannot make the choice, in case it has been granted him, his right shall pass to his heirs; but a choice once
made shall be irrevocable.
Article 944. A legacy for education lasts until the legatee is of age, or beyond the age of majority in order that the legatee may finish some
professional, vocational or general course, provided he pursues his course diligently.
A legacy for support lasts during the lifetime of the legatee, if the testator has not otherwise provided.
If the testator has not fixed the amount of such legacies, it shall be fixed in accordance with the social standing and the circumstances of the legatee
and the value of the estate.
If the testator or during his lifetime used to give the legatee a certain sum of money or other things by way of support, the same amount shall be
deemed bequeathed, unless it be markedly disproportionate to the value of the estate.
Article 945. If a periodical pension, or a certain annual, monthly, or weekly amount is bequeathed, the legatee may petition the court for the first
installment upon the death of the testator, and for the following ones which shall be due at the beginning of each period; such payment shall not be
returned, even though the legatee should die before the expiration of the period which has commenced.
Article 946. If the thing bequeathed should be subject to a usufruct, the legatee or devisee shall respect such right until it is legally extinguished.
Article 947. The legatee or devisee acquires a right to the pure and simple legacies or devises from the death of the testator, and transmits it to his
heirs.
Article 948. If the legacy or devise is of a specific and determinate thing pertaining to the testator, the legatee or devisee acquires the ownership
thereof upon the death of the testator, as well as any growing fruits, or unborn offspring of animals, or uncollected income; but not the income
which was due and unpaid before the latter's death.
From the moment of the testator's death, the thing bequeathed shall be at the risk of the legatee or devisee, who shall, therefore, bear its loss or
deterioration, and shall be benefited by its increase or improvement, without prejudice to the responsibility of the executor or administrator.
Article 949. If the bequest should not be of a specific and determinate thing, but is generic or of quantity, its fruits and interests from the time of the
death of the testator shall pertain to the legatee or devisee if the testator has expressly so ordered.
Article 950. If the estate should not be sufficient to cover all the legacies or devises, their payment shall be made in the following order:
(1) Remuneratory legacies or devises;
(2) Legacies or devises declared by the testator to be preferential;
(3) Legacies for support;
(4) Legacies for education;
(5) Legacies or devises of a specific, determinate thing which forms a part of the estate;
(6) All others pro rata.
Article 951. The thing bequeathed shall be delivered with all its accessories and accessories and in the condition in which it may be upon the death
of the testator.
Article 952. The heir, charged with a legacy or devise, or the executor or administrator of the estate, must deliver the very thing bequeathed if he is
able to do so and cannot discharge this obligation by paying its value.
Legacies of money must be paid in cash, even though the heir or the estate may not have any.
The expenses necessary for the delivery of the thing bequeathed shall be for the account of the heir or the estate, but without prejudice to the
legitime.
Article 953. The legatee or devisee cannot take possession of the thing bequeathed upon his own authority, but shall request its delivery and
possession of the heir charged with the legacy or devise, or of the executor or administrator of the estate should he be authorized by the court to
deliver it. (885a)
Article 954. The legatee or devisee cannot accept a part of the legacy or devise and repudiate the other, if the latter be onerous.
Should he die before having accepted the legacy or devise, leaving several heirs, some of the latter may accept and the others may repudiate the
share respectively belonging to them in the legacy or devise.
Article 955. The legatee or devisee of two legacies or devises, one of which is onerous, cannot renounce the onerous one and accept the other. If both
are onerous or gratuitous, he shall be free to accept or renounce both, or to renounce either. But if the testator intended that the two legacies or
devises should be inseparable from each other, the legatee or devisee must either accept or renounce both.
Any compulsory heir who is at the same time a legatee or devisee may waive the inheritance and accept the legacy or devise, or renounce the latter
and accept the former, or waive or accept both.
Article 956. If the legatee or devisee cannot or is unwilling to accept the legacy or devise, or if the legacy or devise for any reason should become
ineffective, it shall be merged into the mass of the estate, except in cases of substitution and of the right of accretion.
Article 957. The legacy or devise shall be without effect:

(1) If the testator transforms the thing bequeathed in such a manner that it does not retain either the form or the denomination it had;
(2) If the testator by any title or for any cause alienates the thing bequeathed or any part thereof, it being understood that in the latter case
the legacy or devise shall be without effect only with respect to the part thus alienated. If after the alienation the thing should again
! 24
!
belong to the testator, even if it be by reason of nullity of the contract, the legacy or devise shall not thereafter be valid, unless the
reacquisition shall have been effected by virtue of the exercise of the right of repurchase;
(3) If the thing bequeathed is totally lost during the lifetime of the testator, or after his death without the heir's fault. Nevertheless, the person
obliged to pay the legacy or devise shall be liable for eviction if the thing bequeathed should not have been determinate as to its kind, in
accordance with the provisions of article 928.
Article 958. A mistake as to the name of the thing bequeathed or devised, is of no consequence, if it is possible to identify the thing which the
testator intended to bequeath or devise.
Article 959. A disposition made in general terms in favor of the testator's relatives shall be understood to be in favor of those nearest in degree.
! 25
!
LEGAL OR INTESTATE SUCCESSION
XIX. GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. IN GENERAL
1. When does it take place?
2. Who are intestate heirs?
3. Order of and Share in the Testate Succession
B. RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION
XX. ORDER OF INTESTATE SUCCESSION

A. DESCENDING DIRECT LINE
1. Estate of a Legitimate Decedent
a. Illegitimate Children
2. Estate of an Illegitimate Decedent
a. Legitimate Children and Descendant
b. Illegitimate Children and Descendant
B. SURVIVING SPOUSE
C. ASCENDING DIRECT LINE
1. Legitimate Parents and Ascendant
2. Illegitimate Parents
D. COLLATERAL LINE
E. THE STATE
XIX. GENERAL PROVISIONS

A. IN GENERAL
1. When does it take place? Article 960. Legal or intestate succession takes place:
(1) If a person dies without a will, or with a void will, or one which has
subsequently lost its validity;
(2) When the will does not institute an heir to, or dispose of all the property
belonging to the testator. In such case, legal succession shall take place only
with respect to the property of which the testator has not disposed;
(3) If the suspensive condition attached to the institution of heir does not happen or
is not fulfilled, or if the heir dies before the testator, or repudiates the
inheritance, there being no substitution, and no right of accretion takes place;
(4) When the heir instituted is incapable of succeeding, except in cases provided in
this Code.
Article 961. In default of testamentary heirs, the law vests the inheritance, in
2. Who are intestate heirs? accordance with the rules hereinafter set forth, in the legitimate and illegitimate
relatives of the deceased, in the surviving spouse, and in the State.
Article 962. In every inheritance, the relative nearest in degree excludes the more
3. Order and share in the testate distant ones, saving the right of representation when it properly takes place.
succession
Relatives in the same degree shall inherit in equal shares, subject to the provisions of
article 1006 with respect to relatives of the full and half blood, and of article 987,
paragraph 2, concerning division between the paternal and maternal lines.
B. RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION
Article 970. Representation is a right created by fiction of law, by virtue of which the representative is raised to the place and the degree of the
person represented, and acquires the rights which the latter would have if he were living or if he could have inherited.
Article 971. The representative is called to the succession by the law and not by the person represented. The representative does not succeed the
person represented but the one whom the person represented would have succeeded.
Article 972. The right of representation takes place in the direct descending line, but never in the ascending.
In the collateral line, it takes place only in favor of the children of brothers or sisters, whether they be of the full or half blood.
Article 973. In order that representation may take place, it is necessary that the representative himself be capable of succeeding the decedent.
Article 974. Whenever there is succession by representation, the division of the estate shall be made per stirpes, in such manner that the
representative or representatives shall not inherit more than what the person they represent would inherit, if he were living or could inherit.
Article 975. When children of one or more brothers or sisters of the deceased survive, they shall inherit from the latter by representation, if they
survive with their uncles or aunts. But if they alone survive, they shall inherit in equal portions.
Article 976. A person may represent him whose inheritance he has renounced.
Article 977. Heirs who repudiate their share may not be represented.
Article 982. The grandchildren and other descendants shall inherit by right of representation, and if any one of them should have died, leaving
several heirs, the portion pertaining to him shall be divided among the latter in equal portions.
Article 902. The rights of illegitimate children set forth in the preceding articles are transmitted upon their death to their descendants, whether
legitimate or illegitimate.
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.
Article 1005. Should brothers and sisters survive together with nephews and nieces, who are the children of the descendant's brothers and sisters of
the full blood, the former shall inherit per capita, and the latter per stirpes. (948)
Article 1006. Should brother and sisters of the full blood survive together with brothers and sisters of the half blood, the former shall be entitled to a
share double that of the latter. (949)
Article 1007. In case brothers and sisters of the half blood, some on the father's and some on the mother's side, are the only survivors, all shall
! 26
!
inherit in equal shares without distinction as to the origin of the property. (950)
Article 1008. Children of brothers and sisters of the half blood shall succeed per capita or per stirpes, in accordance with the rules laid down for
brothers and sisters of the full blood.
XX. ORDER OF INTESTATE SUCCESSION
1. Estate of a Legitimate Decedent
a. Illegitimate Children Article 983. If illegitimate children survive with legitimate children, the shares of the
A. DESCENDING former shall be in the proportions prescribed by article 895.
DIRECT LINE
Article 988. In the absence of legitimate descendants or ascendants, the illegitimate
children shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased.
Article 989. If, together with illegitimate children, there should survive descendants of
another illegitimate child who is dead, the former shall succeed in their own right and
the latter by right of representation.
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.
2. Estate of an Illegitimate Decedent
a. Legitimate Children Article 903. The legitime of the parents who have an illegitimate child, when such
and Descendant child leaves neither legitimate descendants, nor a surviving spouse, nor illegitimate
children, is one-half of the hereditary estate of such illegitimate child. If only
legitimate or illegitimate children are left, the parents are not entitled to any legitime
whatsoever. If only the widow or widower survives with parents of the illegitimate
child, the legitime of the parents is one-fourth of the hereditary estate of the child, and
that of the surviving spouse also one-fourth of the estate.
Article 987. In default of the father and mother, the ascendants nearest in degree shall
inherit.
Should there be more than one of equal degree belonging to the same line they shall
divide the inheritance per capita; should they be of different lines but of equal degree,
one-half shall go to the paternal and the other half to the maternal ascendants. In each
line the division shall be made per capita.
SUBSECTION 3. Illegitimate Children
Article 988. In the absence of legitimate descendants or ascendants, the illegitimate

children shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased.
Article 989. If, together with illegitimate children, there should survive descendants of
another illegitimate child who is dead, the former shall succeed in their own right and
the latter by right of representation.
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
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 993. If an illegitimate child should die without issue, either legitimate or
illegitimate, his father or mother shall succeed to his entire estate; and if the child's
filiation is duly proved as to both parents, who are both living, they shall inherit from
him share and share alike.
Article 994. In default of the father or mother, an illegitimate child shall be succeeded
by his or her surviving spouse who shall be entitled to the entire estate.
b. Illegitimate Children Article 990. The hereditary rights granted by the two preceding articles to illegitimate
and Descendant children shall be transmitted upon their death to their descendants, who shall inherit
If the widow or widower should survive with brothers and sisters, nephews and
nieces, she or he shall inherit one-half of the estate, and the latter the other half.
Article 995. In the absence of legitimate descendants and ascendants, and illegitimate children and their descendants,
! 27
!
whether legitimate or illegitimate, the surviving spouse shall inherit the entire estate, without prejudice to the rights of
B. SURVIVING brothers and sisters, nephews and nieces, should there be any, under article 1001.
SPOUSE
Article 996. If a widow or widower and legitimate children or descendants are left, the surviving spouse has in the
succession the same share as that of each of the children.
Article 997. When the widow or widower survives with legitimate parents or ascendants, the surviving spouse shall be
entitled to one-half of the estate, and the legitimate parents or ascendants to the other half.
Article 998. If a widow or widower survives with illegitimate children, such widow or widower shall be entitled to one-half
of the inheritance, and the illegitimate children or their descendants, whether legitimate or illegitimate, to the other half.
Article 999. When the widow or widower survives with legitimate children or their descendants and illegitimate children
or their descendants, whether legitimate or illegitimate, such widow or widower shall be entitled to the same share as that
of a legitimate child.
Article 1000. If legitimate ascendants, the surviving spouse, and illegitimate children are left, the ascendants shall be
entitled to one-half of the inheritance, and the other half shall be divided between the surviving spouse and the illegitimate
children so that such widow or widower shall have one-fourth of the estate, and the illegitimate children the other fourth.
Article 1001. Should brothers and sisters or their children survive with the widow or widower, the latter shall be entitled to
one-half of the inheritance and the brothers and sisters or their children to the other half.
Article 1002. In case of a legal separation, if the surviving spouse gave cause for the separation, he or she shall not have any
of the rights granted in the preceding articles.
C. ASCENDING 1. Legitimate Parent and Article 985. In default of legitimate children and descendants of the deceased, his
DIRECT LINE Ascendant parents and ascendants shall inherit from him, to the exclusion of collateral relatives.
Article 986. The father and mother, if living, shall inherit in equal shares.
Should one only of them survive, he or she shall succeed to the entire estate of the
child.
Article 987. In default of the father and mother, the ascendants nearest in degree shall
inherit.
Should there be more than one of equal degree belonging to the same line they shall
divide the inheritance per capita; should they be of different lines but of equal degree,
one-half shall go to the paternal and the other half to the maternal ascendants. In each
line the division shall be made per capita.
2. Illegitimate Parents Article 993. If an illegitimate child should die without issue, either legitimate or
illegitimate, his father or mother shall succeed to his entire estate; and if the child's
filiation is duly proved as to both parents, who are both living, they shall inherit from
him share and share alike.
Article 1003. If there are no descendants, ascendants, illegitimate children, or a surviving spouse, the collateral relatives
D. COLLATERAL shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased in accordance with the following articles.
LINE
Article 1004. Should the only survivors be brothers and sisters of the full blood, they shall inherit in equal shares.
Article 1005. Should brothers and sisters survive together with nephews and nieces, who are the children of the
descendant's brothers and sisters of the full blood, the former shall inherit per capita, and the latter per stirpes.
Article 1006. Should brother and sisters of the full blood survive together with brothers and sisters of the half blood, the
former shall be entitled to a share double that of the latter.
Article 1007. In case brothers and sisters of the half blood, some on the father's and some on the mother's side, are the only
survivors, all shall inherit in equal shares without distinction as to the origin of the property.
Article 1008. Children of brothers and sisters of the half blood shall succeed per capita or per stirpes, in accordance with the
rules laid down for brothers and sisters of the full blood.
Article 1009. Should there be neither brothers nor sisters nor children of brothers or sisters, the other collateral relatives
shall succeed to the estate.
The latter shall succeed without distinction of lines or preference among them by reason of relationship by the whole
blood.
Article 1010. The right to inherit ab intestato shall not extend beyond the fifth degree of relationship in the collateral line.
E. THE STATE Article 1011. In default of persons entitled to succeed in accordance with the provisions of the preceding Sections, the State
shall inherit the whole estate.
Article 1012. In order that the State may take possession of the property mentioned in the preceding article, the pertinent
provisions of the Rules of Court must be observed.
Article 1013. After the payment of debts and charges, the personal property shall be assigned to the municipality or city
where the deceased last resided in the Philippines, and the real estate to the municipalities or cities, respectively, in which
the same is situated.
If the deceased never resided in the Philippines, the whole estate shall be assigned to the respective municipalities or cities
where the same is located.
Such estate shall be for the benefit of public schools, and public charitable institutions and centers, in such municipalities or
! 28
!
cities. The court shall distribute the estate as the respective needs of each beneficiary may warrant.
The court, at the instance of an interested party, or on its own motion, may order the establishment of a permanent trust, so
that only the income from the property shall be used.
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.
! 29
!
PROVISIONS COMMON TO TESTATE AND INTESTATE SUCCESSION
XXI. RIGHT OF ACCRETION
A. CONCEPT
B. IN LEGAL SUCCESSION
C. COMPULSORY SUCCESSION
D. TESTAMENTARY
XXII. PARTITION AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE ESTATE

A. PARTITION
B. EFFECTS OF PARTITION
C. RESCISSION AND NULLITY OF PARTITION
XXIII. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS

Art. 1058-1069
Rule 87, Sec. 1, ROC
Rule 86, Sec. 5, ROC
XXI. RIGHT OF ACCRETION
Article 1015. Accretion is a right by virtue of which, when two or more persons are called to the same
A. Concept inheritance, devise or legacy, the part assigned to the one who renounces or cannot receive his share, or who
died before the testator, is added or incorporated to that of his co-heirs, co-devisees, or co-legatees.
Article 1016. In order that the right of accretion may take place in a testamentary succession, it shall be
necessary:
(1) That two or more persons be called to the same inheritance, or to the same portion thereof, pro
indiviso; and
(2) That one of the persons thus called die before the testator, or renounce the inheritance, or be
incapacitated to receive it.
Article 1017. The words "one-half for each" or "in equal shares" or any others which, though designating an
aliquot part, do not identify it by such description as shall make each heir the exclusive owner of
determinate property, shall not exclude the right of accretion.
In case of money or fungible goods, if the share of each heir is not earmarked, there shall be a right of
accretion.
Article 1018. In legal succession the share of the person who repudiates the inheritance shall always accrue to
B. In Legal Succession his co-heirs.
Article 1021. Among the compulsory heirs the right of accretion shall take place only when the free portion is
C. Compulsory Succession left to two or more of them, or to any one of them and to a stranger.
Should the part repudiated be the legitime, the other co-heirs shall succeed to it in their own right, and not
by the right of accretion.
Article 1022. In testamentary succession, when the right of accretion does not take place, the vacant portion
D. Testamentary of the instituted heirs, if no substitute has been designated, shall pass to the legal heirs of the testator, who
shall receive it with the same charges and obligations.
Article 1023. Accretion shall also take place among devisees, legatees and usufructuaries under the same
conditions established for heirs
XXII. PARTITION AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE ESTATE
A. Partition Article 1078. Where there are two or more heirs, the whole estate of the decedent is, before its partition,
owned in common by such heirs, subject to the payment of debts of the deceased.
Article 1079. Partition, in general, is the separation, division and assignment of a thing held in common
among those to whom it may belong. The thing itself may be divided, or its value.
Article 1080. Should a person make partition of his estate by an act inter vivos, or by will, such partition shall
be respected, insofar as it does not prejudice the legitime of the compulsory heirs.
A parent who, in the interest of his or her family, desires to keep any agricultural, industrial, or
manufacturing enterprise intact, may avail himself of the right granted him in this article, by ordering that
the legitime of the other children to whom the property is not assigned, be paid in cash.
Article 1081. A person may, by an act inter vivos or mortis causa, intrust the mere power to make the
partition after his death to any person who is not one of the co-heirs.
The provisions of this and of the preceding article shall be observed even should there be among the co-heirs
a minor or a person subject to guardianship; but the mandatary, in such case, shall make an inventory of the
property of the estate, after notifying the co-heirs, the creditors, and the legatees or devisees.
Article 1082. Every act which is intended to put an end to indivision among co-heirs and legatees or devisees
is deemed to be a partition, although it should purport to be a sale, and exchange, a compromise, or any
other transaction.
Article 1083. Every co-heir has a right to demand the division of the estate unless the testator should have
expressly forbidden its partition, in which case the period of indivision shall not exceed twenty years as
provided in article 494. This power of the testator to prohibit division applies to the legitime.
Even though forbidden by the testator, the co-ownership terminates when any of the causes for which
partnership is dissolved takes place, or when the court finds for compelling reasons that division should be
ordered, upon petition of one of the co-heirs.
Article 1084. Voluntary heirs upon whom some condition has been imposed cannot demand a partition until
the condition has been fulfilled; but the other co-heirs may demand it by giving sufficient security for the
! 30
!
rights which the former may have in case the condition should be complied with, and until it is known that
the condition has not been fulfilled or can never be complied with, the partition shall be understood to be
provisional.
Article 1085. In the partition of the estate, equality shall be observed as far as possible, dividing the property
into lots, or assigning to each of the co-heirs things of the same nature, quality and kind.
Article 1086. Should a thing be indivisible, or would be much impaired by its being divided, it may be
adjudicated to one of the heirs, provided he shall pay the others the excess in cash.
Nevertheless, if any of the heirs should demand that the thing be sold at public auction and that strangers be
allowed to bid, this must be done.
Article 1087. In the partition the co-heirs shall reimburse one another for the income and fruits which each
one of them may have received from any property of the estate, for any useful and necessary expenses made
upon such property, and for any damage thereto through malice or neglect.
Article 1088. Should any of the heirs sell his hereditary rights to a stranger before the partition, any or all of
the co-heirs may be subrogated to the rights of the purchaser by reimbursing him for the price of the sale,
provided they do so within the period of one month from the time they were notified in writing of the sale
by the vendor.
Article 1089. The titles of acquisition or ownership of each property shall be delivered to the co-heir to whom
said property has been adjudicated.
Article 1090. When the title comprises two or more pieces of land which have been assigned to two or more
co-heirs, or when it covers one piece of land which has been divided between two or more co-heirs, the title
shall be delivered to the one having the largest interest, and authentic copies of the title shall be furnished to
the other co-heirs at the expense of the estate. If the interest of each co-heir should be the same, the oldest
shall have the title.
B. Effects Of Partition Article 1091. A partition legally made confers upon each heir the exclusive ownership of the property
adjudicated to him.
Article 1092. After the partition has been made, the co-heirs shall be reciprocally bound to warrant the title
to, and the quality of, each property adjudicated.
Article 1093. The reciprocal obligation of warranty referred to in the preceding article shall be proportionate
to the respective hereditary shares of the co-heirs, but if any one of them should be insolvent, the other co-
heirs shall be liable for his part in the same proportion, deducting the part corresponding to the one who
should be indemnified.
Those who pay for the insolvent heir shall have a right of action against him for reimbursement, should his
financial condition improve.
Article 1094. An action to enforce the warranty among heirs must be brought within ten years from the date
the right of action accrues.
Article 1095. If a credit should be assigned as collectible, the co-heirs shall not be liable for the subsequent
insolvency of the debtor of the estate, but only for his insolvency at the time the partition is made.
The warranty of the solvency of the debtor can only be enforced during the five years following the partition.
Co-heirs do not warrant bad debts, if so known to, and accepted by, the distributee. But if such debts are not
assigned to a co-heir, and should be collected, in whole or in part, the amount collected shall be distributed
proportionately among the heirs.
Article 1096. The obligation of warranty among co-heirs shall cease in the following cases:
(1) When the testator himself has made the partition, unless it appears, or it may be reasonably
presumed, that his intention was otherwise, but the legitime shall always remain unimpaired;
(2) When it has been so expressly stipulated in the agreement of partition, unless there has been bad
faith;
(3) When the eviction is due to a cause subsequent to the partition, or has been caused by the fault of
the distributee of the property.
Article 1097. A partition may be rescinded or annulled for the same causes as contracts.
C. Rescission And Nullity Of
Partition Article 1098. A partition, judicial or extra-judicial, may also be rescinded on account of lesion, when any one
of the co-heirs received things whose value is less, by at least one-fourth, than the share to which he is
entitled, considering the value of the things at the time they were adjudicated.
Article 1099. The partition made by the testator cannot be impugned on the ground of lesion, except when
the legitime of the compulsory heirs is thereby prejudiced, or when it appears or may reasonably be
presumed, that the intention of the testator was otherwise.
Article 1100. The action for rescission on account of lesion shall prescribe after four years from the time the
partition was made.
Article 1101. The heir who is sued shall have the option of indemnifying the plaintiff for the loss, or
consenting to a new partition.
Indemnity may be made by payment in cash or by the delivery of a thing of the same kind and quality as
that awarded to the plaintiff.
If a new partition is made, it shall affect neither those who have not been prejudiced nor those have not
! 31
!
received more than their just share.
Article 1102. An heir who has alienated the whole or a considerable part of the real property adjudicated to
him cannot maintain an action for rescission on the ground of lesion, but he shall have a right to be
indemnified in cash.
Article 1103. The omission of one or more objects or securities of the inheritance shall not cause the rescission
of the partition on the ground of lesion, but the partition shall be completed by the distribution of the objects
or securities which have been omitted.
Article 1104. A partition made with preterition of any of the compulsory heirs shall not be rescinded, unless
it be proved that there was bad faith or fraud on the part of the other persons interested; but the latter shall
be proportionately obliged to pay to the person omitted the share which belongs to him.
Article 1105. A partition which includes a person believed to be an heir, but who is not, shall be void only
with respect to such person.
XXIII. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS
Article 1058. All matters relating to the appointment, powers and duties of executors and administrators and concerning the administration of
estates of deceased persons shall be governed by the Rules of Court.
Article 1059. If the assets of the estate of a decedent which can be applied to the payment of debts are not sufficient for that purpose, the provisions
of articles 2239 to 2251 on Preference of Credits shall be observed, provided that the expenses referred to in article 2244, No. 8, shall be those
involved in the administration of the decedent's estate.
Article 1060. A corporation or association authorized to conduct the business of a trust company in the Philippines may be appointed as an
executor, administrator, guardian of an estate, or trustee, in like manner as an individual; but it shall not be appointed guardian of the person of a
ward.
! 32
URIBE LECTURES CIVIL LAW REVIEW: Succession DEFANTE | DADO | LIBUNAO
!
Favorite Bar Questions:
! Subjects
! Governing Law
o First question to be asked is “what is the nationality/citizenship of the decedent?”
! Legitime
! Rights of the heirs depend on the national law of the decedent
NATURE
! Modes of acquisition, not necessarily ownership, it can be other rights.
! Death is a requirement.
o Exception: but in the PH, we have “presumptive legitime”.
! Inheritance – inheritance of the decedent, not inheritance of the heirs
o Inheritance belongs to decedent
o Includes rights, property and obligations
GOVERNING LAW
! What law shall govern?
o It depends on the subject matter.
o For example:
An Australian living in the Philippines acquired shares of stock worth P10 million in food manufacturing companies. He died in Manila,
leaving a legal wife and a child in Australia and a live-in partner with whom he had two children in Manila. He also left a will, done
according to Philippine laws, leaving all his properties to his live-in partner and their children. What law will govern the validity of the
disposition in the will? (2011)
(A) Australia law since his legal wife and legitimate child are Australians and domiciled in Australia.
(B) The decedent’s national law governs Australian law since the intrinsic validity of the provisions of a will.
(C) Philippine law since the decedent died in Manila and he executed his will according to such law.
(D) Philippine law since the decedent’s properties are in the Philippines.
Uribe: The law provides that the intrinsic validity, including the capacity to succeed, is governed by the national law of the decedent under
Article 16, par. 2 in relation to Article 1039. Dahil living partner lang niya ito, then the children, under the PH law, are illegitimate children.
Can they inherit? It depends on the national law of Australia, because the decedent is a citizen of Australia.
In answering a question like this, do not give us an answer like, “this shall be governed by the national law of decedent”. Una, it is just a
conclusion, there is no basis. Ang basis dun is, under Article 16, the national law of decedent shall govern the intrinsic validity of wills, in
relation to Article 1039. However, such is still not sufficient. I-apply mo yung law sa facts. Ang ultimate conclusion mo is “applicable law is
the law of Australia, because the decedent in the problem is a citizen of Australia.” Dapat umabot doon ang pag-discuss.
Also, do not just cite Article 16 in its entirety, without identifying the problem because Article 16 [par. 2] has are 3 aspects – (i) order of
succession, (ii) amount of successional rights and (iii) intrinsic validity. Kung yung problem is about ‘intrinsic validity’, hindi problema ang
order of succession or amount of successional rights. Pero ang labanan is magkano, ang relevant the fact ay ang ‘amount of successional
rights’. You can cite the entire provision but make sure to emphasize the applicable part.
(a) irrelevant – it is not about the heirs, it is about the decedent.

(c) irrelevant – almost irrelevant, because in this country, ang relevance lang nyan ay yung sa venue, otherwise hindi siya relevant sa
succession; where he died is also irrelevant because incidental lang yun, like nagbabakasyon ditto.
! Capacity to succeed shall be governed by the national law of the person who died – Article 1039
! Application:
Juan is a Filipino citizen residing in Tokyo, Japan. State what laws govern: (1998)
(A) His successional rights as regards his deceased Filipino father's property in Texas, U.S.A.
(B) The extrinsic validity of the last will and testament which Juan executed while sojourning in Switzerland.
(C) The intrinsic validity of said will.
UP Law Center:
(A) By way of exception to the general rule of lex rei sitae prescribed by the first paragraph of Art. 16. Civil Code, a person's
successional rights are governed by the national law of the decedent (2nd par. Art. 16). Since Juan's deceased father was a Filipino
citizen, Philippine law governs Juan's successional rights.
a. Alternative: Juan's successional rights are governed by Philippine law, pursuant to Article 1039 and the second
paragraph of Article 16, both of the Civil Code. Article 1039, Civil Code, provides that capacity to succeed shall be
governed by the "law of the nation" of the decedent, i.e.. his national law. Article 16 provides in paragraph two that the
amount of successional rights, order of succession, and intrinsic validity of testamentary succession shall be governed by
the "national law" of the decedent who is identified as a Filipino in the present problem.
(B) The extrinsic validity of Juan's will is governed by (a) Swiss law, it being the law where the will was made (Art. 17. 1st par. Civil
Code), or (b) Philippine law, by implication from the provisions of Art. 816, Civil Code, which allows even an alien who is abroad to
make a will in conformity with our Civil Code.
(C) The intrinsic validity of his will is governed by Philippine law, it being his national law. (Art. 16, Civil Code)
Uribe:
(A) Take note; is it PH law because Juan is a Filipino? The answer is wrong. It is PH law because the decedent is a Filipino. It is not
about Juan. It is about his deceased Filipino father. It does not matter if the property is situated in another country. Itong
nationality principle under Article 16, is an exception to lex rei sitae (law where the property is located)
(B) National law of the decedent – PH law. (note: the answer should be “because he is a Filipino”, not “if he is a Filipino”)
If a will is executed by a testator who was born a Filipino citizen but became naturalized Japanese citizen at the time of his death, what law
will govern its testamentary provisions if the will is executed in China and the property being disposed is located in Indonesia? (2012)
a) Chinese law
! 1
!
b) Philippine law
c) Indonesia law
d) Japanese law
Uribe: Take note, “testamentary provisions” ‘yan so intrinsic validity. Okay, born Filipino but became Japanese, what law shall govern?
When it comes to order of succession, amount of successional rights and intrinsic validity, lahat ito at the time of the death of the decedent
kasi minsan ang citizenship nagbabago-bago. But dahil nagging Japanese na siya at the time of his death, Japanese Law.
Juan is a Filipino citizen residing in Tokyo, Japan. State what laws govern: (1998)
(A) The extrinsic validity of the last will and testament which Juan executed while sojourning in Switzerland.
UP Law Center:
(A) The extrinsic validity of Juan's will is governed by (a) Swiss law, it being the law where the will was made (Art. 17. 1st par. Civil
Code), or (b) Philippine law, by implication from the provisions of Art. 816, Civil Code, which allows even an alien who is abroad to
make a will in conformity with our Civil Code.
Uribe: Now, we are into the form of the will. Malinaw na extrinsic validty lang ang tinatanong. As far as wills executed by Filipinos, ang
pinaka-malinaw, expressly provided by law that can be used as a basis is – the law where the will is executed (lex loci celebrationis) under
Article 17. In other words, pwede isagot dito, is the law of Switzerland. But take note the examiner is asking for “what laws?” Marami siyang
hinihinging examples, parang ganito, what laws govern? What if it was not executed in accordance with Swiss Law, will the will be void?
This will may still be valid even if it was not executed according to law of the place where it was executed.
! It could still be executed in accordance with PH law because the Testator is a Filipino. Ano basis nito, no express provision. The
basis for the application of PH law for the will executed abroad by a Filipino is ‘by analogy’ of Article 816, which pertains to aliens
executed wills abroad. Aliens, under such provision, are given 3 options: (i) national law; (ii) law where he resides, and (iii) PH law.
Kung ang alien are given by our law the right to execute wills in accordance with their national laws, why not Filipinos?
! Kaya ang sagot dito ay dalawa: it shall be governed by (i) Swiss law – because it was executed in Switzerland, or by (ii) PH law.
! “OR” lang hindi “AND”.
Atty. BUKO, a Filipino, executed a will while he was in Spain. The attestation clause of the said will does not contain Buko’s signature. It is
valid under Spanish law. At its probate in Manila, it is being opposed on the ground that the attestation clause does not contain BUKO’s
signature. Is the opposition correct? Choose the best answer.
a) Yes, because it is a fatal defect.
b) Yes, the will is not valid under Philippine law.
c) No, attestation clause is not an act of the testator.
d) No, the governing law is Spanish law.
UP Law Center: Has two answers: (c) and (d) because the facts do not state the Law observed by the testator in executing his will. He could
have observed Spanish Law or Philippine Law (see comment of Tolentino to Art. 815 NCC in 3Tolentino117, 1992). If he observed Spanish
Law, the opposition is not correct because the will is valid under Spanish Law, hence choice (d) is the correct answer. If he observed
Philippine Law, the opposition is still not correct because Philippine Law does not require the testator to sign the Attestation Clause of his
will, said clause not being his act. In such case, choice (c) is the correct answer.
Uribe: The fact that the attestation clause does not contain Buko’s signature goes to the intrinsic validity. So the answer here is (d).
A, a Filipino, executed a will in Kuwait while there as a contract worker. Assume that under the laws of Kuwait, it is enough that the
testator affix his signature to the presence of two witnesses and that the will need not be acknowledged before a notary public. May the will
be probated in the Philippines?
UP Law Center: Yes. Under Articles 815 and 17 of the Civil Code, the formality of the execution of a will is governed by the law of the place
of execution. If the will was executed with the formalities prescribed by the laws of Kuwait and valid there as such, the will is valid and may
be probated in the Philippines.
Uribe: Kung ang tanong ay probate, do not go to intrinsic validity. Ang tanong lang ay extrinsic validity in relation to the formalities of the
will. So, yes the will may be probated as long as this will is in accordance with the law of Kuwait – where the will was executed under Article
17. Here, it cannot be under PH law because two witnesses lang, dapat 3 witnesses under PH law but our law allows wills executed in
accordance with the law of the place of execution. Okay na yun sa PH law, it does not have to be consistent with our own laws. Also ang
tanong dito ay “MAY”, so hindi ka pwede sumagot ng “it depends”. It is answerable by yes or no. I will not encourage you to have 3
paragraphs for this question.
If a will is executed by a testator who is a Filipino citizen,

a) What law will govern if the will is executed in the Philippines?
b) What law will govern if the will is executed in another country? Explain your answers.
UP Law Center:
a) If the testator who is a Filipino citizen executes his will in the Philippines, Philippine law will govern the formalities.
b) If said Filipino testator executes his will in another country, the law of the country where he maybe or Philippine law will govern
the formalities. (Article 815, Civil Code}
Uribe: “What law shall govern?”- If this is the question, always think of intrinsic AND extrinsic kasi hindi sinabi kung alin sa dalawa. This is
general. The answer should pertain to both. Unlike in this case, it is asking for ‘execution’ by a Filipino citizen, which pertains to extrinsic.
a) It shall be governed by PH law because the will was executed here in the PH under Article 17, and of course, because he is a
Filipino.
b) It shall be governed by the country where the will was executed (lex loci celebrationis under Article 17) or PH law, as I explained,
by analogy under Article 816.
Pero pag foreigner, let us say, Japanese.
! What law will govern the will executed in the PH?
o Intrinsic: It does not matter where the will was executed, because the governing law will always be the national law of
the testator.
o Extrinsic: Article 817 in relation to Article 17. He can execute the will in accordance with his (i) national law, (ii) PH law
(consistent with lex loci celebrationis)
! What law will govern the will executed in US? ! Article 816 in relation to Article 817.
o 4 possible laws (OR; any of the law in order to be extrinsically valid)
! Under Article 816 – 3 laws
• National law
• Domiciliary law
! 2
!
• PH law
! Under Article 817 – 1 law
• Where the will was executed
Pedro (Filipino) and his wife Jane (American) executed a joint will in Canada, where such joint will is valid. In case the joint will is probated
in Japan, what law will govern the formalities of the joint will?
a) American law
b) Philippine law
c) Canadian law (UP Law Center’s answer)
d) Japanese law (Uribe’s answer)
Uribe: The best answer here is ‘Japanese Law’.
The will of a Filipino executed in a foreign country ---

a) Cannot be probated in the Philippines;
b) May be probated in the Philippines provided that properties in the estate are located in the Philippines;
c) Cannot be probated before the death of the testator;
d) May be probated in the Philippines provided it was executed in accordance with the laws of the place where the
will was executed.
Uribe:
a) Mali ito.
b) That's the premise of the probate here in the PH, kaya itong sagot na ito hindi maganda.
c) In this country, pwede ang ante-mortem probate.
d) Best answer – lex loci celebrationis.
Possible Laws (execution)

! Wills executed abroad by an alien
o Lex loci celebrationis – Article 17
o Domiciliary law –
o National law
o PH law
! Wills executed in the PH by an alien
o National law
o PH law
On December 1, 2000, Dr. Juanito Fuentes executed a holographic will, wherein he gave nothing to his recognized illegitimate son, Jay. Dr.
Fuentes left for the United States, passed the New York medical licensure examinations, resided therein, and became a naturalized
American citizen. He died in New York in 2007. The laws of New York do not recognize holographic wills or compulsory heirs.
(A) Can the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes be admitted to probate in the Philippines? Why or why not?
(B) Assuming that the will is probated in the Philippines, can Jay validly insist that he be given his legitime? Why or why not?
UP Law Center:
(A) Yes, the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes may be admitted to probate in the Philippines because there is no public policy violated by
such probate. The only issue at probate is the due execution of the will which includes the formal validity of the will. As regards
formal validity, the only issue the court will resolve at probate is whether or not the will was executed in accordance with the form
prescribed by the law observed by the testator in the execution of his will. For purposes of probate in the Philippines, an alien
testator may observe the law of the place where the will was executed (Art 17, NCC), or the formalities of the law of the place
where he resides, or according to the formalities of the law of his own country, or in accordance with the Philippine Civil Code (Art.
816, NCC). Since Dr. Fuentes executed his will in accordance with the Philippine law, the Philippine court shall apply the New
Civil Code in determining the formal validity of the holographic will. The subsequent change in the citizenship of Dr. Fuentes did
not affect the law governing the validity of his will. Under the new Civil Code, which was the law used by Dr. Fuentes, the law
enforced at the time of execution of the will shall govern the formal validity of the will (Art. 795, NCC).
(B) No, Jay cannot insist because under New York law he is not a compulsory heir entitled to a legitime. The national law of the
testator determines who his heirs are, the order that they succeed, how much their successional rights are, and whether or not a
testamentary disposition in his will is valid (Art 16, NCC). Since, Dr. Fuentes was a US citizen, the laws of the New York
determines who his heirs are. And since the New York law does not recognize the concept of compulsory heirs, Jay is not a
compulsory heir of Dr. Fuentes entitled to a legitime.
Uribe: Although hindi niya sinabi ang nationality ni Dr. Fuentes at the time of the execution, sinabi lang niya na he thereafter became
American citizen, you can presume na Filipino siya at the time of execution of the will, and sa pagkamatay niya, American citizen siya. So
can the will be probated? Again, this pertains to the extrinsic validity of the will.
(A) The answer is YES, because the will was executed here in PH. Remember, it shall be the law of the place of execution. And under
the PH law, under Article 817, the will is written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator himself, then it is a valid
holographic will. Yun lang ang requirements.
(B) But pagdating dito sa pangalawa, the answer is NO because as far as legitimes are concern it goes into the successional rights of
the heirs. What law shall govern? New York or American law. And the law of New York does not recognize compulsory heirs
therefore, no one can validly claim that he is entitled to legitime. Do no ever claim that he was deprived of his legitime. To be
deprived means he is entitled. Pero kung ang batas does not provide, he is not deprived.
Alex was born a Filipino but was a naturalized Canadian citizen at the time of his death on December 25, 1998. He left behind a last will and
testament in which he bequeathed all his properties, real and personal, in the Philippines to his acknowledged illegitimate Filipina daughter
and nothing to his two legitimate Filipino sons. The sons sought the annulment of the last will and testament on the ground that it deprived
them of their legitimes but the daughter was able to prove that there were no compulsory heirs or legitimes under Canadian law. Who should
prevail? Why?
UP Law Center: The daughter should prevail because Article 16 of the New Civil Code provides that intestate and testamentary succession
shall be governed by the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration.
! 3
!
Uribe: The daughter because it is the national law of the decedent.
An English man who had resided in the PH for a long time, executed a will in France, disposing his real and personal properties in the PH.
What law governs the validity of his will?
Uribe: Again, very general – ‘validity of his will’. As to intrinsic validity, it shall be governed by the law of England, because that is his
national law. But as far as extrinsic validity is concern, since the will was executed in France, then it shall be governed by English law,
French law or PH law. Any of them.
X, a Spanish citizen, residing in Los Angeles executed a will in Tokyo, Japan.

(A) May such will be probated in the PH?
(B) May his estate be distributed in accordance with the provisions of the said will?
Uribe:
(A) Yes, kasi “may” lang naman. Yes, if the will was executed in accordance with the law of (i) Spain, (ii) California, or (iii) Japan, or
(iv) PH. Under Article 816, in relation to Article 17, he is an alien, executing a will abroad.
(B) Yes, kasi “may” lang naman. Yes, if the dispositions in the will are in accordance with the law of Spain because that is his national
law. Note that when it comes to distribution, intrinsic validity yan. Pwede rin kasama dito yun amount of successional rights.
Michelle, the French daughter of Penreich, a German national, died in Spain leaving real properties in the Philippines as well as valuable
personal properties in Germany.
1. What law determines who shall succeed the deceased? Explain your answer and give its legal basis.
2. What law regulates the distribution of the real properties in the Philippines? Explain your answer and give its legal basis.
3. What law governs the distribution of the personal properties in Germany? Explain your answer and give its legal basis.
UP Law Center:
1. (Assuming that the estate of the decedent is being settled in the Philippines) The national law of the decedent (French law) shall
govern in determining who will succeed to his estate. The legal basis is Art. 16 par. 2, NCC.
a. Suggested answer: French law shall govern the distribution of his real properties in the Philippines except when the real
property is land which may be transmitted to a foreigner only by hereditary succession.
2. The distribution of the real properties in the Philippines shall be governed by French law. The legal basis is Art. 16, NCC.
3. The distribution of the personal properties in Germany shall be governed by French law. The legal basis is Art. 16, NCC.
Uribe:
1. Capacity to succeed – intrinsic validity. The governing law is the national law. Take note, ang namatay dito ay si Michelle, not Penreich.
Since Michelle is French, the governing law is the law of France.
2. This question pertains to distribution. Article 16, par. 1 is not applicable. The governing law is not situs or lex rei sitae, but the national
law. Therefore the governing law is the law of France.
3. Same.
! General rule as to real and personal properties

o General rule is the first sentence of Article 16 – where the property is located
o The exceptions are in second paragraph of the said article, which shall be governed by the national law of
the testator
! Order of succession
! Amount of successional rights
! Intrinsic validity
What are the 4 aspects, which are governed by the national law if it is a foreigner?
Uribe:
1. Order of succession
2. Amount of successional rights
3. Intrinsic validity
4. Capacity of succeed
#1-3 are found in Article 16, #4 is found in Article 1039. My advice always is do not cite article # unless 100% sure. Ang gawin “under the PH
law”.
A, a citizen of California, but domiciled in PH, died intestate in Manila, survived by two acknowledged natural children, B and C. In his will,
he left more than P500K to B and only P3K to C. It is admitted that under the Civil Code of California, the domiciliary law of the decedent
shall govern questions involving the validity of testamentary provisions, C, who is contesting the validity of the disposition in favor of B now
contends that the PH laws with respect to succession are applicable. Is this correct? Give your reasons.
UP Law Center: Yes, this is correct. The doctrine of renvoi is applicable in the instant case. Although the Civil Code in Art. 16 states that the
intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions shall be regulated by the decedent’s national law, nevertheless, the Civil Code of California
declares that the decedent’s domiciliary law shall govern. Hence, the question shall be referred back to the decedent’s domicile. In other
words, the laws of the PH with respect to succession shall govern. Consequently, in the partition of the estate, C shall be given a share which
must not be less than his legitime. (Aznar v. Garcia)
Uribe: The facts were lifted from the case of In re: Christensen. Since gusto ni C malaki yung share niya, this goes into the amount of
successional rights, which shall be governed by the national law of the testator. So kung nasa PH yung kaso, irerefer ito sa national law. But
his national law provides that as to their citizens, who are domiciled abroad, the properties shall be distributed in accordance with the law of
the place where the citizen resides at the time of the death. Since nagkataon na domiciled si A sa PH, the matter is referred back to the PH,
under the doctrine of renvoi (which means “refer back”).
! But kung resident siya ng Tokyo at the time of his death, irerefer ang matter sa national law under Article 16, then ang kanyang
law irerefer sa law of Japan kasi dun siya domiciled. Ang tawag dito ay hindi renvoi, kundi, “transmission theory”. Kapag tatlong
stage na ang involved, it is transmission theory.
! Therefore, C here is correct, that it should be PH law.
! 4
!
SUBJECTS
! From this topic until the end, we will just cover PH law.
! The most important person is the (1) decedent because the inheritance belongs to him, and all the people should be
related to him.
! But do not ever call a person a “testator” if there is no will.
o Decedent – no will
o Testator
! Left a will
! Still alive
! Even though the will is void, it could still be the basis of a valid distribution of estate – probated by the Court + no
MR was filed + the decree became final.
! (2) Heirs
o Legatee – personal property
! Note: iba ang rules sa legacy, iba din ang rule sa devise.
o Are legatees heirs? Or rather, are heirs legatees?
! With regard to the second question, not necessarily because ‘heirs’ under the Code are persons
called to the succession either by provisions of law or by will. But legatees are those to whom
personal properties are given in the will. Take note, “given”, not “persons who inherit”. Whether or
not magmamana siya is another matter. There are thousands of reasons why a legatee may not
inherit. Kaya ang definition is “binigyan lang siya”. So may mga heirs na hindi legatee.
! Are legatees heirs? Parang yes kasi anyone who are called to succession either by will or operation
of law is an heir. But actually it depends: (i) general sense, or (ii) strict sense.
o Strict sense – they are not an heir because in this sense, heirs are those who may inherit
an aliquot portion or the entire estate. Legatees, in this concept, are not heirs.
! Examples: T
• The provisions on institution of heirs – the heirs here are heirs in strict
sense. Hindi ito legacies. Iba ang provision nun. Also may mga provisions
na nakalagay “heirs, legacies, devisees”. Otherwise, redundant ang batas.
• Preterition – kasi ang annulment of institution pertains only to heirs in
strict sense.
o General sense
o Legatees are devisees are given specific properties. But compulsory heirs receive aliquot portion.
! Kinds of Heirs – distinguish one from the other in relation to the will
o Compulsory – may inherit despite a will
! Classification of Compulsory Heirs
• Primary – generally related by blood; all in direct line except pag may iron curtain; pero
wala sa collateral; descending – “love first descends, before it ascends”.
o In the direct line, there is no limit in the # of degrees
• Secondary – hindi swerte; legit parents and ascendants
o Will only inherit in default of the primary
o Default – incapacitated, died, renounced
• Concurring – spouse, illegitimate children (swerte because regardless if primary or
secondary ang magmana, they will also inherit)
! See Article 887
! Illegitimate children are also compulsory heirs both in old civil, NCC and FC.
! Parents of illegitimate child (or the illegitimate parents) – can excluded by ANY descendant,
legitimate or illegitimate
o Voluntary/Testamentary – they may inherit only because there is a valid will
! Anyone can be a voluntary unless incapacitated by law, compulsory, legal, etc.
! In addition to legitime
! Always know in what capacity the heir inherits.
• Because for example, a voluntary heir predeceased the testator, the heirs of the voluntary
heirs will not get the inheritance. But if he is a compulsory heirs and he predeceased, his
heirs will inherit by right of representation. Note that there is no representation in
testamentary succession.
o Legal/Intestate – will or none, valid or not
! Strictly speaking, legal is not the same as intestate
• Legal – died with a will, although void or all the heirs renounced or are incapacitated
• Intestate – died without a will
! Reason for differentiation: legal effects such as recognition of illegitimate child, kasi kahit void
yung will, pwede siya maging basis for the recognition.
! All compulsory heirs may be legal or intestate heirs.
! But not all legal/intestate heirs are compulsory heirs. These are the heirs in the collateral line but
only up to 5th civil degree. (note: children of first cousin – legal heir; heirs 5 degrees removed –
kapatid ng great-grandfather – legal heir)
! Other People Who May Have the Rights of Legitimate Children
o Product of artificial insemination
o Re: Adopted child – he will have the rights of the legitimate children only as to the adopter. It will not
extend to the parents and relatives of the adopter, because adoption creates relationship only as to the
adopter and the adopted (legitimate).
! State – legal heir.
Don died after executing a Last Will and Testament leaving his estate valued at P12 Million to his common-law wife Roshelle. He is survived
by his brother Ronie and his half-sister Michelle.
! 5
!
(1) Was Don's testamentary disposition of his estate in accordance with the law on succession? Whether you agree or not, explain your
answer. Explain.
(2) If Don failed to execute a will during his lifetime, as his lawyer, how will you distribute his estate? Explain.
(3) Assuming he died intestate survived by his brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, and his legitimate son Jayson, how will you
distribute his estate? Explain.
(4) Assuming further he died intestate, survived by his father Juan, his brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, and his legitimate son
Jayson, how will you distribute his estate? Explain.
UP Law Center:
(1) Yes, Don's testamentary disposition of his estate is in accordance with the law on succession. Don has no compulsory heirs not
having ascendants, descendants nor a spouse [Art. 887, New Civil Code]. Brothers and sisters are not compulsory heirs. Thus, he
can bequeath his entire estate to anyone who is not otherwise incapacitated to inherit from him. A common-law wife is not
incapacitated under the law, as Don is not married to anyone.
(2) After paying the legal obligations of the estate, I will give Ronie, as full-blood brother of Don, 2/3 of the net estate, twice the share
of Michelle, the half-sister who shall receive 1/3. Roshelle will not receive anything as she is not a legal heir [Art. 1006 New Civil
Code].
(3) Jayson will be entitled to the entire P12 Million as the brother and sister will be excluded by a legitimate son of the decedent. This
follows the principle of proximity, where "the nearer excludes the farther."
(4) Jayson will still be entitled to the entire P12 Million as the father, brother and sister will be excluded by a legitimate son of the
decedent [Art. 887, New Civil Code]. This follows the principle that the descendants exclude the ascendants from inheritance.
Uribe: Maganda mag-drawing.
(1) Ang maling frame palagi dito ay kapag common-law, kabit na agad. It is wrong. Kapag common-law wife, they are living together
as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage. Under the facts, walang nakalagay na may asawa ang isa. In other words,
since walang compulsory heirs dito, wala sa direct line, he can give his entire estate to anyone – person not disqualified by law. So
here, kahit ibigay niya lahat sa common-law wife, pwede.
(2) Ngayon walang will. Failed to execute – intestate. So here, Roshelle will not inherit because she is not a legal heir. Pwede lang siya
maging voluntary heir. So, here the distribution according to the law since silang dalawa lang (Ronie and Michelle), the share of
the full-blood is twice the share of the half-blood. Therefore, out of P12M, divided by 3 (2/3 full blood, 1/3 half blood) = P8M kay
Ronnie, P2M kay Michelle.
(3) Intestate parin pero may anak na so everyone in the collateral line will be excluded, even those in the ascending line.
(4) Dito may tatay na, si Juan. Everything to Jason, excluded the others – Juan, Roshelle. Because Jason is a legitimate child, unlike
the rules on illegitimate child, which do not exclude the father, but he can exclude the brothers.
Luis was survived by two legitimate children, two illegitimate children, his parents, and two brothers. He left an estate of P1M. Luis died
intestate.
(a) Who are compulsory heirs of Luis?
(b) How much is the legitime of each?
(c) How much is the free portion of his estate, if any?
(d) Who are his intestate heirs?
(e) How much is the share of each in his estate?
UP Law Center:
(a) The 2 L/C and the 2 I/C. The parents are excluded by the L/C, while the brothers are not compulsory heirs at all.
(b) 2 L/C = P250K each; 2 I/C = P125K each.
(c) The total legitime of the compulsory heirs is P750K. So the balance of P250K is the free portion.
(d) The intestate heirs are the 2 legitimate children (L/C) and the 2 illegitimate children (I/C).
(e) In intestacy, the estate of the decedent is divided among the legitimate and illegitimate children such that the share of each
illegitimate child is ½ the share of each legitimate child. Their share are:
For each L/C - P 333,333.33
For each I/C – P166,666.66
(NCC 983, FC 176)
Uribe:
(a) L/C, I/C, parents. There are 2 ways to know whether a person is a compulsory heir. First, expressly so provides (Article 887).
Second, there has to be rules as to how much the legitime would be. Kung walang provision as to legitime, pinaasa ka lang na
compulsory heir ka. Thus, the parents are compulsory heirs, but they will be excluded in the presence of the children/descendants.
(b) Legitime of I/L is half of the legitime of L/C. The legitime of the L/C is half of the estate.
(c) Note: do not include in your answers the free portion, unless asked. Most of the time, hindi ito tinatanong.
(d) Lahat sila intestate heirs, even brothers but they will not have a share in this succession because they will excluded by the L/C.
(e) Alamin ang legitime ng compulsory heirs, kasi kapag master mo yun, madali na yung sa intestate. (Refer to the computation
above) Ang magmamana lang dito ay L/C at I/C. (Pwede niyo ilagay 1/3 of P1M, kahit hindi na yung buo)
Joanne married James, a person with no known relatives. Through James' hard work, he and his wife Joane prospered. When James died,
his estate alone amounted to P100 million. If, in his will, James designates Joanne as his only heir, what will be the free portion of his estate.
(A) Joanne gets all; estate has no free portion left.
(B) Joanne gets 1/2; the other half is free portion.
(C) Joanne gets 1/3; the remaining 2/3 is free portion.
(D) Joanne gets 1/4; the remaining 3/4 is free portion.
Uribe: In our law, may tinatatwag na basic legitime. If only 1 compulsory heir survived or who may inherit, ang basic legitime is ½. But if 2
or more heirs but of the same kind, ang legitime is ½, yun kalahati is free portion. Even if the only compulsory heir survived is the spouse, it
is possible na hindi ½ ang mapunta sa kanya, possible na 1/3 lang if the marriage was a marriage in articulo mortis, and the one who was at
the point of death, died within 3 months, and this couple is not living together as husband and wife for at least 5 years (cumulative
requirement).
(A) Mali to. Focus on the question. “What will be the free portion?”
*Doon sa Article 41, bigamous marriage, kasi meron talaga siyang asawa. Paano ang hatian? (Uribe did not answer. He just said “maganda
itanong yan”)
Emil, the testator, has three legitimate children, Tom, Henry and Warlito; a wife named Adette; parents named Pepe and Pilar; an
illegitimate child, Ramon; brother, Mark; and a sister, Nanette. Since his wife Adette is well-off, he wants to leave to his illegitimate child as
much of his estate as he can legally do. His estate has an aggregate net amount of Pl,200,000.00, and all the above-named relatives are still
living. Emil now comes to you for advice in making a will. How will you distribute his estate according to his wishes without violating the
law on testamentary succession?
! 6
!
UP Law Center: P600,000.00 — legitime to be divided equally between Tom, Henry and Warlito as the legitimate children. Each will be
entitled to P200,000.00. (Art. 888, Civil Code) P100,000.00 -- share of Ramon the illegitimate child. Equivalent to 1/2 of the share of each
legitimate child. (Art. 176, Family Code) P200,000.00 — Adette the wife. Her share is equivalent to the share of one legitimate child. (Art.
892, par. 2, Civil Code)
Pepe and Pilar, the parents are only secondary compulsory heirs and they cannot inherit if the primary compulsory heirs (legitimate
children) are alive. (Art. 887, par. 2, Civil Code)
Brother Mark and sister Nanette are not compulsory heirs since they are not included in the enumeration under Article 887 of the Civil
Code.
The remaining balance of P300,000.00 is the free portion which can be given to the illegitimate child Ramon as an instituted heir. (Art. 914,
Civil Code) If so given by the decedent, Ramon would receive a total of P400,000.00.
Uribe: Compute the legitimes of all the compoulsory heirs kasi sila lang ang hindi pwede i-deprive, unless may ground for disinheritance. So
whatever is left sa FDP, you add to the legitime of this person (Ramon), kasi ang I/C may legitime din siya, so idagdag mo ang FDP. Walang
violation ‘yan sa law on testamentary succession. Concretely, magkano ang lalabas dyan? Again, drawing. (See computation above) I would
always require you to apply the law sa facts.
A Filipino Couple, Mr. and Mrs. BM, Jr., decided to adopt YV, an orphan from St. Claire’s orphanage in New York City. They loved and
treated her like a legitimate child for they have none of their very own. However, BM, Jr., died in an accident at sea, followed to the grace a
year later by his sick father, BM, Sr. Each left a sizable estate consisting of bank deposits, lands, and buildings in Manila.
a) May the adopted child, YV, inherit from BM, Jr.?
b) May she also inherit from BM, Sr.? Is there a difference? Why? Explain.
UP Law Center: YV can inherit from BM, Jr. The succession to the estate of BM, Jr. is governed by Philippine law because he was a Filipino
when he died (Article 16, Civil Code). Under Article 1039 of the Civil Code, the capacity of the heir to succeed is governed by the national law
of the decedent and not by the national law of the heir. Hence, whether or not YV can inherit from BM, Jr. is determined by Philippine law.
Under Philippine law, the adopted inherits from the adopter as a legitimate child of the adopter.
YV, however, cannot inherit, in his own right, from the father of the adopter, BM, Sr., because he is not a legal heir of BM, Sr. The legal
fiction of adoption exists only between the adopted and the adopter. (Teotico v. Del Val 13 SCRA 406 [1965]). Neither may he inherit from
BM, Sr. by representing BM, Jr. because in representation, the representative must be a legal heir not only of the person he is representing
but also of the decedent from whom the represented was supposed to inherit (Article 973, Civil Code).
Uribe: Yes, if this is a testamentary succession from BM, Jr. or Sr. But if this is an intestate succession, yes from BM, Jr., because as an
adopted child, she will have the same rights as that of a legitimate child as far the adopter is concern. But she cannot inherit from BM, Sr.,
because adoption create legal relationship only as to the adopter and the adoptee. Kaya hanggang kay BM, Jr. lang siya.
Mr. XT and Mrs. YT have been married for 20 years. Suppose the wife, YT, died childless, survived only by her husband, XT. What would be
the share of XT from her estate as inheritance? Why? Explain.
Uribe: There being no will and on the premise that YT is childless, the husband is entitled to the entire estate.
Armand died intestate. His full-blood brothers, Bobby and Conrad, and half- blood brothers, Danny, Edward and Floro, all predeceased him.
The following are the surviving relatives:
1. Benny and Bonnie, legitimate children of Bobby;
2. Cesar, legitimate child of Conrad;
3. Dante, illegitimate child of Danny;
4. Ernie, adopted child of Edward; and
5. Felix, grandson of Floro.
The net value of Armand's estate is Pl,200,000.
How much is Ernie's share in the net estate.

(A) P 0.
(B) P400,000.
(C) P150,000.
(D) P200,000.
(E) None of the above
Uribe: In the bar exams, kung ang facts ay mahaba, start with the question. Kasi may mga facts na irrelevant. Here, Ernie’s share.
Therefore, kung babasahin mo yung facts, si Ernie ady adopted child ni Edward. So may man aba si Ernie kay Armand? Syempre, wala.
! 7
!
LEGITIMES*
Legitimate Children (L/C) and Descendants

! Basic legitime: ½
! In intestate succession, all of them can repudiate, so you just divide.
! If there is a will, ½ of the testator’s estate can be given to anyone who is not disqualified by law. But if there is no
will, the entire estate will be given to his heirs.
Illustrations:
Intestate Succession: If there are 2 L/C, and there are 6 I/C, assuming the estate is P100M, the legitimes are to be computed
as follows:
" 2 L/C = P50M (P25M each)
6 I/C = P75M (P12.5M)
-------------------------------------
Total = P125M
# The total legitime is P125M, but the estate is only P100M.
# Solution: Divide the remaining FDP to the # of I/C
o Why? Because that is where I/C legitimes are being deducted
o P100M (estate) – P50M (L/C legitime) = P50M (FPD)
o Therefore, it will be: P50M ÷ 6 (I/C) = P8,333,333.33
" FINAL:
2 L/C = P50M (P25M each)
6 I/C = P50M (P8,333,333.33 each)
Tip: Kapag lumagpas yung number ng I/C sa number of L/C, mag-duda ka na, lalo na kung may SS. Mag-compute na kana.
But always remember, never impair na legitime of L/C.
Intestate Succession: L/C + I/C + SS

• If you follow the rules, the estate may not be sufficient especially kung maraming I/C
• Solution: protect the legitime of L/C and of the spouse, whatever is left, give it to the I/C. Do not use the ratio of 2:2:1
when there is a lot of I/C. If you want, compute based on the ratio, but make sure to compute also the legitime to see
whether there is impairment.
Intestate Succession: Legitimate parents/ascendants (secondary compulsory heirs) are the only survivors
• Legitime is ½ as they will taker the place of primary compulsory heirs
• They may also get everything
Illegitimate parents + I/C + SS – take note of this as this is usually being asked in the bar.
! 8
!
Amount of Legitime Intestate Succession Notes
L/C,
Natural &/or ½ SS = same share as 1 L/C If you follow the rules, the estate may not be
Other I/C & ½ of each L/C sufficient especially kung maraming I/C
SS 2/5 of L/C or ½ of L/C
Same share of one L/C Solution: protect the legitime of L/C and of the
spouse, whatever is left, give it to the I/C. Do not
use the ratio of 2:2:1 when there is a lot of I/C. If
you want, compute based on the ratio, but make
sure to compute also the legitime to see whether
there is impairment.
Legitimate Parent or Legitime is ½ as they will taker the place of

Ascendant ½ Entire estate primary compulsory heirs.
They may also get everything
Legitimate Parents
Natural or ½ ½
Other I/C ¼ ½
Legitimate Parents
Natural Children and ½ ½
Other I/C ¼ ½
Legitimate Parents and ½ ½

SS ¼ ½
Legitimate Parents ½ ½ Usually being asked in the bar.

Natural Children
Other I/C and ¼ ¼
SS 1/8 ¼
Natural and/or ½ Entire Estate If there is a will, half of the estate may be
Other I/C disposed.
If there is a will, let’s say, a car was given to a
Natural and/or 1/3 ½ friend, the two of them will suffer, so long as the ½
Other I/C and legitimes will not be impaired. If the value of the
SS 1/3 ½ car exceeds 1/3… (Atty. Uribe did not give the
answer. He just said “tanggalan ng gulong”)
SS ½ or 1/3* Entire Estate Note when marriage is articulo mortis.*
If the I/C has a child, L/C or not, the parents are
Illegitimate Parents ½ Entire Estate excluded. Unlike legitimate parents, only L/C can
exclude them.
Illegitimate Parents and None Entire Estate to Children

Children of any class ½
Illegitimate Parents and ¼ ½

SS ¼ ½
SS and ½ or 1/3 ½ Usually being asked in the bar.

Brothers & Sisters, None ½
Nephews & Nieces
Brothers & Sisters, None Entire Estate They are legal heirs.
Nephews & Nieces
Children of 1st Cousins None Entire Estate Remotest who can inherit.
Personal Property
State Real Property Entire Estate
Note: Decedent died before August 3, 1988, there are different children (natural children and other I/C). You need to compute. But in FC,
there is no distinction.
! 9
!
Pedro had worked for 15 years in Saudi Arabia when he finally decided to engage in farming in his home province where his 10- hectare
farmland valued at ₱2,000,000.00 was located. He had already ₱3,000,000.00 savings from his long stint in Saudi Arabia.
Eagerly awaiting Pedro's arrival at the NAIA were his aging parents Modesto and Jacinta, his common-law spouse Veneranda, their three
children, and Alex, his child by Carol, his departed legal wife. Sadly for all of them, Pedro suffered a stroke because of his overexcitement
just as the plane was about to land, and died without seeing any of them.
The farmland and the savings were all the properties he left.
(a) State who are Pedro's legal heirs, and the shares of each legal heir to the estate? Explain your answer.
(b) Assuming that Pedro's will is discovered soon after his funeral. In the will, he disposed of half of his estate in favor of
Veneranda, and the other half in favor of his children and his parents in equal shares. Assuming also that the will is
admitted to probate by the proper court. Are the testamentary dispositions valid and effective under the law on
succession? Explain your answer.
Rabuya:
(a) Pedro’s legal heirs are his legitimate child, Alex, and his three illegitimate chidlren with Veneranda. Pedro’s chidlren with Veneranda are
illegitimate because they were conceived and born outside of a valid marriage. Alex, on the other hand, is a legitimate child because she was
conceived or born inside a valid marriage.
Pedro’s surviving parents are not legal heirs because they are excluded by Alex. In intestate succession, the legitimate ascendants do not
become legal heirs if there is a surviving legitimate descendant, such as Alex in the problem. Veneranda is not a legal heir of Pedro because
she and Pedro were not married.
Ordinarily, the share of an illegitimate child in intestate succession is one-half of the share of the legitimate child. Considering, however,
that the three illegitimate chidlren will impair the legitime of Alex if the foregoing formula is followed, Alex is entitled instead to get his
legitime, which is 1⁄2 of the estate, or P2.5 Million, while the remaining P2.5 Million is to be divided equally among the three illegitimate
children of Pedro. Their legitimes in this case will likewise be their shares in intestate succession. [Discussed in pp. 944, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s
Civil Law Reviewer]
(b) No, because the testamentary dispositions impair the legitimes of Pedro’s compulsory heirs.
Following the provisions of the Civil Code, only Alex and Pedro’s three illegitimate children are Pedro’s compulsory heirs. Since Alex is
Pedro’s legitimate descendant and a primary compulsory heir, she excludes Pedro’s parents as compulsory heirs, the latter being merely
secondary compulsory heirs. However, the three illegitimate chidlren are considered concurring compulsory heirs who are also entitled to a
share of the legitime.
Under the law, the legitime of Alex, being a legitimate descendant, is 1⁄2 of Pedro’s estate, or P2.5 Million. The legitime of each of the
illegitimate children is supposed to be 1⁄2 of the share of Alex, or P1.25 Million each. Considering, however, that the remaining portion of the
estate is no longer sufficient to cover the supposed legitimes of the three illegitimate children, they will simply share equally in the
remaining P2.5 Million. Consequently, there is no disposable free portion that Pedro may validly give to Veneranda or to his parents. Hence,
the will is intrinsically invalid. [Discussed in pp. 859, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
Uribe:
(a) Pag nag-tanong siya ng legal heir, mukhang walang will. The legal heirs are: L/C, I/C, and parents. Common law spouse is not a legal
heir. There should be a valid marriage. As to the shares:
• The parents are excluded by the L/C. So ang lalabas yung isang L/C and yung 3 I/C (hindi sinabi sa problem na I/C sila but
malinaw sa problem) ang may mana.
" Estate: P5B (value of the property) ÷ 2
o P2.5B = share of the L/C
o P2.5B = FDP/legitime of I/C
" The legitime of each I/C based on the legitime of the L/C is supposed to be P1.25B each.
o P1.25B x 3 (# of IC) = P3.25B
# Note that the FDP is only P2.5B.
# Solution: Divide P2.5B to the # of I/C
" FINAL:
L/C = P2.5B (only 1 L/C)
I/C = P 833,333,333.33 each I/C (P2.5B ÷ 3 I/C)
(b) No, because Veneranda and the parents will not be entitled to anything. Eh kulang pa nga sa mga I/C. Wala nang FDP.
The decedent died intestate leaving an estate of P10 million. He left the following heirs: a) Marlon, a legitimate child and b) Cecilia, the legal
spouse. Divide the estate.
(A) Marlon gets 1/4 and Cecilia gets 3/4.
(B) Marlon gets 2/3 and Cecilia 1/3.
(C) Marlon gets 1/2 and Cecilia gets 1/2.
(D) Marlon gets 3/4 and Cecilia 1/4.
Uribe: Kapag divide the estate, wag ka na magcompute ng legitimes kasi ito pinapabigay na. So ang sagot dito ay, ½; ½ because remember
ang legitime ng L/C ay ½, ang legitime ng SS ay ¼. But in intestate succession, ¼ becomes ½. Kapag mayroon pang isang compulsory heir,
hindi magbabago ang legitime ng L/C. Mapupunta sa ibang heirs ang FDP.
Ramon Mayaman died intestate, leaving a net estate of P10,000,000.00. Determine how much each heir will receive from the estate:
(A) If Ramon is survived by his wife, three full-blood brothers, two half-brothers, and one nephew (the son of a deceased full- blood
brother)? Explain.
(B) If Ramon is survived by his wife, a half- sister, and three nephews (sons of a deceased full-blood brother)? Explain.
UP Law Center:
(A) Having died intestate, the estate of Ramon shall be inherited by his wife and his full and half blood siblings or their respective
representatives. In intestacy, if the wife concurs with no one but the siblings of the husband, all of them are the intestate heirs of
the deceased husband. The wife will receive half of the intestate estate, while the siblings or their respective representatives, will
inherit the other half to be divided among them equally. If some siblings are of the full-blood and the other of the half blood, a half
blood sibling will receive half the share of a full-blood sibling.
(1) The wife of Ramon will, therefore, receive one half (1⁄2) of the estate or the amount of P5,000,000.00.
! 10
!
(2) The three (3) full-blood brothers, will, therefore, receive P1,000,000.00 each.
(3) The nephew will receive P1M by right of representation
(4) The two (2) half-brothers will receive P500,000.00 each.
(B) The wife will receive one half (1/2) of the estate or P5,000,000.00. The other half shall be inherited by (1) the full-blood brother,
represented by his three children, and (2) the half-sister. They will divide the other half between them such that the share of the
half-sister is just half the share of the full-blood brother. The share of the full-blood brother shall in turn be inherited by the three
nephews in equal shares by right of presentation.
Therefore, the three (3) nephews will receive P1,111,111.10 each the half- sister will receive the sum of P1,666,666.60.
Uribe:
(A) In intestate succession, yung share ng full-blood is twice the share of half-blood so kung dalawang half-blood, technically 1 full blood yung
equivalent. As mentioned earlier, ang share ng wife is kalahati. But the other half goes to the brothers, whether half or full, or to the
nephews and nieces in case they inherit by right of representation. In collateral line, pwede mag-mana ang children of the brothers and
sisters by right of representation. Yung mga apo ng kapatid, hindi pwede mag-mana by right of representation pero pwede sila mag-man in
their own right kung wala na ibang heirs.
• Wife = P5M
• 3 full-blood + 1 full blood represented child (decedent’s nephew)
o 3 full blood = P3M (P1M each)
o Represented = P1M by right of representation
o Total: P4M
• 2 half-blood = P1M (P500K each)
(B) Practically, ang dapat mag-mana dito ay isang full-blood brother at isang half-sister (1:2). So out of P5M, 2/3 ay para sa full-blood, 1/3 ay
para sa half-sister. Yung 2/3 will be divided into 3 for the 3 nephews who will inherit by right of representation. (See computation above)
Ernesto, an overseas Filipino worker, was coming home to the Philippines after working for so many years in the Middle East. He had saved
P100,000 in his saving account in Manila which intended to use to start a business in his home country. On his flight home, Ernesto had a
fatal heart attack. He left behind his widowed mother, his common-law wife and their twins sons. He left no will, no debts, no other relatives
and no other properties except the money in his saving account. Who are the heirs entitled to inherint from him and how much should each
receive?
UP Law Center: The mother and twin sons are entitled to inherit from Ernesto. Art. 991 of the Civil Code, provides that if legitimate
ascendants are left, the twin sons shall divide the inheritance with them taking one-half of the estate. Thus, the widowed mother gets
P50,000.00 while the twin sons shall receive P25,000.00 each. The common-law wife cannot inherit from him because when the law speaks
"widow or widower" as a compulsory heir, the law refers to a legitimate spouse (Art. 887, par 3, Civil Code).
Uribe: Common law wife lang so hindi siya magmamana and the children are illegitimate. Entitled to inherit – mother and I/C. Remember,
I/C do not exclude the parents. But as discussed in FC, kung FC 147 ito, kalahati ng P100K mapupunta sa wife. But kung ganito ang
problem sa succession, you can say or presume na ang P100K is the net hereditary estate. Kapag net hereditary estate, ½ of the P100K goes
o the mother because that is the basic legitime. Also note that the legitime of the I/C, since this is an intestate succession, ¼ becomes ½. (See
computation above)
On 10 September 1988 Kevin, a 26-year old businessman, married Karla, a winsome lass of 18. Without the knowledge of their parents or
legal guardians, Kevin and Karla entered into an ante-nuptial contract the day before their marriage stipulating that conjugal partnership of
gains shall govern their marriage. At the time of their marriage Kevin's estate was worth 50 Million while Karla's was valued at 2 Million. A
month after their marriage Kevin died in a freak helicopter accident. He left no will, no debts, no obligations. Surviving Kevin, aside from
Karla, are his only relatives: his brother Luis and first cousin Lilia.
1) What property Relations governed the marriage of Kevin and Karla? Explain.
2) Determine the value of the estate of Kevin.
3) Who are Kevin's heirs?
4) How much is each of Kevin's heirs entitled to inherit?
UP Law Center:
1) Since the marriage settlement was entered into without the consent and without the participation of the parents (they did not sign the
document), the marriage settlement is invalid applying Art. 78, F.C. which provides that a minor who according to law may contract
marriage may also enter into marriage settlements but they shall be valid only if the person who may give consent to the marriage are
made parties to the agreement. (Karla was still a minor at the time the marriage settlement was executed in September 1988 because
the law, R.A. 6809, reducing the age of majority to 18 years took effect on 18 December 1989). The marriage settlement being void, the
property Relations governing the marriage is, therefore, absolute community of property, under Art. 75 of the FC.
2) All the properties which Kevin and Karla owned at the time of marriage became community property which shall be divided equally
between them at dissolution. Since Kevin owned 50 Million and Karla. 2 Million, at the time of the marriage, 52 Million constituted
their community property. Upon the death of Kevin, the community was dissolved and half of the 52 Million or 26 Million is his share
in the community. This 26 Million therefore is his estate.
3) Karla and Luis are the Intestate heirs of Kevin.
4) They are entitled to share the estate equally under Article 1001 of the NCC. Therefore. Karla gets 13 Million and Luis gets 13 Million.
Uribe: Marriage settlement here is void so property regime is ACP as the marriage was celebrated during the FC. So nung namatay Kevin,
panalo si Karla dahil ang P2M niya biglang naging P26M. Share niya pa lang yun, wala pang mana. So ang estate ni Kevin is P26M. Dito
mayroong brother and first cousin. Ang first cousin (4 degrees) ay excluded by the brother (2 degrees) because of “proximity rule”. Walang
right of representation sa first cousin. So ang magmamana lang is si Karla and Luis (brother). But because isa lang ang heir aside from the
wife, 50% sa wife, 50% sa other heir. So the shares are as follows:
• Karla: P26M (shares sa ACP) + P13M (mana) = P39M
• Luis: P13M
What do you understand by "presumptive legitime", in what case or cases must the parent deliver such legitime to the children, and what are
the legal effects in each case if the parent fails to do so?
UP Law Center: PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME is not defined in the law. Its definition must have been taken from Act 2710, the Old Divorce
Law, which required the delivery to the legitimate children of "the equivalent of what would have been due to them as their legal portion if
said spouse had died intestate immediately after the dissolution of the community of property." As used in the Family Code, presumptive
legitime is understood as the equivalent of the legitimate children's legitimes assuming that the spouses had died immediately after the
dissolution of the community of property.
Presumptive legitime is required to be delivered to the common children of the spouses when the marriage is annulled or declared void ab
initio and possibly, when the conjugal partnership or absolute community is dissolved as in the case of legal separation. Failure of the
! 11
!
parents to deliver the presumptive legitime will make their subsequent marriage null and void under Article 53 of the Family Code.
Uribe: PL is an amount which the children would have been entitled to inherit had their parent died immediately after the
annulment/nullity. As I said, wala dapat mamatay dito kasi ‘presumptive’ legitime. I do not agree na kapag may legal separation, ia-apply
ang view na ito. Kasi waa naman pwede makapag-asawa sa kanila e. The effects – the subsequent marriage will be void but the children
remain to be legitimate.
John and Paula, British citizens at birth, acquired Philippine citizenship by naturalization after their marriage. During their marriage the
couple acquired substantial landholdings in London and in Makati. Paula bore John three children, Peter, Paul and Mary. In one of their
trips to London, the couple executed a joint will appointing each other as their heirs and providing that upon the death of the survivor
between them the entire estate would go to Peter and Paul only but the two could not dispose of nor divide the London estate as long as they
live. John and Paul died tragically in the London Subway terrorist attack in 2005. Peter and Paula filed a petition for probate of their
parent's will before a Makati Regional Trial Court.
(A) Should the will be admitted to probate?
(B) Are the testamentary dispositions valid?
UP Law Center:
(A) No. The will cannot be admitted to probate because a joint will is expressly prohibited under Art. 818 of the Civil Code. This
provision applies John and Paula became Filipino citizens after their marriage.
(B) No. The testamentary dispositions are not valid because (a) omission of Mary, a legitimate child, is tantamount to preterition
which shall annul the institution of Peter and Paul as heirs (Art. 854, Civil Code); and, (b) the disposition that Peter and Paul could
not dispose of nor divide the London estate for more than 20 years is void (Art. 870, Civil Code).
Uribe:
(A) Cannot be probated because it is a joint will between Filipinos.
(B) No because the will is not valid. But assuming the will is valid, there are 2 dispositions which are not valid first, is that the entire
estate will go to Peter and Paula. That is not valid as it results to preterition. Second is, the two could not dispose nor divide as
long as they live – not valid because the law would consider that the right to dispose is limited.
Crispin died testate and was survived by Alex and Josine, his children from his first wife; Rene and Ruby, his children from his second wife;
and Allan, Bea, and Cheska, his children from his third wife.
One important provision in his will reads as follows:
"Ang lupa at bahay sa Lungsod ng Maynila ay ililipat at ilalagay sa pangalan nila Alex at Rene hindi bilang pamana ko sa kanila kundi
upang pamahalaan at pangalagaan lamang nila at nang ang sinuman sa aking mga anak, sampu ng aking mga apo at kaapuapuhan ko sa
habang panahon, ay may tutuluyan kung magnanais na mag-aral sa Maynila o sa kalapit na mga lungsod."
Is the provision valid?
Uribe: Santiago v. Santiago. This is void. A testamentary disposition that prohibits alienation of property for more than 20 years is void.
! 12
!
WHO MAY SUCCEED?
Always remember that just because he is an heir does not mean that he will inherit. Ang tagapag-mana minsan hindi
nagmamana.
In “who may succeed?”, the first thing that you should ask is, “does he have capacity to succeed?”. There are other reason but
always think of the capacity.
X, who died in 2005, had 5 children: A, B, C, D and E. Who will not inherit from X?
(A) A is already a citizen of France at the time of X’s death.
(B) B is a permanent resident of Canada at the time of X’s death.
(C) C is suffering civil interdiction at the time of X’s death.
(D) D predeceased X.
(E) E died before the filing of the petition for settlement of the estate of X, even if he died after the death of X.
Uribe: Ang premise dito ay pwedeng intestate succession. Walang will. Ang rule here ay Article 1024 (persons may succeed unless they are
disqualified by law).
• A (citizen of France) – does not matter even if this is testamentary succession; kahit lupa pwede nila i-inheirt
• C (civil interdiction) – they are prohibited in disposing their properties by acts inter vivos, pero ang pag-mana ay acquisition kaya
pwede sila mag-accept; although the law requires them to accept through guardian.
• D (predeceased) – See article 1025; living at the time of the opening of succession. (Tip: if you are going to answer, do not state “D
will not inherit because he predeceased”. That is wrong because that’s a fact)
o Take note as to ‘not living’. There are 2 scenarios:
i. Not conceived
ii. Conceived – subject to requirements
• E – does not matter if he died 2 minutes after the death of X. The fact that when he died, he already inherited. Article 777 –
transmission upon death.
X died on January 15, 2005, survived by his wife, Y, and his paramour, Z. A, legitimate child of X, died on December 31, 2004. Y gave birth to
B on December 30, 2005. Z gave birth to C, 5 months after the death of X, however C died 5 hours after birth. Who may inherit from X?
Uribe:
• A will no longer inherit because he died before the opening of succession.
• B will not inherit. 12 months have passed since X died when B was born. So B is not a child of X.
• C may inherit. Take note, the question is “who MAY?” He may inherit because, althought he was born 5 months after the death of
X, he may have intra-uterine life of 2 months before the death of X. Ang kailangan lang ng batas ay intra-uterine life of less than 7
months. Pwede siya mag-man if at the time of his birth, minimum of 7 months na siya. Kasi kung iisipin, buntis na yung mama
nya ng 4 months nung namatay si X.
50.000 Isidro and Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of age, were passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental Airlines. The plane they boarded was of
Philippine registry. While en route from Manila to Greece some passengers hijacked the plane, held the chief pilot hostage at the cockpit and
ordered him to fly instead to Libya. During the hijacking Isidro suffered a heart attack and was on the verge of death. Since Irma was
already eight months pregnant by Isidro, she pleaded to the hijackers to allow the assistant pilot to solemnize her marriage with Isidro. Soon
after the marriage, Isidro expired. As the plane landed in Libya Irma gave birth. However, the baby died a few minutes after complete
delivery. Back in the Philippines Irma Immediately filed a claim for inheritance. The parents of Isidro opposed her claim contending that the
marriage between her and Isidro was void ab initio on the following grounds: (a) they had not given their consent to the marriage of their
son; (b) there was no marriage license; (c) the solemnizing officer had no authority to perform the marriage; and, (d) the solemnizing officer
did not file an affidavit of marriage with the proper civil registrar.
Does Irma have any successional rights at all? Discuss fully.
UP Law Center: Irma succeeded to the estate of Isidro as his surviving spouse to the estate of her legitimate child. When Isidro died, he was
succeeded by his surviving wife Irma, and his legitimate unborn child. They divided the estate equally between them, the child excluding the
parents of Isidro. An unborn child is considered born for all purposes favorable to it provided it is born later. The child was considered born
because, having an intra-uterine life of more than seven months, it lived for a few minutes after its complete delivery. It was legitimate
because it was born within the valid marriage of the parents. Succession is favorable to it. When the child died, Irma inherited the share of
the child. However, the share of the child in the hands of Irma is subject to reserva troncal for the benefit of the relatives of the child within
the third degree of consanguinity and who belong to the line of Isidro.
Uribe: The marriage is valid. Irma have successional rights because she is the SS of the decedent, and also because under the facts, at the
time of marriage, she is 8 months pregnant even if after few minutes, Irma gave birth when the plane landed. That child acquired juridical
personality kahit ilang minute lang siya buhay. And therefore, he inherited from his father. Yun nga lang dahil namatay siya, yung
inheritance mapupunta sa mother. Irma will exclude the grandparents by “proximity rule”. Irma is one degree removed, ang grandparents ay
2 degrees. In other words, lahat mapupunta kay Irma.
• Save this question when we go to ‘reserva troncal’. In relation to the portion of the estate na mamanahin ni Irma ay reserve
troncal. So when she dies, half of the estate will go reservatarios.
For purpose of this question, assume all formalities and procedural requirements have been complied with. In 1970, Ramon and Dessa got
married.
Prior to their marriage, Ramon had a child, Anna. In 1971 and 1972, Ramon and Dessa legally adopted Cherry and Michelle respectively. In
1973, Dessa died while giving birth to Larry Anna had a child, Lia. Anna never married. Cherry, on the other hand, legally adopted Shelly.
Larry had twins, Hans and Gretel, with his girlfriend, Fiona. In 2005, Anna, Larry and Cherry died in a car accident. In 2007, Ramon died.
Who may inherit from Ramon and who may not? Give your reason briefly.
UP Law Center:
The following may inherit from Ramon:
(1) Michelle, as an adopted child of Ramon, will inherit as a legitimate child of Ramon. As an adopted child, Michelle has all the rights
of a legitimate child (Sec 18, Domestic Adoption Law).
(2) Lia will inherit in representation of Anna. Although Lia is an illegitimate child, she is not barred by Articles 992, because her
mother Anna is an illegitimate herself. She will represent Anna as regards Anna's legitime under Art. 902, NCC and as regards
Anna's intestate share under Art. 990, NCC.
! 13
!
The following may not inherit from Ramon:
(1) Shelly, being an adopted child, she cannot represent Cherry. This is because adoption creates a personal legal relation only
between the adopter and the adopted. The law on representation requires the representative to be a legal heir of the person he is
representing and also of the person from whom the person being represented was supposed to inherit. While Shelly is a legal heir of
Cherry, Shelly is not a legal heir of Ramon. Adoption created a purely personal legal relation only between Cherry and Shelly.
(2) Hans and Gretel are barred from inheriting from Ramon under Art. 992, NCC. Being illegitimate children, they cannot inherit ab
intestao from Ramon.
Uribe: Focus on the person under consideration (Ramon). Kahit hindi tinanong kung sino ang hindi magi-inherit, i-explain mo kung bakit
hindi magi-inherit ang isang tao. Kaya drawing ulit.
Who may inherit?

- Michelle – adopted by Ramon
- Lia – I will not presume Anna is legitimate. Ang presumption ng legitimate ay pag-kasal. Since walang nakalagay dito na kasal,
ang tamang pagsagot ay “it depends”.
o If Anna is legitimate – she cannot inherit because she is barred by iron curtain rule
o If Anna is I/C – Lia can inherit under Article 990; walang bar kapag parehong I/C
Who may not inherit – malinaw, Article 1025 agad.

- Anna – not living when the succession opened
- Larry – not living when the succession opened
- Cherry – not living when the succession opened
- Fiona – not an heir, even a legal heir.
- Grandchildren ni Ramon, anak ni Larry – iron curtain rule (paste here the provision – Article 992, memorize it)
Shelly – adopted by Cherry
! 14
!
DISQUALIFIED and INCAPACITATED
• Not living – absolute
• Article 1927 and 1032 (acts of unworthiness) – not absolute
Note: Adultery on the part of the wife. May the wife inherit from the husband? By intestate succession, she cannot inherit.
The law expressly provides that the guilty spouse cannot inherit by intestate succession. But by will, the answer is yes. She
may inherit if the will is executed after the decree of LS. Before the decree, all the dispositions in favor of the guilty spouse
are revoked by operation of law.
Iron Curtain Rule – bars an heir, not only from inheriting by right of representation but even by his own right, regardless
kung mag-isa nalang siya, in which the State will inherit.
Supposed that the beneficiary in a will is the wife of the minister of the gospel, who rendered aid to the testator during the latter’s last
illness. Would she be disqualified from inheriting from the testator?
Uribe: Take note ang binigyan ay ang wife of the minister. If you read again 1024, is there a law that disqualifies the wife of the minister?
Read 1027. Ang nakalagay lang diyan ay ang minister at relatives within the 4th civil degree. The wife is not within 4th degree. But in our
law, husband and wife become one. Hindi mo man sabihin na hindi siya within the line or 4th civil degree, asawa siya. If you follow the letter
of the law, she can really inherit, but personally, for me, the provision is not literal. I do not follow it. The intention of the law, kasama ang
spouse sa disqualified. Ang first cousin nga disqualified, asawa pa kaya. Kaya nakalagay dyan up to 4th degree kasi hindi naman ineexpect
na magaasawa ang priest. But I think the spirit of the law includes wives sa prohibition. So I think disqualified siya, except if the aid given
is not “spiritual” aid. Kung monetary aid, ay hindi siya disqualified kasi ang “spiritual” aid, may undue influence.
In the will of X, a parcel of land was given to A, B, C and D. A is a priest who have heard the confession of the testator 5 years before his
death. B is the guardian of X, C is one of the attesting witnesses, and D was convicted of adultery. Who may inherit from X as voluntary
heir?
Uribe: Here, since “may” lang naman, ang answer is “all of the above”.
A – even though he had heard the confession, this confession may not be during his last illness. Take note sa law, hindi “last confession”.
B – pwede mag-mana if B is the spouse, brother, parent, child
C – pwede if there are 3 other competent witnesses; if one, hindi naman void ang will, yung disposition lang.
D – in order to be disqualified he must be convicted of adultery with the testator himself, or with the spouse of the testator.
H died leaving a last will and testament wherein it is stated that he was legally married to W by whom he had two legitimate children A and
B. H devised to his said forced heirs the entire estate except the free portion which he gave to X who was living with him at the time of his
death.
In said will he explained that he had been estranged from his wife W for more than 20 years and he has been living with X as man and wife
since his separation from his legitimate family.
In the probate proceedings, X asked for the issuance of letters testamentary in accordance with the will wherein she is named sole executor.
This was opposed by W and her children.
(a) Should the will be admitted in said probate proceedings?
(b) Is the said devise to X valid?
(c) Was it proper for the trial court to consider the intrinsic validity of the provisions of said will? Explain your answers.
UP Law Center:
(a) Yes, the will may be probated if executed according to the formalities prescribed by law.
(b) The institution giving X the free portion is not valid, because the prohibitions under Art. 739 of the Civil Code on donations also
apply to testamentary dispositions (Article 1028, Civil Code), Among donations which are considered void are those made between
persons who were guilty of adultery or concubinage at the time of the donation.
(c) As a general rule, the will should be admitted in probate proceedings if all the necessary requirements for its extrinsic validity
have been met and the court should not consider the intrinsic validity of the provisions of said will. However, the exception arises
when the will in effect contains only one testamentary disposition. In effect, the only testamentary disposition under the will is the
giving of the free portion to X, since legitimes are provided by law. Hence, the trial court may consider the intrinsic validity of the
provisions of said will. (Nuguid v. Nuguid, etal.. No. L23445, June 23, 1966, 17 SCRA; Nepomuceno v. CA, L-62952, 9 October 1985.
139 SCRA 206).
Uribe:
(b) Devise is not valid because ang prohibition ng batas sa donations were made applicable sa succession. So kung hindi ka pwede mag-
donate, hindi rin pwede ibigay through a will. Article 1028.
Abraham died intestate on 7 January 1994 survived by his son Braulio. Abraham's older son Carlos died on 14 February 1990. Danilo who
claims to be an adulterous child of Carlos intervenes in the proceedings for the settlement of the estate of Abraham in representation of
Carlos. Danilo was legally adopted on 17 March 1970 by Carlos with the consent of the latter's wife. Can Danilo inherit from Abraham in
representation of his father Carlos? Explain.
UP Law Center: No, he cannot. Danilo cannot represent Carlos as the latter's adopted child in the inheritance of Abraham because adoption
did not make Danilo a legitimate grandchild of Abraham. Adoption is personal between Carlos and Danilo. He cannot also represent Carlos
as the latter's illegitimate child because in such case he is barred by Art. 992 of the NCC from inheriting from his illegitimate grandfather
Abraham.
Uribe: (Based on a case: NAVAL v. CA? Please find) No because as an I/C, he is barred by the iron curtain rule.
A is the acknowledged natural child of B who died when A was already 22 years old. When B's full blood brother, C, died he (C) was survived
by his widow and four children of his other brother D. Claiming that he is entitled to inherit from his father's brother C. A brought suit to
obtain his share in the estate of C. Will his action prosper?
UP Law Center: No, the action of A will not prosper. On the premise that B, C and D are legitimate brothers, as an illegitimate child of B, A
! 15
!
cannot inherit in intestacy from C who is a legitimate brother of B. Only the wife of C in her own right and the legitimate relatives of C (i.e.
the children of D as C's legitimate nephews inheriting as collateral relatives) can inherit in intestacy. (Arts. 992, 1001, 1OO5 and 975, Civil
Code)
Uribe: if you will closely consider the facts, mag-drawing.

• A cannot inherit from C because of the iron curtain rule under Article 992.
• If A dies, C cannot also inherit because of iron curtain rule.
A had 2 sons, one legitimate (B) and the other illegitimate (C), who both died in a car accident. At the time of the accident, B was not married
but had an illegitimate son, D. C also had an illegitimate son, E. Upon learning of the death of his sons, A suffered a heart attach and died.
Can D and E inherit from A? Explain your answer.
UP Law Center: D cannot inherit. The I/C cannot inherit from the legitimate relatives of his father or mother, under Article 992. However, E
can inherit. The rights of I/C are transmitted upon their death to their descendants, legitimate or illegitimate.
Uribe: take note ang tanong ay “inherit”, not “inherit by right of representation”. E will inherit under Article 990 because D is barred by iron
curtain rule.
A, a spurious child, died intestate survived by B, the brother of the deceased mother, and C, his mother’s legitimate granddaughter. May B
and C inherit from A? Reasons.
UP Law Center: B cannot because uncles have no right to inherit from their illegitimate nephews. C cannot succeed either because the
legitimate relatives have no right to inherit from an I/C and vice versa.
Uribe: No. If A cannot inherit form B and C, they also cannot inherit from A in intestate succession under Article 992.
Armand died intestate. His full-blood brothers, Bobby and Conrad, and half-
blood brothers, Danny, Edward and Floro, all predeceased him. The following are the surviving relatives:
How much is Dante's share in the net estate?

(A) P150,000.
(B) P200,000.
(C) P300,000.
(D) P400,000.
(E) None of the above.
UP Law Center: There is no showing that Danny is an illegitimate half-blood brother of Armand. In the absence of proof to the contrary, the
law presumes that the relationship is legitimate. Thus, Dante, an illegitimate child of Danny, is barred from inheriting from Armand
pursuant to the “iron curtain rule” which disqualifies an illegitimate child from inheriting ab intestao from the legitimate children and
relatives of his father or mother, and vice versa (Art 992, Civil Code).
Eugenio died without issue, leaving several parcels of land in Bataan. He was survived by Antonio, his legitimate brother; Martina, the only
daughter of his predeceased sister Mercedes; and five legitimate children of Joaquin, another predeceased brother. Shortly after Eugenio's
death, Antonio also died, leaving three legitimate children. Subsequently, Martina, the children of Joaquin and the children of Antonio
executed an extrajudicial settlement of the estate of Eugenio, dividing it among themselves. The succeeding year, a petition to annul the
extrajudicial settlement was filed by Antero, an illegitimate son of Antonio, who claims he is entitled to share in the estate of Eugenio. The
defendants filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that Antero is barred by Article 992 of the Civil Code from inheriting from the legitimate
brother of his father. How will you resolve the motion?
UP Law Center: The motion to dismiss should be granted. Article 992 does not apply. Antero is not claiming any inheritance from Eugenio.
He is claiming his share in the inheritance of his father consisting of his father's share in the inheritance of Eugenio (Dela Merced v. Dela
Merced, Gr No. 126707, 25 February 1999).
Uribe: The motion should be granted. Iron curtail rule does not apply.
Don Ricardo had 2 legitimate children - Tomas and Tristan. Tristan has 3 children. Meanwhile, Tomas had a relationship with Nancy, who
was also single and had the legal capacity to marry. Nancy became pregnant and gave birth to Tomas, Jr. After the birth of Tomas, Jr., his
father, Tomas, died. Later, Don Ricardo died without a will and Tristan opposed the motion of Tomas, Jr. to be declared an heir of the
deceased since he is an illegitimate child. Tomas, Jr. countered that Article 992 of the Civil Code is unconstitutional for violation of the equal
protection of the laws. He explained that an illegitimate child of an illegitimate parent is allowed to inherit under Articles 902, 982 and 990
of the Civil Code while he - an illegitimate child of a legitimate father - cannot. Civil Law commentator Arturo Tolentino opined that Article
992 created an absurdity and committed an injustice because while the illegitimate descendant of an illegitimate child can represent, the
illegitimate descendant of a legitimate child cannot. Decide the case and explain.
Rabuya: I will deny the motion of Tomas, Jr. to be declared as an heir of! son, Tomas, cannot inherit ab intestate from the deceased, Don
Ricardo, because of the iron curtain rule under Article 992 of the Civil Code. Tomas cannot argue that Article 992 is violative of the equal
protection clause because equal protection simply requires that all persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike, both as to
rights conferred and responsibilities imposed (Ichong v. Hernandez101 Phil. 1155 [May 31, 1957]). It, however, does not require the universal
application of the laws to all persons or things without distinction. What it simply requires is equality among equals as determined according
to a valid classification. Indeed, the equal protection clause permits classification.
Uribe: This problem goes into the wisdom of the law. You may answer that the law is valid because there is substantial distinction.
! 16
!
OBJECTS OF SUCCESSION
• Inheritance – property, rights and obligations which are not extinguished by the death
• Definition of inheritance
• Monetary obligations form part of the inheritance
X gave A 10k, X died. During the settlement, it accrued 2K. Is the interest part of inheritance?
A: No. It is already acquired by the heir. And therefore, he owns it by right accretion.
Uribe: A is entitled to the interest because upon death, everything that accrues, own by the heir
• Article 781: “which have accrued since the opening of the succession” – fundamentally erroneous
Q: Can a property already sold and in possession of a third person, still form part of the inheritance?
A: It may form part of the inheritance under the different circumstances:
1. Void contract of sale
2. Voidable contract of sale, if the period to repurchase hasn’t expired yet at the time of death.
3. Pacto de retro sale, if the period to repurchase hasn’t expired yet at the time of death. (Reyes v. CA)
OPENING OF SUCCESSION
• Most important provision is here Article 777.
• Successional rights are transmitted upon death.
• Retroacts to the date of death
On A’s death last year, his nearest of kin were a legitimate daughter born in 1945 and a spurious son born and recognized by A in 1949. May
the daughter oppose her brother’s claim to their father’s estate on the ground that it would impair her right under the old Civil Code to
succeed him to the exclusion of spurious children? Why?
UP Law Center: No. The rights to the succession are transmitted only from the moment of the death of the decedent. Since A died last year
when the old Civil Code was no longer in force, she did not acquire the right granted by it to exclude her brother from A’s inheritance. Her
right thereto is governed by the new Civil Code, the statute in force at the time of the opening of the succession of A, under which spurious
children inherit together with legitimate descendants.
Uribe: Kung tama ang kanyang claim na maiimpair yung right niya under the civil code, tama ang opposition niya. Ang mali niya, hindi ang
old civil code ang maga-apply dito, kundi ang NCC. It is not about the birth of the heirs. It is about the death of the person whose succession
is under consideration.
H and W are husband and wife. They have neither descendant or ascendant. X died, while the conjugal property is under consideration…. W
donated all her share in her husband’s estate to a friend, F. W died… (could not find the this bar question)
Uribe: Mali ang claim na donation of future property ito, because ang donation happened patay na si H. When H died, vested na ang rights
ng SS. And dahil vested na, pwede na niya ibenta or ipamigay even if hindi pa talaga settled fully ang estate. (Article 777)
Q: X executed a will in 1985. In 1990, he left the house, and was never heard of again. In 1999, an action for settlement was filed. In 2013, it
prospered
a. Can heir file a declaration of settlement and declaration of presumptive death be filed together?
b. Will the action for prosper?
c. X acquired a condominium. When can A be entitled to the rentals?
A:
a. Yes. It can be filed at the same time.
b. Yes, it can prosper if X is above 75 years old. However, if he is below 75 years old, then no.
c. 1999. 10 years from the last day of disappearance.
REQUISITES OF TRANSMISSION OF SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS

1. Express will
2. Death of the person
3. Acceptance
The questions are usually on the ‘death of the person’ because ang pinaka madalas na tanong pertains to a scenario where 2
or more persons perished in the same accident. Ang question is “who survived?” Dito papasok ang Article 43 and Rules on
Survivorship under the ROC.
*See Article 41-44
Cristy and her late husband Luis had two children, Rose and Patrick, One summer, her mother-in-law, aged 70, took the two children, then
aged 10 and 12, with her on a boat trip to Cebu. Unfortunately, the vessel sank en route, and the bodies of the three were never found. None
of the survivors ever saw them on the water. On the settlement of her mother-in-law's estate, Cristy files a claim for a share of her estate on
the ground that the same was inherited by her children from their grandmother in representation of their father, and she inherited the same
from them. Will her action prosper?
UP Law Center: No, her action will not prosper. Since there was no proof as to who died first, all the three are deemed to have died at the
same time and there was no transmission of rights from one to another, applying Article 43 of the New Civil Code.
• Alternative Answer: No, her action will not prosper. Under Article 43 of the New Civil Code, inasmuch as there is no proof as to
who died first, all the three are presumed to have died at the same time and there could be no transmission of rights among them.
Her children not having inherited from their grandmother. Cristy has no right to share in her mother-inlaw's estate. She cannot
share in her own right as she is not a legal heir of her mother-in-law. The survivorship provision of Rule 131 of the Rules of Court
does not apply to the problem. It applies only to those cases where the issue involved is not succession.
! 17
!
Uribe: The most important sentence here is: “none of the survivors ever saw them on the water”. In the facts, Cristy is not claiming that she
inherited from her mother-in-law. In intestate succession, she cannot inherit because she is not an heir. She is just saying that her children
can inherit from their grandmother. But her children died, so whatever the grandchildren inherited from their grandmother, yung ang
mamanahin niya. So may share siya dun sa estate ng mother because minana niya ang minana ng mga anak niya from their grandmother.
• Dahil ang question clearly is about succession, ang iapply ay Article 43 of the NCC. Pag hindi succession ang usapin, like who
survive, i-apply ang ROC.
• Here, the action will not prosper because nakalagay dito “none of the survivors ever saw them on the water”. It would appear that
there is no proof as to who died first. In the absence of proof, it would be presumed that they died at the same time. And therefore,
there would be no transmission of successional rights between the two. Note na ang requirement in order to inherit is living at the
time of the opening of succession. Therefore, the grandchildren did not inherit from their grandmother, and so the mother has
nothing to inherit out of the estate of the grandmother.
Jaime, who is 65, and his son, Willy, who is 25, died in a plane crash. There is no proof as to who died first. Jaime's only surviving heir is his
wife, Julia, who is also Willy's mother. Willy's surviving heirs are his mother, Julia and his wife, Wilma.
1. In the settlement of Jaime's estate, can Wilma successfully claim that her late husband, Willy had a hereditary share since he was
much younger than his father and, therefore, should be presumed to have survived longer?
2. Suppose Jaime had a life insurance policy with his wife, Julia, and his son, Willy, as the beneficiaries. Can Wilma successfully
claim that one-half of the proceeds should belong to Willy's estate?
UP Law Center:
1. No, Wilma cannot successfully claim that Willy had a hereditary share in his father's estate. Under Art. 43, Civil Code, two persons
"who are called to succeed each other" are presumed to have died at the same time, in the absence of proof as to which of them died
first. This presumption of simultaneous death applies in cases involving the question of succession as between the two who died,
who in this case are mutual heirs, being father and son.
2. Yet, Wilma can invoke the presumption of survivorship and claim that one-half of the proceeds should belong to Willy's estate,
under Sec. 3 (jj) par. 5 Rule 131, Rules of Court, as the dispute does not involve succession. Under this presumption, the person
between the ages of 15 and 60 years is deemed to have survived one whose age was over 60 at the time of their deaths. The estate
of Willy endowed with juridical personality stands in place and stead of Willy, as beneficiary.
Uribe: Malinaw na sa first question, succession, but sa second question, ROC.

1. Article 43
2. ROC usually being used in donation (mortis causa and inter vivos)
Note:
1. the case of de Borja v. de Borja – compromise agreement
a. In De Borja, all the heirs are compulsory heirs
2. All the cases under this topic
XxX
KINDS OF SUCCESSION:
TESTAMENTARY
• Takes place only with a valid will
• If the will void – it will not be testamentary
• Will is revoked – not testamentary
LEGAL or INTESTATE
• Intestate – without a will
• Legal – even if there is a valid will under certain circumstances under Article 960 (not exclusive list)
MIXED
• Combination of the two
CONTRACTUAL
• This is an agreement of spouses of their future properties not in accordance with the formalities of will.
• Uribe does not agree that there is contractual succession.
• Not required to comply with the formalities requirement
COMPULSORY SUCCESSION
• No need for this
It is not necessary that when decedent left a will, it is testamentary succession, because of the instances under Article 960.
! 18
!
TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION
Will is an act. It is not a piece of paper – it is just an evidence.

1. It is purely personal act
2. Ambulant – not stable
Characteristics:
1. Purely personal act
2. A free act, without violence, fraud or deceit
3. Disposes of a property
4. Essentially revocable
5. Formally executed
6. Testator must have testamentary capacity
7. Unilateral act
8. Act mortis causa
9. Individual
The testator executed a will following the formalities required by the law on succession without designating any heir. The only testamentary
disposition in the will is the recognition of the testator's illegitimate child with a popular actress. Is the will valid?
(A) Yes, since in recognizing his illegitimate child, the testator has made him his heir.
(B) No, because the non-designation of heirs defeats the purpose of a will.
(C) No, the will comes to life only when the proper heirs are instituted.
(D) Yes, the recognition of an illegitimate heir is an ample reason for a will.
Uribe: It is a will because it will affect rights of the heirs. Even though the will is not valid, if there is recognition of an I/C, the instrument
can be given effect in relation to the recognition. It can be used as proof of recognition.
Manuel, a Filipino, and his American wife Eleanor, executed a Joint Will in Boston, Massachusetts when they were residing in said city. The
law of Massachusetts allows the execution of joint wills. Shortly thereafter, Eleanor died. Can the said Will be probated in the Philippines for
the settlement of her estate?
UP Law Center: Yes, the will may be probated in the Philippines insofar as the estate of Eleanor is concerned. While the Civil Code prohibits
the execution of Joint wills here and abroad, such prohibition applies only to Filipinos. Hence, the joint will which is valid where executed is
valid in the Philippines but only with respect to Eleanor. Under Article 819, it is void with respect to Manuel whose joint will remains void in
the Philippines despite being valid where executed.
Uribe: Yes. Because Eleonor is not a PH citizen so Article 888 does not apply. If it was executed with the law of the place of execution.
Ric and Josie, Filipinos, have been sweethearts for 5 years. While working in a European country where the execution of joint wills are
allowed, the two of them executed a joint holographic will where they named each other as sole heir of the other in case either of them dies.
Unfortunately, Ric died a year later. Can Josie have the joint will successfully probated in the Philippines?
(A) Yes, in the highest interest of comity of nations and to honor the wishes of the deceased.
(B) No, since Philippine law prohibits the execution of joint wills and such law is binding on Ric and Josie
even abroad.
(C) Yes, since they executed their joint will out of mutual love and care, values that the generally accepted principles of
international law accepts.
(D) Yes, since it is valid in the country where it was executed, applying the principle of "lex loci celebrationis."
Uribe: No because this is prohibited under the PH law. Testators are both Filipino.
Validity of the Will
• General Requirements:
o Testamentary capacity
! Not less than 18 (note: the law use “not below 18”, not “minor”)
! Soundness of the mind
o All wills must be in writing.
! PH laws do not recognize orally declared wills.
o In a language known to the testator
! Attestation clause – not in a language known to the testator – valid will because it is not an act of
the testator. It is an act of the testator. In fact, even though the witnesses do not know the
language used, it shall interpreted to them.
! The fact that the testator knows the language does not need to be stated in the attestation clause.
As long as it is proven (no presumption).
! If the will is in a language used in the locality where the Testator had lived for a long time –
presumption arises (no proof); only a disputable presumption
• Other specific requirements
o If notarial (check provisions)
• Solemnities
o Determination if the will is ordinary or holographic, because they have different requirements.
! General requirements – same
! 19
!
Other notes:
• Supervening incapacity does not invalidate an effective will, nor is the will of an incapable validated by the
supervening capacity.
• Supervening competency as regards witnesses "!reckoning point of capacity is execution of the will
• Place of Signature
• must be at the end thereof. The purpose for this is to prevent fraud or interpolation between the testamentary
dispositions and signature.
• There is two theories on where the end is: the physical end which pertains to the physical end of the writing;
and logical end, which is the point where the testamentary disposition terminates.
• Signature by Another
• this must be done by express direction and in the presence of testator. It may be established by extrinsic
evidence. It must be stated in the attestation clause.
• If X died as a blind person, and a petition for probate for HW was filed, may the will be probated?
o Yes, because the facts did not say that he was blind at the time of execution
o Since this is HW – 2-reading requirement is not required.
• Only the testator has the privilege to ask someone to sign for him. Witnesses do not have this kind of privilege.
• Number of pages/numbered
o Substantial compliance
• Failure to state material fact in the attestation clause – if it is stated in any part of the will – substantial compliance
o What fact must be stated - those which make the will void
o Fact which may not be stated in the attestation clause - T signed in each and every page
• Date
o The law does not require that the will be completely executed on a single day, at one time, and in the same
ink, because unity of act is not a requisite for this form of wills.
o A made an involuntary mistake in the date. However, there are material elements in the will which fix the
date with certainty. Does it invalidate the will?
! It does not invalidate the will. The testator is in good faith provided that such proof, which may be
even extrinsic, can have basis in the will itself.
o What if it is intentional false statement of date then?
! Then it invalidates the will. The proof of falsity however must be intrinsic.
• Icasiano v. Icasiano
o Inadvertent failure of one witness to affix his signature to one page of a testament, due to the simultaneous
lifting of two pages in the course of signing, is not per se sufficient to justify denial of probate. Impossibility
of substitution of this page is assured not only the fact that the testatrix and two other witnesses did sign
the defective page, but also by its bearing the coincident imprint of the seal of the notary public before
whom the testament was ratified by testatrix and all three witnesses.\
• Lopez v. Lopez
o While Article 809 allows substantial compliance for defects in the form of the attestation clause, Richard
likewise failed in this respect. The statement in the Acknowledgment portion of the subject last will and
testament that it "consists of 7 pages including the page on which the ratification and acknowledgment are
written" cannot be deemed substantial compliance. The will actually consists of 8 pages including its
acknowledgment which discrepancy cannot be explained by mere examination of the will itself but through
the presentation of evidence aliunde.
Busalsal executed a will in his handwriting, signed by him at the end of each page on the left marginal space of every page except the last
page. The document bore no date. However, below Busalsal’s every signature, were the signatures of two witnesses, who later testified that
the will was executed in their presence on Jan. 1, 1985, New Year’s Day, and that Busalsal was in full possession of his faculties at that time
and even explained to them details of the will he was writing down. Is the will formally valid? Explain.
Uribe: You have to consider if it is a valid will? Ordinary or testate will? Or is this a valid holographic? The fact that it was handwritten does
not mean that it is holographic, because it can still comply with the requirements set forth in an ordinary/notarial will.
• As ordinary will, it is not valid because the law requires at least 3 witnesses. Here, there are only 2.
• As holographic, no, it is not valid, because the document bore no date.
o Why is it that date is required in holographic will, unlike in notarial will? It is required because the date is the only basis
to determine the testamentary capacity of the testator. In notarial, there are witnesses to testify on this matter.
Clara, thinking of her mortality, drafted a will and asked Roberta, Hannah, Luisa and Benjamin to be witnesses. During the day of signing
of her will, Clara fell down the stairs and broke her arms. Coming from the hospital, Clara insisted on signing her will by thumb mark and
said that she can sign her full name later. While the will was being signed, Roberta experienced a stomach ache and kept going to the
restroom for long periods of time. Hannah, while waiting for her turn to sign the will, was reading the 7th Harry Potter book on the couch,
beside the table on which everyone was signing. Benjamin, aside from witnessing the will, also offered to notarize it. A week after, Clara was
run over by a drunk driver while crossing the street in Greenbelt.
May the will of Clara be admitted to probate? Give your reasons briefly.
UP Law Center: Probate should be denied. The requirement that the testator and at least three (3) witnesses must sign all in the "presence"
of one another was not complied with. Benjamin who notarized the will is disqualified as a witness, hence he cannot be counted as one of the
three witnesses (Cruz v. Villasor, 54 SCRA 31, 1973). The testatrix and the other witnesses signed the will not in the presence of Roberta
because she was in the restroom for extended periods of time. Inside the restroom, Roberta could not have possibly seen the testatrix and the
other witnesses sign the will by merely casting her eyes in the proper direction (Jaboneta v. Gustilo, 5 Phil 541, 1906; Nera v. Rimando, 18
Phil 451, 1914). Therefore, the testatrix signed the will in the presence of only two witnesses, and only two witnesses signed the will in the
presence of the testatrix and of one another.
It is to be noted, however, that the thumb mark intended by the testator to be his signature in executing his last will and testament is valid
(Payad v. Tolentino, 62 Phil 848, 1936; Matias v. Salud, L-104 Phil 1046, 23 June, 1958). The problem, however, states that Clara "said that
she can sign her full name later;" Hence, she did not consider her thumb mark as her "complete" signature, and intended further action on
her part. The testatrix and the other witness signed the will in the presence of Hannah, because she was aware of her function and role as
! 20
!
witness and was in a position to see the testatrix and the other witnesses sign by merely casting her eyes in the proper direction.
Uribe: “May” – YES.

• Thumbmark as signature – valid as signature everyone has different thumb marks. (SC CASE) The only danger here is vitiation of
consent.
• Signing by the witness in the presence of the T and of each other. Complied or not? Ang mga may issue dito ay kina:
o Roberta
! As to the presence, it is not required that ‘actually seen”. It is sufficient that they are in a position to see. No
obstruction to the line of sight.
! Just because she kept going to the bathroom does not mean that the signing was not done in her presence. It
could have been agreed that no one will sign while she’s in the bathroom, or the door is opened (HAHA).
o Hanna
! Very much in the position to see if she wanted to
o Benjamin
! 1 of the 3 witnesses is a notary public – not allowed
! But such is not the case here because he only offered to notarize. But for the sake of argument, should it be
notarized by Benjamin, the will would still be valid because there are other 3 witnesses.
o No issue with Louisa
On his deathbed, Vicente was executing a will. In the room were Carissa, Carmela, Comelio and Atty. Cimpo, a notary public. Suddenly,
there was a street brawl which caught Comelio's attention, prompting him to look out the window. Cornelio did not see Vicente sign a will. Is
the will valid?
UP Law Center:
a) Yes, The will is valid. The law does not require a witness to actually see the testator sign the will. It is sufficient if the witness
could have seen the act of signing had he chosen to do so by casting his eyes to the proper direction.
b) Yes, the will is valid. Applying the "test of position", although Comelio did not actually see Vicente sign the will, Cornelio was in
the proper position to see Vicente sign if Cornelio so wished.
Uribe: YES. First, just because he did not see does not mean that the signing was not done in his presence. The fact that he was in the room
– he was in the position to see the signing if he wanted to. Second, it would be argued that he was not in the position to see, nonetheless
there were other 3 witnesses. Also, the fact that Atty. Cimpo is a notary public does not make him an incompetent because the facts did not
state that the will was acknowledged before him.
The probate of the will of Nicandro is contested on the ground that the notary public before whom the will was acknowledged was also one of
the three instrumental witnesses. If you were the probate judge, how would you decide the contest? Give your reasons.
UP Law Center: The will is void. The acknowledging officer cannot serve as attesting witness at the same time. In effect, there are only 2
witnesses since the notary cannot swear before himself.
Uribe: With due respect to the examiner, mali yun word na “contest”. Contest is technical term. If a will is contested, it pertains to
holographic will regarding the handwriting. Anyway, this is the case of Cruz v. Villasor. If one of the 3 witnesses is a notary public, it is a
void will.
Arthur executed a will which contained only: (i) a provision disinheriting his daughter Bernica for running off with a married man, and (ii) a
provision disposing of his share in the family house and lot in favor of his other children Connie and Dora. He did not make any provisions in
favor of his wife Erica, because as the will stated, she would anyway get 1⁄2 of the house and lot as her conjugal share. The will was very
brief and straightforward and both the above provisions were contained in page 1, which Arthur and his instrumental witness, signed at the
bottom. Page 2 contained the attestation clause and the signatures, at the bottom thereof, of the 3 instrumental witnesses which included
Lambert, the driver of Arthur; Yoly, the family cook, and Attorney Zorba, the lawyer who prepared the will. There was a 3rd page, but this
only contained the notarial acknowledgement.
The attestation clause stated the will was signed on the same occasion by Arthur and his instrumental witnesses who all signed in the
presence of each other, and the notary public who notarized the will. There are no marginal signatures or pagination appearing on any of the
3 pages. Upon his death, it was discovered that apart from the house and lot, he had a P 1 million account deposited with ABC bank.
(B) What other defects of the will, if any, can cause denial of probate?
UP Law Center: The other defects of the will that can cause its denial are as follows: (a) Atty. Zorba, the one who prepared the will was one
of the three witnesses, violating the three-witnesses rule; (b) no marginal signature at the last page; (c ) the attestation did not state the
number of pages upon which the will is written; and, (d) no pagination appearing correlatively in letters on the upper part of the three pages
(Azuela v. C.A., G.R.!No. 122880, 12 Apr 2006 and cited cases therein, Art 805 and 806, Civil Code).
Uribe: There is none, with due respect to UP.

• Atty. Uribe discussed only the issues on marginal signature, and competency of the witnesses.
• As to the marginal signature:
o Witnesses signed at the bottom – will not cause the denial of probate because marginal signatures does not affect the
validity of the will because the purpose of such is just to make sure that there is no substitution, alteration, insertions,
intercalation, etc.
o Witnesses are supposed to sign at the left portion – non-compliance does not void the will
• As to the competency of the witnesses
o Law requires witnesses only to be:
! Not less than 18
! Soundness of the mind
! Able to read and write
! Not blind/deafmute
! Not convicted of perjury, false testimony
! Domiciled in the PH
• When describing witnesses, use the word “competent/incompetent”
• When describing testator, use the word “qualified” to make a will
The attestation clause contains the following, except:
! 21
!
a) the number of pages used;
b) that the testator signed or caused another to sign the will and every page thereof in the presence of the instrumental witnesses;
c) notary public;
d) the instrumental witnesses witnessed and signed the will and all the pages thereof in the presence of the testator and one another.
Pepito executed a will that he and 3 attesting witnesses signed following the formalities of law, except that the Notary Public failed to come.
Two days later, the Notary Public notarized the will in his law office where all signatories to the will acknowledged that the testator signed
the will in the presence of the witnesses and that the latter themselves signed the will in the presence of the testator and of one another.
Was the will validly notarized?
(A) No, since it was not notarized on the occasion when the signatories affixed their signatures on the will.
(B) Yes, since the Notary Public has to be present only when the signatories acknowledged the acts required of
them in relation to the will.
(C) Yes, but the defect in the mere notarization of the will is not fatal to its execution.
(D) No, since the notary public did not require the signatories to sign their respective attestations again.
Uribe: NP is not required to be present during the signing of the will as long as the T and W acknowledged it before him. Also the law does
not require that it be acknowledged in the presence of each other. (Javellana case: what if the T and W went to the NP however the NP failed
to sign the acknowledgment while the parties were in his office. He just remembered nung wala na. It can still be probated because the law
does not require that he signs in the presence of the parties)
Question: What if the NP actually failed to sign? It can still be probated because the law requires the act of acknowledging, and this was
complied with. What is required by the law is not the instrument but the act.
Holographic Wills
The following are the formalities required in the execution of holographic will, except:
a) Entirely written;
b) Dated;
c) Signed by testator himself
d) Notarized by a notary public.
Uribe:
• Reason why dated – only element which determines the age and capacity to execute a will
• Signature
o Cross above the name – sufficient except in:
! Garcia v. Lacuesta – denied probate because it was not shown that such cross is the usual way of signing.
• Entirely written – usual bar questions
o Insertions made by 3rd persons – should be authenticated by the full signature (full name; not initial) of the testator.
When complied, the insertion becomes part of the testamentary dispositions.
Vanessa died on April 14, 1980, leaving behind a holographic will which is entirely written, dated and signed in her own handwriting.
However, it contains insertions and cancellations which are not authenticated by her signature. For this reason, the probate of Vanessa's will
was opposed by her relatives who stood to inherit by her intestacy. May Vanessa's holographic will be probated? Explain.
UP Law Center: Yes, the will as originally written may be probated. The insertions and alterations were void since they were not
authenticated by the full signature of Vanessa, under Art. 814, NCC. The original will, however, remains valid because a holographic will is
not invalidated by the unauthenticated insertions or alterations (Ajero v. CA, 236 SCRA 468].
Uribe: Yes because the insertions and cancellations, which are not authenticated by signature, cannot be given effect kasi anyone can do
that.
• Question: May a will be void because of insertions? YES, if not authenticated – even if the insertion was made by the testator.
• See the case of Kalaw
Natividad’s holographic will, which had only one (1) substantial provision, as first written, named Rosa as her sole heir. However, when
Gregorio presented it for probate, it already contained an alteration, naming Gregorio, instead of Rosa, as sole heir, but without
authentication by Natividad’s signature. Rosa opposes the probate alleging such lack of proper authentication. She claims that the unaltered
form of the will should be given effect. Whose claim should be granted? Explain.
UP Law Center: It depends. If the cancellation of Rosa’s name in the will was done by the testator himself, Rosa’s claimed that the
holographic will in its original tenor should be given effect must be denied. The said cancellation has revoked the entire will as nothing
remains of the will after the name of Rosa was cancelled. Such cancellation is valid revocation of the will and does not require authentication
by the full signature of the testator to be effective.
However, if the cancellation of Rosa’s name was not done by the testator himself, such cancellation shall not be effective and the will in its
original tenor shall remain valid. The effectively of the holographic will cannot be left to the mercy of unscrupulous third parties.
The writing of Gregorio’s name as sole heir was ineffective, even though written by the testator himself, because such is an alteration that
requires authentication by the full signature of the testator to be valid and effective. Not having an authenticated, the designation of
Gregorio as an heir was ineffective, (Kalaw v. Relova, G.R. No. L-40207, Sept 28, 1984).
Uribe: Wala. [See UP Law Center’s answer]
Stevie was born blind. He went to school for the blind, and learned to read in Baille Language. He Speaks English fluently. Can he:
(A) Make a will?
(B) Act as a witness to a will?
(C) In either of the above instances, must the will be read to him?
UP Law Center:
! 22
!
(A) Assuming that he is of legal age (Art. 797, Civil Code) and of sound mind at the time of execution of the will (Art. 798, Civil Code),
Stevie, a blind person, can make a notarial will, subject to compliance with the "two-reading rule" (Art. 808, Civil Code) and the
provisions of Arts. 804, 805 and 806 of the Civil Code.
(B) Stevie cannot be a witness to a will. Art. 820 provides that “any person of sound mind and of the age of 18 years or more, and not
blind, deaf and dumb, and able to read and write, may be a witness to the execution of a will.”
(C) If Stevie makes a will, the will must be read to him twice, once by one of the subscribing witnesses, and again, by the notary public
before whom the will is acknowledged (Art. 808, Civil Code).
Uribe: (A) Holographic will – yes. Just because he is blind does not mean he does not know how to write. Notarial will – “two-reading rule”.
(B) No. See requisites in order to be a competent witness. (C) No, if it is a holographic will.
Codicil
- Not part of the will, but explains the will
- A codicil is a supplement or addition to a will made after the execution of a will and annexed to be taken as a part
thereof, by which any disposition made in the original will is explained, added to, or altered. (Art. 825)
Revocation
Note:
Just because an heir is guilty of a crime does not necessarily result to revocation of a will by implication of law because it
does not mean that he committed an act of unworthiness. Also, just because guilty of adultery, she is incapacitated. It must
be adultery with the testator or with the spouse of the testator. Take note also of the distinction:
• Unworthy under Article 1032 – adultery with the spouse of the testator
• Immoral under Article 1028 – adultery with the testator
Which of the ff. is absolutely true?

a. Revocation is an act of the testator
b. Revocation is by operation of law
c. Revocation presupposes a valid act
d. Revocation takes place only during the lifetime of the testator
e. None of the above
Uribe:
A = There are 3 modes of revocation: (i) destruction, (ii) implication of law, and (iii) codicil/execution of subsequent
instrument, so not necessarily act of the testator.
B = “By implication of law” is also not an absolute of rule because pwede act of an testator.
C = So ang answer is (c). Kapag hindi valid ang will, there is nothing to revoke.
D = because as far as revocation by implication of law. Example – Article 1032 (unworthiness – forge, concealing the will…)
With the intention of revoking his will, X ask his son A, to get the envelope containing the will from his bag knowing that his heavily favour
in the will, A replace a will with a deed of sale and give the envelope to his father. X immediately burn the envelope without looking of his
contents is there a?
a. Revocation by implication of law
b. Revocation by execution of subsequent instrument
c. Revocation be destruction
d. There is no revocation
Uribe: No destruction kasi pinalitan yun will. By the way, in burning, it is not required na maging ash siya. Basta may discoloration, kahit
nababasa pa, pwedeng revocation na. So dito ang choices lang talaga is (a) and (d). But take note, may intent to revoke, but no destruction.
Tapos may act of unworthiness on the part of A by preventing X to revoke the will under Article 1032.
Ramon, a Filipino, executed a will in Manila, where he left his house and located in BP Homes Parañaque in favor of his Filipino son,
Ramgen. Ramon’s other children RJ and Ramona, both Turkish nationals, are disputing the bequest to Ramgen. They plotted to kill Ramgen.
Ramon learned of the plot, so he tore his will in two pieces out of anger. Which statement is most accurate?
a) The mere act of Ramon Sr. is immaterial because the will is still readable.
b) The mere act of tearing the will amounts to revocation.
c) The tearing of the will may amount to revocation if coupled with intent of revoking it.
d) The act of tearing the will is material.
Uribe: intention + destruction.
Mr. Reyes executed a will completely valid as to form. A week later, however, he executed another will which expressly revoked his first will,
which he tore his first will to pieces. Upon the death of Mr. Reyes, his second will was presented for probate by his heirs, but it was denied
probate due to formal defects. Assuming that a copy of the first will is available, may it now be admitted to probate and given effect? Why?
UP Law Center: Yes, the first will may be admitted to probate and given effect. When the testator tore first will, he was under the mistaken
belief that the second will was perfectly valid and he would not have destroyed the first will had he known that the second will is not valid.
The revocation by destruction therefore is dependent on the validity of the second will. Since it turned out that the second will was invalid,
the tearing of the first will did not produce the effect of revocation. This is known as the doctrine of dependent relative revocation. (Molo v.
Molo, 90 Phil 37.)
Uribe: Kung meron revocation by execution of subsequent instrument, if the 2nd will was denied probate, it is as if walang revocation. In
order for the revocatory clause in the 2nd will to be given effect, that 2nd will must be valid. (Molo v. Molo) Here, the first will is also revoked
because it was destroyed. Kaya always know the modes, kasi baka dun sa isang mode, pumasok sya. Wala ngang revocation by execution of
! 23
!
subsequent instrument, meron naman revocation by destruction.
May there be a presumption of revocation?
Uribe: Yes, Gago v. Mamuyac. The [disputable] presumption arises when after the death of T, the will could not be found despite diligent
efforts but it was last seen in the possession of the testator.
• Requisites:
o Diligent efforts
o Will could not be found
o Last seen in the possession of T
Doctrine of Dependent Relative Revocation

• Where the act of destruction is connected with the making of another will, so as fairly to raise the inference that the testator meant
the revocation of the old to depend upon the efficacy of the new disposition intended to be substituted, the revocation will be
conditional and dependent upon the efficacy of the new disposition; and it the new will intended to be made as substitute is
inoperative, the revocation fails and the original will remain in full force.
• The question in each is case is whether the destruction or revocation was with the absolute intent to revoke all events, or only in
case the new will is well and completely executed. This is a question of fact to be proved by any competent evidence.
• What the testator said at the time of the doing the revocation is competent as part of the res gestae.
• Provision: The validity of the new will prevents the operation of the principle of dependent relative revocation, even if the new
dispositions cannot be carried out.
! 24
!
Probate
Allowance of Wills
Purpose:
(1) To determine if the will is executed in accordance with the formalities prescribed by law
(2) To determine the capacity to make a will
(3) To determine if there is intent to make a will
Necessity of probate: the law provides that no will shall pass unless the will is probated.
Subject of Inquiry of Probate Court:

(1) Authenticity
(2) Intention to dispose
(3) Testamentary capacity
Note: validity of testamentary dispositions is not a subject of inquiry during probate proceedings because the said
proceedings pertains only to extrinsic validity but in exceptional circumstances, that even if in the probate proceedings, if the
will is void on its face, the court should not proceed with the probate.
Maria, to spite her husband Jorge, whom she suspected was having an affair with another woman, executed a will, unknown to him,
bequeathing all the properties she inherited from her parents, to her sister Miguela. Upon her death, the will was presented for probate.
Jorge opposed probate of the will on the ground that the will was executed by his wife without his knowledge, much less consent, and that it
deprived him of his legitime. After all, he had given her no cause for disinheritance, added Jorge in his opposition.
How will you rule on Jorge's opposition to the probate of Maria's will. If you were the Judge?
UP Law Center: As Judge, I shall rule as follows: Jorge's opposition should be sustained in part and denied in part. Jorge's omission as
spouse of Maria is not preterition of a compulsory heir in the direct line. Hence, Art. 854 of the Civil Code does not apply, and the institution
of Miguela as heir is valid, but only to the extent of the free portion of one-half. Jorge is still entitled to one-half of the estate as his legitime.
(Art. 1001, Civil Code)
Uribe:
Without the consent of the husband? Not a ground. Deprivation of legitime – this goes into the intrinsic validity. The Court may only inquire
as to the extrinsic validity. But on its face, he was not really deprived. But again, it is not a ground for disallowance of wills.
Modes of Probate
Ante-Mortem
• Note: death certificate is not required for obvious reasons.
Probate of Holographic Wills

• Usual bar question
o Entirely written by the hand of the T – if the handwriting is being question then the will is being contested
! Article 811 – if the will is contested, there should be at least 3 witness to testify on the handwriting
• Is the 3-witness rule mandatory? YES. Azaola v. Singson – only permissive requirement
despite the word “shall” because:
(1) Nature of probate proceedings, eg. ordinarily the petition for probate is
filed so many years after the execution, and by that time yung ibang
witnesses , namatay na;
(2) Expert witness may be presented.
o But in Codoy v. Calugay, SC said that the requirement is mandatory. (Atty. Uribe
disagreed)
• The witnesses are not required to have actually seen how the will was executed. They just
testify on the handwriting.
Johnny, with no known living relatives, executed a notarial will giving all his estate to his sweetheart. One day, he had a serious altercation
with his sweetheart. A few days later, he was introduced to a charming lady who later became a dear friend. Soon after, he executed a
holographic will expressly revoking the notarial will and so designating his new friend as sole heir. One day when he was clearing up his
desk, Johnny mistakenly burned, along with other papers, the only copy of his holographic will. His business associate, Eduardo knew well
the contents of the will which was shown to him by Johnny the day it was executed. A few days after the burning incident, Johnny died. Both
wills were sought to be probated in two separate petitions. Will either or both petitions prosper?
UP Law Center: The probate of the notarial will will prosper. The holographic will cannot be admitted to probate because a holographic will
can only be probated upon evidence of the will itself unless there is a photographic copy. But since the holographic will was lost and there
was no other copy, it cannot be probated and therefore the notarial will will be admitted to probate because there is no revoking will.
Uribe: Only the petition in relation to notarial will (1st). Because first, the notarial will was revoked. But was the revocation valid? No
because it was revoked by a holographic will. In Molo v. Molo, in order for the revocatory clause to take effect, the revocatory instrument
must be probated. But since it is a holographic will, and it was lost and no copy, Gan v. Yap will apply. A HW cannot be probated if it is not
presented for probate, unless there is a copy. Why require the presentation? Because it is the only evidence as to the handwriting. Kaya
kapag nawala ito, regardless kung sino may kasalanan, it cannot be probated, and revoked a will.
Note: there is a case where the court allowed a photocopy (photostatic) of will to be probated. Atty. Uribe does not agree. It is very easy to
commit fraud. (Footnote of Gan v. Yap)
! 25
!
Disallowance of Will
The following are the grounds for disallowance of wills, except:

a) The formalities required by law have not been complied with.
b) The testator was insane or mentally incapable of making will.
c) The will was executed through force or under duress, or influence of fear or threats.
d) The will contains an attestation clause.
Uribe: What are the grounds? Enumerated in Article 839. Is it exclusive? If the will is revoked, it can no longer be probated. But is revocation
a ground to disallowance? No, because it is a ground to the dismissal of the petition. Revocation is a jurisdictional matter. Before probate
court acquires jurisdiction, it should not be revoked. Therefore, the enumeration is exclusive.
Legitimes* (SKIPPED)
! 26
!
PRINCIPLES AFFECTING LEGITIME
Focus:
1. Preterition
2. Reserva Troncal
3. Disinheritance
1. Preterition
Omission in the T’s will of one, some or all CHs in the direct line whether living at the time of the execution of the will or
born thereafter.
If an heir who is a CH in the direct line was omitted in the will, necessarily the heir was preterited?
• NO. If there are undisposed properties.
o Remedy: completion of legitime
• If all the properties were disposed of
o If given a property during the lifetime of T
• Therefore, the accurate definition of preterition is – total omission of CH in the direct line in the inheritance, not
only in the will.
Effect when preterited:

1. [Total] annulment of institution of heir however respecting the L/D, as long as they are not inofficious
Requisites:
1. Valid will
a. Because if none, one can inherit by legal succession, and no annulment of institution
2. Dispose ALL properties
3. Heir is in the direct line
a. Father/mother can be preterited but the premise there is no one can inherit in the descending line.
b. I/C can be preterited because he is still an heir in the direct line
i. Limited only to legitime (Atty. Uribe does not agree)
4. Heir is not an disinherited
a. Preterition is unintentional.
Can a spouse be preterited?

• NO. Spouse is not an heir in the direct line.
Because her eldest son Juan had been pestering her for capital to start a business, Josefa gave him P100,000. Five years later, Josefa died,
leaving a last will and testament in which she instituted only her four younger children as her sole heirs. At the time of her death, her only
properly left was P900,000.00 in a bank. Juan opposed the will on the ground of preterition. How should Josefa's estate be divided among her
heirs? State briefly the reason(s) for your answer.
UP Law Center: There was no preterition of the oldest son because the testatrix donated 100,000 pesos to him. This donation is considered
an advance on the son's inheritance. There being no preterition, the institutions in the will shall be respected but the legitime of the oldest
son has to be completed if he received less.
After collating the donation of P100.000 to the remaining property of P900,000, the estate of the testatrix is P1,000,000. Of this amount, one-
half or P500,000, is the legitime of the legitimate children and it follows that the legitime of one legitimate child is P100,000. The legitime,
therefore, of the oldest son is P100,000. However, since the donation given him was P100,000, he has already received in full his legitime and
he will not receive anything anymore from the decedent. The remaining P900,000, therefore, shall go to the four younger children by
institution in the will, to be divided equally among them. Each will receive P225,000.
Uribe: Before we can divide the estate properly, we should first address the question whether Juan was preterited.
• He was not preterited because he received P100K during T’s lifetime. So his remedy is completion of legitime assuming P100K is
less than what he supposed to received as legitime.
• So collate and compute. [See UP’s answer]
Arthur executed a will which contained only: (i) a provision disinheriting his daughter Bernica for running off with a married man, and (ii) a
provision disposing of his share in the family house and lot in favor of his other children Connie and Dora. He did not make any provisions in
favor of his wife Erica, because as the will stated, she would anyway get 1⁄2 of the house and lot as her conjugal share. The will was very
brief and straightforward and both the above provisions were contained in page 1, which Arthur and his instrumental witness, signed at the
bottom. Page 2 contained the attestation clause and the signatures, at the bottom thereof, of the 3 instrumental witnesses which included
Lambert, the driver of Arthur; Yoly, the family cook, and Attorney Zorba, the lawyer who prepared the will. There was a 3rd page, but this
only contained the notarial acknowledgement.
Was Erica preterited?
UP Law Center: No. Art. 854 of the Civil Code provides that only compulsory heirs in the direct line can be preterited
Uribe: She is not an heir in the direct line. Even though she is an heir in the direct line, there is no preterition because not all properties
were disposed of.
! 27
!
2. Reserva Troncal (2:12:00)
Also known reserve lineal.
Rationale: to entail a property/estate to a certain family.

• To compensate the absence of right of representation in the ascending line.
• Inconsistent with philosophy which guided the Code Commission - “socialization of ownership”
May the reservor, more popularly known as reservista, dispose of the reservable property by acts inter vivos or acts mortis
causa?
Uribe:
• By acts inter vivos – he can because the present ruling, the SC said that the reservista acquires ownership over the
property; but the said ownership during the reservation is not absolute, as it is subject to a resolutory condition that
upon his death, there is this heir known as reservatarios, who may inherit this property.
• By acts mortis causa – ordinarily, no, because upon death of the reservista, it goes to reservatario. So a disposition to
take effect mortis causa cannot take effect unless at the time of death of reservista, there is no reservatario
(incapacitated, renounced, dead)
To understand the rules on reserva troncal, consider the parties involved in this concept.
1. Origin –
a. Ascendant, brother or sister
b. Property came from this person;
c. Always a determinate property (no reservation over generic property)
d. Transfers the property by gratuitous title
i. Not required to be dead
e.
2. Prepositus
a. Descendant, brother or sister
b. When this person acquires the property, he does not automatically become a prepositus because there is no
reservation yet so can dispose as he wishes
c. However, when the property is acquired by an ascendant (reservor/reservista) by operation of law (not by
donation), reservation starts.
d. Death, incapacity, or renouncement is required.
e. Property goes to ascendant because prepositus has no descendant
3. Reservor/reservista
a. Ascendant
b. By operation of law
c. Reservista until death
4. Reservatario/reservees
a. Within 3 degrees from the prepositus (because reservor/reservista only reserves the property)
b. Within the line of origin
c. Can be two or more reservatarios
i. But can all of them inherit? Not necessarily because PH law does not the principle of reserve
integral.
1. SC follows the rules on intestate succession (eg. proximity rule)
d. Must be of legitimate relation
e. Between uncle/aunt and niece/nephew - who will inherit considering that they belong in the same degree
and that proximity rules does not apply?
i. by express provision of the law, niece/nephew will exclude uncle/aunt
Causes of Extinguishment
• Death of reservista
• Loss of the thing due to fortuitous event
• Renunciation (on the part of reservatario)
o Different views:
! If renounced after reservista’s death – reservation is extinguished
• Uribe: this is wrong because patay na nga reservista therefore extinguished na talaga ang
reservation. The only effect of this is the heirs of reservista will inherit.
! If renounced before reservista’s death –
• Uribe: no effect because reservatario’s rights are vested only upon reservista’s death
Alienation:
• If the reservista alienated the property, the reservatarios, upon reservista’s death, may recover the property when
the reservable character of the property is annotated at the back of the title of the property.
o If it is annotated – bad faith ang buyer thus, can be recovered
o If not annotated – buyer in good faith and in value; reservatarios may recover from the estate of the
reservista
True or false. In reservatroncal, all reservatarios (reservees) inherit as a class and in equal shares regardless of their proximity in degree to
the prepositus.
UP Law Center: FALSE. Not all the relatives within the third degree will inherit as reservatario, and not all those who are entitled to
inherit will inherit in the equal shares . The applicable laws of intestate succession will determine who among the relatives will inherit as
reservatarios and what shares they will take, i.e., the direct line excludes the collateral, the descending direct line excludes the ascending,
! 28
!
the nearer excludes the more remote, the nephews and nieces exclude the uncles and the aunts, and half blood relatives inherit half the
share of full-blooded relatives.
Mr. Luna died, leaving an estate of Ten Million (P1 0,000,000.00) Pesos. His widow gave birth to a child four months after Mr, Luna's death,
but the child died five hours after birth. Two days after the child's death, the widow of Mr. Luna also died because she had suffered from
difficult childbirth. The estate of Mr. Luna is now being claimed by his parents, and the parents of his widow. Who is entitled to Mr. Luna'a
estate and why? (5%)
UP Law Center: Half of the estate of Mr. Luna will go to the parents of Mrs. Luna as their inheritance from Mrs. Luna, while the other half
will be inherited by the parents of Mr. Luna as the reservatarios of the reserved property inherited by Mrs. Luna from her child.
When Mr. Luna died, his heirs were his wife and the unborn child. The unborn child inherited because the inheritance was favorable to it
and it was born alive later though it lived only for five hours. Mrs. Luna inherited half of the 10 Million estate while the unborn child
inherited the other half. When the child died, it was survived by its mother, Mrs. Luna. As the only heir, Mrs. Luna inherited, by operation of
law, the estate of the child consisting of its 5 Million inheritance from Mr. Luna. In the hands of Mrs. Luna, what she inherited from her
child was subject to reserva troncal for the benefit of the relatives of the child within the third degree of consanguinity and who belong to the
family of Mr. Luna, the line where the property came from.
When Mrs. Luna died, she was survived by her parents as her only heirs. Her parents will inherit her estate consisting of the 5 Million she
inherited from Mr. Luna. The other 5 Million she inherited from her child will be delivered to the parents of Mr. Luna as beneficiaries of the
reserved property.
In sum, 5 Million Pesos of Mr. Luna's estate will go to the parents of Mrs. Luna, while the other 5 Million Pesos will go to the parents of Mr.
Luna as reservatarios.
Uribe: “being claimed” does not mean na nag-mana sila directly from the decedent. Baka nagmana sila dun sa nagnaman kay Mr. Luna kasi
marami na namatay. Ang issue dito will include the acquisition of juridical personality kasi may bata – itong batang ito was born 4 months
after Mr. Luna’s death. Pero just because he was born 4 months after does not mean that he only had intra-uterine of less than 7 months
kasi nung namatay si Mr. Luna, 5 months lang yun sa bata sa loob, after 4 months, full term na sya. So even if he died 5 hours after death,
he already acquired juridical personality so sagot is magqqaulify ‘yan - kasi if the child will inherit/acquire juridical personality, P10M will
be divided between the child and the mother (1/2; ½) parents excluded. Kaso namatay din ang bata so, ang magiinheirt is yun parent
[mother]. Barred ang grandparents kasi 2 degrees sila. Yung mother inherit the P5M, so buong P10M napunta na sa kanya – from her
husband as his wife, and from her child as her mother. Per nung namatay sya, it should not stop. So nung namatay siya, dyan ang laban.
• Yun minana nya as surviving spouse will go to her surviving parents
• But yung minana nya galling sa anak niya, mapupunta sa parents ni Mr. Luna under reserva troncal kasi yung minana ng child
galling kay Mr. Luna ! (via gratuitous title) descendant ! (operation of law) mother ! parents of Mr. Luna - within 3 degrees
from the child, from the line of Mr. Luna
• Assuming the child was born less than 7 months – ang magmamana is mother/spouse P5M, parents of Mr. Luna P5M; when
mother/spouse died, her P5M will go to her parents.
Property – parcel of land

H2 – origin
Bx – prepositus
R – reservista
Scene 1: N – grandchild of H2; within 3 degrees from Bx

• Cannot inherit as reservatario because of illegitimate relation
Scene 2: E and Z
E – brother of H2; uncle of Bx
Z – nephew of Bx
• Z will inherit because of express provision of the law (order of succession)
Scene 3: J and Q
J – 2 degrees from Bx
Q – 3 degrees from Bx; by right of representation
• Both of them will inherit
Scene 4: J and L
Both – 2 degrees
• L will not inherit because he did not come from the line of H2; child from another guy
Scene 5: K and T
K – 2 degrees
T – 4 degrees
• T cannot inherit
• T also cannot claim that he can inherit by right of representation because this right, in the collateral line, extends only to the
children of brothers and sisters – grandchildren are excluded. They can only inherit in their own right.
Isidro and Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of age, were passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental Airlines. The plane they boarded was of
Philippine registry. While en route from Manila to Greece some passengers hijacked the plane, held the chief pilot hostage at the cockpit and
ordered him to fly instead to Libya. During the hijacking Isidro suffered a heart attack and was on the verge of death. Since Irma was
already eight months pregnant by Isidro, she pleaded to the hijackers to allow the assistant pilot to solemnize her marriage with Isidro. Soon
after the marriage, Isidro expired. As the plane landed in Libya Irma gave birth. However, the baby died a few minutes after complete
delivery. Back in the Philippines Irma Immediately filed a claim for inheritance. The parents of Isidro opposed her claim contending that the
marriage between her and Isidro was void ab initio on the following grounds: (a) they had not given their consent to the marriage of their
son; (b) there was no marriage license; (c) the solemnizing officer had no authority to perform the marriage; and, (d) the solemnizing officer
did not file an affidavit of marriage with the proper civil registrar.
Does Irma have any successional rights at all? Discuss fully.
UP Law Center: Irma succeeded to the estate of Isidro as his surviving spouse to the estate of her legitimate child. When Isidro died, he was
succeeded by his surviving wife Irma, and his legitimate unborn child. They divided the estate equally between them, the child excluding the
parents of Isidro. An unborn child is considered born for all purposes favorable to it provided it is born later. The child was considered born
because, having an intra-uterine life of more than seven months, it lived for a few minutes after its complete delivery. It was legitimate
because it was born within the valid marriage of the parents. Succession is favorable to it. When the child died, Irma inherited the share of
the child. However, the share of the child in the hands of Irma is subject to reserva troncal for the benefit of the relatives of the child within
! 29
!
the third degree of consanguinity and who belong to the line of Isidro.
Property – land worth P10K; shares of stock worth P20K = P30K

N – origin (X’s mother)
X – prepositus (X gave all his properties to his father through a will)
Y and Z – X’s siblings
Uribe:
• Note that even though X has a will, his father would still inherit ½ of the estate (legitime; by operation of law)
• Shares in this case are not reservable (not clear by not reservable); land is reservable
• P15K by operation of law to X’s father
• Question: how much is the reservable property? Is the whole land reservable? (kasi ang mapupunta sa tatay by operation of law is
P15K lang, yung value ng land is P10K, so covered siya)
o This is where reserva minima and maxima come in.
! Maxima – whole land is reservable
! Minima – half is reservable;
o The correct principle here is reserva minima because it is consistent with the socialization of ownership.
Princess married Roberto and bore a son, Onofre. Roberto died in a plane crash. Princess later married Mark and they also had a son -
Pepito. Onofre donated to Pepito, his half-brother, a lot in Makati City worth P3,000,000.00. Pepito succumbed to an illness and died
intestate. The lot given to Pepito by Onofre was inherited by his father, Mark. Mark also died intestate. Lonely, Princess followed Mark to
the life beyond. The claimants to the subject lot emerged - Jojo, the father of Princess; Victor, the father of Mark; and Jerico, the father of
Roberto.
Who among the three (3) ascendants is entitled to the lot? Explain.
Rabuya: Jojo, Princess's father, is entitled to the lot.
This is a clear case of reserva troncal. The Origin is Onofre. The Prepositus is Pepito. The mode of transmission from Onofre to Pepito is
donation (hence, by gratuitous title). The Reservista is Mark, who acquired it from his descendant (son) Pepito by legitime and intestacy
(hence, by operation of law).
The Reservatario is Princess, a relative of the Prepositus Pepito within the third degree and who belonged to the line of origin (the maternal
line). Line of origin is the maternal line because Onofre (the Origin) and Pepito (the Prepositus) are maternal half-blood siblings.
When Mark (Reservista) died, the property passed to Princess as sole reservatario, thus extinguishing the reserva troncal.
Upon Princess's death, the property was transmitted ab intestate to her father Jojo. Transmission to Jojo is by the ordinary rules of
compulsory and intestate succession, not by reserva troncal, because the reserva was extinguished upon the transmission of the property to
Princess, this making Princess the absolute owner subject to no reserva.
Uribe:
(Note: In a problem na at least dalawa yung namatay, hindi sabay, kasi kapag sabay, survivorship nay yun. Pag dalawa, mag-isip ka na na
reserve troncal yun, pag tatlo 90% na yun)
• Here, the best way is mag-drawing.
• Atty. Uribe has the same answer with UP
3. Disinheritance (2:43:30)
There are 3 things that you need to remember:

1. There can be no disinheritance without a will.
a. But ang will pwedeng valid, pwedeng void.
i. If the will is void $ it is as if walang inheritance. Kaya the use of “void disinheritance” is being
discouraged.
ii. If the will is valid $ the question as to the validity or the imperfection of the disinheritance comes in.
Imperfect/Ineffective Disinheritance (ARTICLE 198)

10. No ground/ without specification as to the cause
11. Cause is not provided by the law
12. Cause is provided by law, however it was not proven when the heir questioned it
Effect of Imperfect Disinheritance

• Art. 918. Disinheritance without a specification of the cause, or for a cause the truth of
which, if contradicted, is not proved, or which is not one of those set forth in this Code,
shall annul the institution of heirs insofar as it may prejudice the person disinherited;
but the devises and legacies and other testamentary disposition shall be valid to such
extent as will not impair the legitime.
• Uribe: there is a debate as regards the interpretation of the said effect, but for me the
correct interpretation is that – “to the extent that the heir is prejudiced” means the
annulment shall pertain only to the legitime. So kung ang institution is ½, ang legitime
is ¼ lang, ang annulment is ¼ lang, basta makuha na ang legitime, and then volunatry
heirs can get the remaining ¼ kasi hindi total ang annulment kapag imperfect
disinheritance. Kaya nag mangyayari ay magccompute ka ng legitime.
Note: Know the grounds to disinherit descendant, ascendant and SS.
! 30
!
DISINHERITANCE
Children and descendants, Parents or ascendants,
legitimate as well as illegitimate whether legitimate or illegitimate Spouse
1) When a child or descendant has 1) When the parents have abandoned 1) When the spouse has been
been found guilty of an attempt their children or induced their convicted of an attempt against the
against the life of the testator, his or daughter to live a corrupt or life of the testator, his or her
her spouse, descendants, or immoral life, or attempted against descendants, or ascendants;
ascendants; their virtue; 2) When the spouse has accused the
2) When a child or descendant has 2) When the parent or ascendant has testator of a crime for which the
accused the testator of a crime for been convicted of an attempt against law prescribes imprisonment for
which the law prescribe the life of the testator, his or her six years or more, and the
imprisonment for six years or more, spouse, descendants, or ascendants; accusation has been found to be
if the accusation ahs been found 3) When the parent or ascendant has false;
groundless; accused the testator of a crime for 3) When the spouse by fraud,
3) When a child or descendant has which the law prescribes violence, intimidation or undue
been convicted of adultery or imprisonment for six years or more, influence causes the testator to
concubinage with the spouse of the if the accusation has been found to make a will or to change one
testator; be false; already made;
4) When a child or descendant by 4) When the parent or ascendant has 4) When the spouse has given cause
fraud, violence, intimidation, or been convicted of adultery of for legal separation;
undue influence causes the testator concubinage with the spouse of the 5) When the spouse has given
to make a will or to change one testator; grounds for the loss of parental
already made; 5) When the parent or ascendant by authority;
5) A refusal without justifiable cause fraud, violence, intimidation, or 6) Unjustifiable refusal to support the
to support the parent or ascendant undue influence causes the testator children or the other spouse.
who disinherits such child or to make a will or to change one
descendant; already made;
6) Maltreatment of the testator by 6) The loss of parental authority for
word or deed, by the child or causes specified in this Code;
descendant; 7) The refusal to support the children
7) When a child or descendant leads a or descendants without justifiable
dishonorable or disgraceful life; cause;
8) Conviction of a crime which carries 8) An attempt by one of the parents
with it the penalty of civil against the life of the other, unless
interdiction. there has been reconciliation
between them.
X’s only living relatives are his brothers, A and B. X executed a will providing as follows: “I institute my brother A as my sole and universal
heir, and I am disinheriting my brother B because he refused to support me when I had nothing.”
After X’s demise, is B entitled to share in the inheritance on the ground that the inheritance was ineffective because X had not proved that
he in fact refused to support the testator? Reason.
UP Law Center: B is not entitled to share in the inheritance not on the ground that the disinheritance was ineffective because X had proved
that he in fact refused to support the testator. The reason is evident, B is not a compulsory heir. The law on disinheritance applied only to
compulsory heirs, never to voluntary heirs or legatees or devisees. Consequently, even assuming that indeed X had not proved that B refused
to support him, such fact would not have only effect whatsoever. The act of X in disinheriting B is clearly a surplusage. (Based on Art. 915)
Uribe: Is it true that only compulsory heirs can be disinherited? Hindi totoo yan. Although ang nakalagay sa Art. 918, “compulsory heirs can
be deprived of their legitime”. Natural, compulsory heirs and may legitime e. Pero ang mga legal heirs can be deprived of their shares.
Magandang argument diyan is – kung ang compulsory heirs, na protected ng law, can be deprived, lalo na ang hindi compulsory heirs. Yung
argument na “they cannot be deprived because the law does not provide for any ground/s. Yung grounds for disinheritance, for compulsory
heirs lang.” That is true sa compulsory heirs lang ang grounds because these grounds are meant to protect the compulsory heirs kaya
exclusive yun. In other words, kapag ang iddisinherit ay hindi compulsory heir, hindi kailangan ng ground. Wala lang trip lang. That is why
yun argument niya na failed to prove is not meritorious. The fact na dinisinherit siya, yun nay un.
Arthur executed a will which contained a provision disinheriting his daughter Bernica for running off with a married man. Was the
disinheritance valid?
UP Law Center: Yes, the disinheritance was valid. Art. 919, par 7, Civil Code provides that "when a child or descendant leads a dishonorable
or disgraceful life, like running off with a married man, there is sufficient cause for disinheritance."
Uribe: “nakikiapid” = dishonorable life.
Mr. Palma, widower, has three daughters D, D-l and D-2. He executes a Will disinheriting D because she married a man he did not like, and
instituting daughters D-1 and D-2 as his heirs to his entire estate of P 1,000,000.00, Upon Mr, Palma's death, how should his estate be
divided? Explain.
UP Law Center: This is a case of ineffective disinheritance because marrying a man that the father did not approve of is not a ground for
disinheriting D. Therefore, the institution of D-l and D-2 shall be annulled insofar as it prejudices the legitime of D, and the institution of D-l
and D-2 shall only apply on the free portion in the amount of P500,000.00. Therefore, D, D-l and D-2 will get their legitimes of P500.000.00
divided into three equal parts and D-l and D-2 will get a reduced testamentary disposition of P250,000.00 each. Hence, the shares will be:
D P166,666.66
D-l P166,666.66 + P250.000.00
D-2 P166,666.66 + P250,000.00
! 31
!
Uribe: Nung dinisinherit ba si D, valid yun disinheritance? Hindi. The ground is not one of the grounds provided by law. Kaya imperfect
disinheritance.
• Effect of Imperfect Disinheritance: annulment the institution of heirs insofar as it may prejudice the person disinherited; but the
devises and legacies and other testamentary disposition shall be valid to such extent as will not impair the legitime.
Jose and Ana are husband and wife. On January 10, 1980, Jose learned tat Ana was having illicit relations with Juan. In fact, Jose
personally saw his wife and Juan leaving a motel in one occasion. Despite all the evidence he had at hand, Jose did not bring any action for
legal separation against Ana. Instead, Jose simply prepared a will wherein he disinherited Ana for her acts of infidelity. The validity of the
disinheritance was questioned by Ana upon Jose’s death. If you were the judge, how would you resolve this question?
UP Law Center: The disinheritance is valid. Under the Civil Code, the legal ground for disinheriting a spouse is that the spouse has given
cause for legal separation. Therefore, a final judgment is not needed.
Uribe: Sa facts ditto, ang sinasabi ng examiner, guilty talaga yun wife kasi “learned” na e. In order to be able to disinherit an heir, the
requirement is not “decree” of legal separation, only a “cause” of legal separation.
! 32
!
PRINCIPLES AFFECTING FREE PORTION
Topics to discuss:
1. Institution
2. Substitution
3. Legacy and Devise
Can there be a valid institution as to the entire estate?

• Yes, if the testator has no compulsory heir. If there is, such instituted heir is the compulsory heir.
Can there be a valid will despite absence of institution of heir?
• By express provision of the law, yes. Even if there’s no institution, there’s legacy or devise.
A. INSTITUTION
Kinds of Institution
1. Simple or pure
a. example: “I hereby give the entire to my favorite grandchild”
2. Conditional
a. example: “I hereby give my house and lot to A if A passes the bar exam this 2018”
3. Modal
a. The testamentary disposition in favor of an heir has a purpose (to be an instrument for others).
b. Example- “his heir should give 100 cavans of rice to this people every year”
In terms of conditional like OBLICON, always think if it is suspensive or resolutory.

• If SUSPENSIVE, wala ka munang mana until mafulfill ang condition
o Pag may term, pagkamatay ng testator, mamana ka kaagad.
o So again, if the term is suspensive, mamana ka, vested and rights mo pero you have to wait.
• If RESOLUTORY, mamana ka kaagad.
o Pero pag may period, tanggal ang rights mo as an heir.
• But in conditional, there is one requirement for an heir to inherit in conditional testamentary disposition, where the
condition is suspensive in character, here’s one bar exam question:
A, a bachelor, named his brother B as heir if his sister S dies within 10 years after A’s death. B died 2 years after A’s
death while S died 1 year later. A’s estate is claimed by B’s only child and S’s 6 children. Who are entitled to it and
how much will each receive?
UP Law Center:
1. The estate of A will be distributed in intestacy among the 6 children of S and the child of B. The condition embodied by A was
ineffective because B died ahead of S. Hence; the condition was not fulfilled while B was alive. Intestate succession for B and
S will be determined as to the rights existing on A’s death, hence, one-half will go to the children of S and the other half to the
child of B.
2. Only the 6 children of 3 will get the property because the heir died before the fulfillment of the condition.
3. From the wording of the facts in the case, it would appear that S is the heir and that if 3 died within 10 years after A’s death,
then B gets it, not the children of S. If S died after B, the children of S get it.
4. In a conditional institution, such as what has arisen in the problem, the instituted heir must survive not only the testator but
likewise the fulfillment of the condition in the will (Article 1034). Since B did not survive that condition, the institution in his
favor could not be operative. The estate, therefore, assuming that there are no other relatives other than those named in the
problem, would be the child of B and the 6 children of S, who would get it in equal shares (per capita), each receiving 1/7 of
the estate (Article 975).
Uribe: If the condition is fulfilled to the point that B will inherit from A as heir if his sister dies within 10 years, therefore B shall
inherit as a voluntary heir if the condition is fulfilled as required by law. In this case, S died between 3 years since B died 2 years
after A’s death. Therefore, the testamentary disposition is not valid because at the time S died, B is already dead. In other words
for conditional testamentary disposition to take effect, it is necessary that at the time of the fulfillment of the condition, the heirs
still has the capacity to succeed. When S died, B already died. In that fact, the testamentary disposition has no more effect. Its
effect is that, since both of them are siblings who are entitled to it, how much will each receive. If B and S died after the death of A,
the siblings will inherit equally.
B only has one child whereas S has 6 children. The half shall be inherited by the only child of B. The other half shall be inherited
by the 6 children of S. In other words, ½ shall be given to the only child of B. 1/12 each (kalahati ng ½) shall be given to the 6
children.
I hereby give the freely disposable portion of my estate to A, B, children (D, E, F) of C and G and his children (H, I, J and K).
What if A is a full blood brother and B is a half-sister. The freely disposable portion is P 100,000. Who will inherit and how
much?
Uribe:
• First, as to the full blood and half blood, in testamentary succession, it is equal and less. If intestate, the full blood
shall receive twice of the half blood.
• Second, C will not inherit as he is not instituted, only the children. However, D, E, and F will not inherit equal
amount. Under the law, if some heirs are individually instituted and others are collectively instituted, those
collectively instituted are considered individually instituted unless the contrary of the intention is in the will.
• As to G and his children, is it necessary that G needs to die first before the children may inherit?
o In testamentary succession, the children will be excluded by their father as to their grandfather but not in
! 33
!
intestate succession.
o In intestate succession, the parent who was instituted together with his children will inherit simultaneously
unless the contrary intention. Unless otherwise designated by the testator, they will all share equally.
• In other words, 10 divided by 100,000 is 10,000. They will each receive 10,000.
B. SUBSTITUTION
Kinds of Substitution
1. Simple
o example: B is the substitute of A
2. Fideicommissary (eto lang ang tinatanong so eto lang focus)
3. Mutual/Reciprocal
o example: A and B reciprocally substitute each other. It can also be done by three persons reciprocally
substituting each other
4. Brief or Compendious
o example: A and B originally instituted, C is the substitute
When will the substitution take effect?

• Pag walang sinabi ang testator na ground, any of the three (because the heir instituted (i) predeceased or (ii)
renounced or (iii) incapacitated), [although] the testator can specify if the heir is renounced. [If not renounced,
or, by reason of predecease, there’s no substitution]. Otherwise, any of the three may be a ground for a substitution.
Fideicommissary
Requisites:
1. The testator clearly mandated the first heir to preserve the property and later on to transfer this to the second heir.
2. The fiduciary must be one degree to the second heir. The testator need not be related to the fiduciary and the
fideicommissary. However, the fiduciary and fideicommissary must be related.
• In other words, MAGKAPATID, MAG AMA OR MAG INA.
• The problem is that there are only two parents but there can be many children. So fideicommissary
substitutes can be more than 50. Kasi pwedeng sabihin niya na ang unang fideicommissary ay 3
months lang. For example, 3 months si A. Another 3 months naman si B, so on and so forth. There can
be many substitutes as long as all of them are within one degree from the fiduciary.
3. Both the fiduciary and fideicommissary must survive the testator.
• If the fiduciary predeceased, can there be a valid substitution?
o No because the first heir or fiduciary will not inherit at all. On the other hand, if the
fideicommissary substitute predeceased the testator, there is no valid substitution. He must be
living at the time of the opening of succession which is at the time of death of the testator. If
the fiduciary ang nauna, as in wala na siyang obligation to transfer, sa kanya na yun.
Is it required that the testator needed to die first?

• The moment the testator died and both the fiduciary and fideicommissary are alive, the rights of fideicommissary
are vested. So even if the fideicommissary died before the fiduciary, the rights shall be transmitted to the heirs of the
fideicommissary.
When should the fiduciary transfer the property to the fideicommissary?

• If the testator does not expressly provide, it shall be upon death of the fiduciary. Unless the testator say otherwise.
For example: hanggang 3 months ka lang or 1 year ka lang so transfer mo na afterwards sa fideicommissary.
Raymond, single, named his sister Ruffa in his will as a devisee of a parcel of land which he owned. The will imposed upon Ruffa the
obligation of preseving the land and transferring it, upon her death, to her illegitimate daughter Scarlet who was then only one year old.
Raymond later died, leaving behind his widowed mother, Ruffa and Scarlet.
(A) Is the condition imposed upon Ruffa, to preserve the property and to transmit it upon her death to Scarlet, valid?
(B) If Scarlet predeceases Ruffa, who inherits the property?
(C) If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, can Scarlet inherit the property directly from Raymond?
UP Law Center:
(A) Yes, the condition imposed upon Ruffa to preserve the property and to transmit it upon her death to Scarlet is valid because it is
tantamount to fideicommissary substitution under Art. 863 of the Civil Code. The illegitimate status does not matter because this
is a testamentary disposition. The iron curtain rules does not apply to testamentary dispositions but only to intestate. In other
words, Scarlet being illegitimate can inherit as it is a testamentary succession.
(B) Ruffa will inherit the property as Scarlet's heir. Scarlet acquires a right to the succession from the time of Raymond's death, even
though she should predecease Ruffa (Art. 866, Civil Code). In other words, The rights are already vested to Scarlet from the death
of Raymond as Scarlet is the substitute. Since Scarlet predeceased Ruffa, the latter shall inherit because Ruffa is one degree from
the widowed mother of Raymond who is two degrees.
(C) No. If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, Raymond’s widowed mother will be entitled to the inheritance. Scarlet an illegitimate child
cannot inherit the property by intestate succession from Raymond (by virtue of iron curtain rule) who is a legitimate relative of
Ruffa under Art. 992 of the Civil Code. Moreover, Scarlet is not a compulsory heir of Raymond, hence she can inherit only by
testamentary succession . Since Raymond executed a will, in the case at bar, Scarlet may inherit from Raymond.
! 34
!
Uribe: No.
• First reason: the provision of the substitution becomes ineffective since it is required that both of them must still be living at the
time of death of the testator.
• Second reason: Since Ruffa predeceased Raymond, Scarlet cannot inherit by reason of iron curtain rule. Wala na sa testamentary
succession pero sa intestate wala din siya.
C. DEVISE AND LEGACY
Legacy – personal property

Devise – real property
Pwede bang magimpose ng legacy over a legacy?

• Yes. Bibigyan ka ng pera pero irerequire ka magbigay ng pera sa iba but must be within the limits of the law.
X has two children A and B. His estate is 1 million. In his will, he instituted as sole heirs A and B. (Remember, if there’s no designation of
shares, the shares shall be made equally). But in the same will, B should give Y 25,000 pesos a month for one year. How much can Y compel
B to give to him?
Uribe: 1 year is 12 months, 25k times 12 is 300,000. The 1 million shall be given to A and B in equal shares (500k each). The other half of
500k is legitime which is 250k. What is inhereited from the free portion is 250k. As such, the testator cannot impose a burden upon the
legitime. The legitime cannot be impaired. B shall only give 250k and not 300k despite the legacy.
In the will, I hereby give to Y 5 million. It turned out that Y is a creditor of X, the testator. The debt of X to Y is 3 million. How much will Y
receive?
Uribe: Y shall receive 8 million unless it is clearly intended by the testator that what was given to Y in the will already covers the payment of
the debt. Therefore, it shall be 5 million.
What if what’s given is a parcel of land. It turned out that the said land was mortgaged and the outstanding debt is 5 million. Who should
pay the 5 million?
Uribe: Ordinarily, the estate. Unless it is stated in the will, that the heir will pay for the debt.
In 1986, Jennifer and Brad were madly in love. In 1989, because a certain Picasso painting reminded Brad of her, Jennifer acquired it and
placed it in his bedroom. In 1990, Brad and Jennifer broke up. While Brad was mending his broken heart, he met Angie and fell in love.
Because the Picasso painting reminded Angie of him, Brad in his will bequeathed the painting to Angie. Brad died in 1995. Saddened by
Brad's death, Jennifer asked for the Picasso painting as a remembrance of him. Angie refused and claimed that Brad, in his will, bequeathed
the painting to her. Is Angie correct? Why or why not?
UP Law Center: NO. Angie is not correct. The Picasso painting is not given or donated by Jennifer to Brad. She merely "placed it in his
bedroom." Hence, she is still the owner of the painting. Not being the owner of the Picasso painting, Brad cannot validly bequeath the same
to Angie (Art. 930, NCC). Even assuming that the painting was impliedly given or donated by Jennifer to Brad, the donation is nevertheless
void for not being in writing. The Picasso painting must be worth more than 5,000 pesos. Under Art. 748, NCC, the donation and acceptance
of a movable worth more than 5,000 pesos must be in writing, otherwise the donation is void. The donation being void, Jennifer remained the
owner of the Picasso painting and Brad could not have validly disposed of said painting in favor of Angie in his will.
Uribe: The first essential is that who owns the said painting. It will depend if Brad know that he owns it or not. It is a matter of proof. From
the facts, Jennifer owns the painting. Therefore, his disposition is void.
Partition in Proximity Rule

• The heirs who are nearer in degree would exclude those of the remote degree. Example, between a child and
grandchild, the child shall inherit to the exclusion of the grandchild. Also, between a sibling and a cousin, the
sibling shall inherit. However there are exceptions
Exception:
• Right of Representation – because the heir will be placed in the nearer degree.
o X died, survived by A who is his child and C who is his grandchild. A, being the parent, who predeceased C.
! Uribe: Under the proximity rule, C will not inherit. But by way of right of representation, C will
inherit. Therefore, C is not excluded by the proximity rule.
• There is this what we call preference between the lines. There are two aspects of it:
o One, in the direct line descending is preferred more than the ascending.
o The second one is, for example, a great grandfather who is on the 3rd degree. The sibling of the great
grandfather is on the 2nd degree. Who will inherit? The great grandfather because the direct line is
preferred instead in the collateral line, okay so that’s the second aspect ng preference between the lines.
• If the same degree, no one will be excluded. But not so under Article 1009. It’s the article in which the nephews
and nieces would exclude aunts and uncles.
In other words there are the exceptions in the Proximity Rule

1. By right of representation
2. Preference between the lines
3. Iron Curtain Rule
4. Art 1009
! 35
!
Equal Division Rule
• It provides that if two or more degrees from the decedent, they will share equally. “Lahat sila magkakapatid same
degree lahat sila mga pinsan equal division.
Exception:
• Right of representation - heirs will inherit per sterpies not per capita
Armand died intestate. His full-blood brothers, Bobby and Conrad, and half- blood brothers, Danny, Edward and Floro, all
predeceased him. The following are the surviving relatives:
How much is Felix's share in the net estate?

(A) P400,000.
(B) P150,000.
(C) P300,000.
(D) P0.
(E) None of the above.
UP Law Center: D or E. In the collateral line, representation is granted only to children of brother or sisters, Felix is a
grandson of a predeceased brother. (Note: “E. None of the above: is another answer because Felix has no share at all in the
net estate)
Uribe: None, since Felix is the grandson of Floro. By right of representation, he will not inherit. Felix is already the
grandchild of the sibling. Again, right of representation extends only to the children of the brothers and sisters.
Right of representation is a fiction of law where an heir is placed nearer to the decendent in order for him not to be excluded
by proximity rule. The premise is that there are two heir with different degree because if it is the same, there will be no right
of representation. They will inherit in there own right Therefore, if there’s a child in the first degree and a grandchild in the
second degree, there is right of representation.
When does the right of representation takes place?

• A right of representation can be had if the heir predeceased, incapacitated or disinherited.
• The premise of it is that, there must be an heir nearer to the degree otherwise if they are of the same degree they
will inherit the same. The heirs will be entitled to what ever the person who are they representing will be entitled.
In case of disinheritance and incapacity, under the law, the heirs will only be entitled to the legitime of the person that they
are representing. There is no right of representation in the ascending line. But in the collateral line it is possible but to the
extent of children or brothers and sisters wherein they may inherit by right of representation in testamentary succession to
the extent of legitime, right of representation is possible.
! 36
!
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
• Signature of the witness in the will - a mere surplusage

• A decedent is a testator, on the other hand,a testator is not necessary .
• Testator becomes a decedent after his death since he is called as a testator when he is still alive.
• Do not call him a decedent when he left a will.
• Even if a will is void, we should still call it a Testator since the will may recognize an illegitimate child, and said
recognition will not be void.
• A void may still be effective if the court probated it by mistake.
• Heir in the general sense v. in the specific sense (admits an aliquot part of the inheritance).
• Aliquot part–(e.g1/2,1/3,1⁄4)
• Is a legatee an heir?
o It depends. There are two kinds of Heirs: the general; and the specific heir. In the general sense, a legatee is
an heir. However, in the specific sense, a legatee is not an heir since it is particular to the aliquot part of the
estate.
• Corporation:
o A corporation cannot be a testator because a corporation does not die the same way a natural person does,
rather, it dissolves. Also, they cannot dispose because it would prejudice the creditors and stockholders.
o A corporation may inherit because an heir is a person called to succession, and a corporation is a juridical
person.
• Can a soul be an heir?
o Yes. It would then be given to religious sectors and the state.
• Can a legal heir inherit even if there is a valid will?
o Yes. When the testamentary will does not dispose of all the properties.
• Can Civil Interdiction prohibit a person from succeeding?
o No. It only prohibits donation inter vivos, however, in mortis causa, it is allowed. The guardian shall accept
the inheritance.
• What if the will did not state that the testator know the language. Is the will valid?
o The law does not require that the fact that the testator know the language be written in the will. It must be
proved in court.
• What does the testator acknowledge?
o That this is the will signed byX
o That we signed freely and voluntarily
• Can there be a valid collation if the donation is void?
o No. Collation presumes that the donation is valid.
• X donated a car to his father, F. X is survived by a child. Is it subject to collation?
o It depends. If A is not entitled to Legitime due to some reason, there is no need to collate since there is one
compulsory heir. But if A is entitled to legitime, it is subject to collation.
• X had a LC, A. And an IC, B. X donated 50M to B. The estate of X amounts to 50M upon his death. Does B need to
collate the 50M donated to him.
o 50+50 = 100M. 50M is the legitime of A. And 25M is the legitime of B. There is no impairment. Based on
Article 910.
o X and Y had children A and B. B has a wife, W. X and Y donated a condo to B with the amount of 14M. X
died. Is the condo subject to collation?
! 7M is only subject to collation since Y is still alive. If Y dies, the other 7M will also be subject to
collation.
o To whose legitime will it be charged?
! B and W owns the property therefore, they own 3.5 each. 3.5 will be to the legitime of B and the
other 3.5 will be charged to the free portion.
• Prepositus need be related to the origin since under the code, the only requirement is that it is by gratuitous title.
• X disinherited A on the ground for attempt on the life of testator, subsequently the will was void. Will A inherit?
o No. Since he is already incapacitated.
• There are instances when the parents lose parental authority but cannot be used as a ground for disinheritance.
o Example: In case of adopotion. Also, when the child reaches 18 years old.
• Are the rules on institution apply to legacies and devises?
o No. Institution of an heir is a specific heir. Legacies and devises are specific things which is different from
aliquot part. Legatees and devisees are general heirs.
• Can the will still be valid even if there is no institution of heir?
o Yes. Because there may still be legacy and devises.
• In the will of X, there is a provision “I hereby give the freely disposable portion of my estate to A, B, 3 children of C,
G and his 3 children.” The estate is 100M. How much are entitled to each person?
o 10M each. Apply 847, 849, 850.
• I hereby give to A 1⁄2 of the freely disposable portion, to B 1⁄4, and to C 1/8.” Assuming the estate is 100k, how much
will the heirs receive?
o The specific calculation. If the testator said that he gives the entire freely disposable portion, the excess will
be given to them proportionally.
• “I hereby give all my freely disposable portion to A 1⁄2, B 1⁄4, C1/4, and D” Assuming there is 100k of estate, how
much will D get?
o Nothing. Because there is nothing to proportion. It is a mathematical impossibility.
• A has a brother, B, and a sister C. In the will of A, there is a provision of “I hereby give B a parcel of land if C dies
within 10 years from the death of A.” B has a child of D.C has 3 children. B died, then C (within the 10years). Who
will inherit?
o The heir must have capacity at the time of the happening of the condition, since B died already before C, he
cannot inherit the parcel of land. Legal succession will take place. D will inherit half of the parcel of land,
and EFG will inherit the other half.
! 37
!
• In the will of X, he stated that he will give his car to his grandson A upon reaching 18. When X died, A was 16 years
old. A died 17years old. Who will inherit?
o A’s legal heirs. It is written in the will that it is only the age, not that A needs to be alive at the time of his
18th birthday. Therefore, it is a suspensive term. The heir has a vested right already.
• I hereby give A 10M if A will not go to the sun within 10 years from my death. Will A inherit the 10M?
o Yes. The condition will not be treated as written since it is an impossible condition.
• In the will of X, he gave a specific condo unit to his mother B on the condition that B does not remarry. After the
execution of the will, A, the husband of B died, thereafter, X died. However, within 3 months from the death of X, B
married Z. Is B entitled to the condo unit?
o B is entitled. It was not stated whether A is the child of the deceased spouse.
• The substitute will not inherit if the first heir does not succeed.
o Fiduciary and Fideicommissary should survive the testator (Fideicomitente)
o There can be substitute as many as you can have provided that the rules are followed.
o Does the Iron Curtain Rule apply, such that an illegitimate child cannot be substituted?
! It does not apply because Iron Curtain Rule applies only to ab intestato.
o If the first heir is not mandated to preserve and transmit, there is no fideicommissary. The property will go
to the fiduciary.
o The general rule is that the transmission from fiduciary to fideicommissary is upon death of fiduciary.
! 38
!
JURISPRUDENCE
Fleumer v. Hix The laws of a foreign jurisdiction do not prove themselves in our courts. The courts of the Philippine Islands are
not authorized to take judicial notice of the laws of the various States of the American Union. Such laws must be
proven as facts.
Estate of Giberson A will that is legalized and accepted in a foreign country, through the laws of said foreign country, can be
accepted here in the Philippines.
A will executed abroad need not be probated first in the said foreign country first, before it is probated here.
In Re: Will of Bilbao The reason for this provision is, especially as regards husbands and wife is that when a will is made jointly or in
the same instrument, the spouse who is more aggressive, stronger in will or character and dominant is liable to
dictate the terms of the will for his or her own benefit or for that of third persons whom he or she desires to
favor. And, where the will is not only joint but reciprocal, either one of the spouses who may happen to be
unscrupulous, wicked, faithless, or desperate, knowing as he or she does the terms of the will whereby the whole
property of the spouses both conjugal and paraphernal goes to the survivor, may be tempted to kill or dispose of
the other.
The final decree of probate has a conclusive effect. Even though joint wills are invalid, the error committed by
De La Cerna v. Potot the probate court was an error of law, which should have been corrected by an appeal, but did not affect the
jurisdiction of the court.
A final judgment rendered on a petition for the probate of a will is binding upon the whole world and public
policy and sound practice demand that at the risk of occasional errors judgment of courts should become final at
some definite date fixed by law .
Doctrine of Renvoi shall apply if the decedent’s nationality is that of a foreign country, and is domiciled in the
Estate of Edward Philippines. And said foreign country has a law that refers back to the domicile with regard to the law on
Christensen succession.
Estate Of Amos Bellis It is therefore evident that whatever public policy or good customs may be involved in our System of
legitimes, Congress has not intended to extend the same to the succession of foreign nationals. For it has
specifically chosen to leave, inter alia, the amount of successional rights, to the decedent's national law. Specific
provisions must prevail over general ones.
Cayetano v. Leonidas Articles 16 and 1039 states that capacity to succeed is governed by the law of the nation of the decedent.
The law the governs Adoracion’s will is the law of Pennsylvania. Although said law does not provide for
legitimes. Petitioner argued here that it is contrary to the sound and public policy. The court held that whatever
public policy or good customs may be involved in our system of legitimes, is not extended to foreign nationals.
In order to be capacitated to inherit, the heir, devisee or legatee must be living at the moment the succession
Parish Priest of Victoria opens, except in case of representation, when it is proper.
v. Rigor
Reyes v. CA The property sold still forms part of the Inheritance. In the case at bar, the sale cannot be considered as valid as
the purpose for entering into such contract is to deprive the heirs of their legitimes.
No consideration whatever was paid by Dimagiba on account of the transfers, thereby rendering it even more
doubtful whether in conveying the property to her legatee.
Guinto v. Medina Guinto is entitled to recover damages, notwithstanding the death of Medina. Action for forcible entry survives
despite defendant’s death. The heirs of Medina are liable to pay the damages. As they are merely substituted in
the place of Santiago upon his death, their liability is only to the extent of the value of the property, which they
might have received from the original defendant.
Uson v. Del Rosario The claim of the defendants that Maria Uson had relinquished her right over the lands in question because she
expressly renounced to inherit any future property that her husband may acquire and leave upon his death in
the deed of separation they had entered into on February 21, 1931, cannot be entertained for the simple reason
that future inheritance cannot be the subject of a contract nor can it be renounced.
De Borja v. De Borja Presentation of a will for probate is mandatory and that the settlement and distribution of an estate on the basis
of intestacy when the decedent left a will, is against the law and public policy. However, it does not apply to this
case. Since a hereditary share in a decedent’s estate is transmitted or vested immediately from the moment of
the death of such predecessor in interest, there is no legal bar to a successor disposing of her or his hereditary
share immediately after such death, even if the actual extent of such share is not determined until the
subsequent liquidation of the estate.
Bonilla v. Bonilla The moment of death is the determining factor when the heirs acquire a definite right to the inheritance
whether such right be pure or contingent. The right of the heirs to the property of the deceased vests in them
even before judicial declaration of their being heirs in the testate or intestate proceedings.
Suroza v. Honrado In the opening paragraph of the will, it was stated that English was a language "understood and known" to the
testatrix. But in its concluding paragraph, it was stated that the will was read to the testatrix "and translated
into Filipino language". (p. 16, Record of testate case). That could only mean that the will was written in a
language not known to the illiterate testatrix and, therefore, it is void because of the mandatory provision of
article 804 of the Civil Code that every will must be executed in a language or dialect known to the testator.
Thus, a will written in English, which was not known to the Igorot testator, is void and was disallowed.
Garcia v. Lacuesta The herein petitioner (who is appealing by way of certiorari from the decision of the Court of Appeals) argues,
however, that there is no need for such recital (that the testator asked him to sign his name) because the cross
written by the testator after his name is a sufficient signature and the signature of Atty. Florentino Javier is a
surplusage. Petitioner's theory is that the cross is as much a signature as a thumbmark, the latter having been
held sufficient by this Court in different cases.
The court held, HOWEVER, It is not here pretended that the cross appearing on the will is the usual signature
of Antero Mercado or even one of the ways by which he signed his name. After mature reflection, we are not
prepared to liken the mere sign of the cross to a thumbmark, and the reason is obvious. The cross cannot and
does not have the trustworthiness of a thumbmark.
Balonan v. Abellana Where a testator does not know how, or is unable for any reason, to sign the will himself, it shall be signed in the
following manner:
John Doe by the testator, Richard Doe; or in this form: "By the testator, John Doe, Richard Doe." All this must be
written by the witness signing at the request of the testator.
Nera v. Rimando The true test of presence of the testator and the witnesses in the execution of a will is not whether they actually saw
each other sign, but whether they might have been seen each other sign, had they chosen to do so, considering their
mental and physical condition and position with relation to each other at the moment of inscription of each signature.
Taboada v. Rosal We have examined the will in question and noticed that the attestation clause failed to state the number of
pages used in writing the will. This would have been a fatal defect were it not for the fact that, in this case, it is
! 39
!
discernible from the entire wig that it is really and actually composed of only two pages duly signed by the
testatrix and her instrumental witnesses.
Icasiano v. Icasiano We hold that the inadvertent failure of one witness to affix his signature to one page of a testament, due to the
simultaneous lifting of two pages in the course of signing, is not per se sufficient to justify denial of probate.
Impossibility of substitution of this page is assured not only the fact that the testatrix and two other witnesses
did sign the defective page, but also by its bearing the coincident imprint of the seal of the notary public before
whom the testament was ratified by testatrix and all three witnesses.
In Re: Enrique Lopez While Article 809 allows substantial compliance for defects in the form of the attestation clause, Richard
likewise failed in this respect. The statement in the Acknowledgment portion of the subject last will and
testament that it "consists of 7 pages including the page on which the ratification and acknowledgment are
written" cannot be deemed substantial compliance. The will actually consists of 8 pages including its
acknowledgment which discrepancy cannot be explained by mere examination of the will itself but through the
presentation of evidence aliunde.
Echavez v. Dozen Even granting that the Acknowledgment embodies what the attestation clause requires, we are not prepared to
Construction hold that an attestation clause and an acknowledgment can be merged in one statement.
That the requirements of attestation and acknowledgment are embodied in two separate provisions of the Civil
Code (Articles 805 and 806, respectively) indicates that the law contemplates two distinct acts that serve
different purposes.
An acknowledgment is made by one executing a deed, declaring before a competent officer or court that the deed
or act is his own. On the other hand, the attestation of a will refers to the act of the instrumental witnesses
themselves who certify to the execution of the instrument before them and to the manner of its execution.
Cruz v. Villasor The notary public before whom the will was acknowledged cannot be considered as the third instrumental
witness since he cannot acknowledge before himself his having signed the will. To acknowledge before means to
avow, to own as genuine, to assent, to admit; and "before" means in front or preceding in space or ahead of.
Javellana v. Ledesma Unlike the Code of 1889 (Art. 699), the new Civil Code does not require that the signing of the testator,
witnesses and notary should be accomplished in one single act. A comparison of Articles 805 and 806 of the new
Civil Code reveals that while testator and witnesses sign in the presence of each other, all that is thereafter
required is that "every will must be acknowledged before a notary public by the testator and the witnesses" (Art.
806); i.e., that the latter should avow to the certifying officer the authenticity of their signatures and the
voluntariness of their actions in executing the testamentary disposition.
! 40

DDL Succession 1 PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

DDL Succession 1 PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

URIBE PROVISIONS CIVIL LAW REVIEW: Succession KKMD Notes

A. DEFINITION AND CONCEPTS (Arts. 774, 712, 1311)

They may also be acquired by means of prescription.

B. LAW GOVERNING FROM:

1. AS TO TIME OF EXECUTION (Art. 795)

TIME OF EXECUTION PLACE OF EXECUTION

AS TO TIME AS TO SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS

D. SUBJECTS OF SUCCESSION (Art. 775, 782. 887, 1003)

Article 887. The following are compulsory heirs:

RELATIONSHIP Article 965. The direct line is either descending or ascending.

Article 1026. A testamentary disposition may be made to the State, provinces,

Article 1030. Testamentary provisions in favor of the poor in general, without

Article 1027. The following are incapable of succeeding:

Article 1031. A testamentary provision in favor of a disqualified person, even though

Article 1032. The following are incapable of succeeding by reason of unworthiness:

Article 390 & 391 (Presumption of death provisions)

FC 86: (Revocation of donations by the donor; grounds)

Requisites for the Transmission of Successional Rights

Article 1049. Acceptance may be express or tacit.

Article 1050. An inheritance is deemed accepted:

G. KINDS OF SUCCESSION (Art. 778)

Article 960. Legal or intestate succession takes place:

III. TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY AND INTENT

A. WHO MAY MAKE A WILL?

Article 821. The following are disqualified from being witnesses to a

Article 823. If a person attests the execution of a will, to whom or to

V. INCORPORATION OF DOCUMENT BY REFERENCE

A. DEFINITION (Arts. 825, 830)

Article 830. No will shall be revoked except in the following cases:

Article 830. No will shall be revoked except in the following cases:

VIII. REPUBLICATION AND REVIVAL OF WILLS

Article 887. The following are compulsory heirs:

The other half shall be at the free disposal of the testator.

Article 909. Donations given to children shall be charged to their legitime.

XVI. INSTITUTION OF HEIRS

(7) Disposition in Favor Article 845.

a. Kinds Vda. De Kilayko v. Tengco

Nevertheless, the right of usufruct, or an allowance or some personal prestation may be

Article 864. A fideicommissary substitution can never burden the legitime.

Article 867. The following shall not take effect:

Once made, the choice is irrevocable.

Article 957. The legacy or devise shall be without effect:

XX. ORDER OF INTESTATE SUCCESSION

XIX. GENERAL PROVISIONS

SUBSECTION 3. Illegitimate Children

Article 988. In the absence of legitimate descendants or ascendants, the illegitimate

XXII. PARTITION AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE ESTATE

XXIII. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS

XXIII. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS

(a) irrelevant – it is not about the heirs, it is about the decedent.

If a will is executed by a testator who is a Filipino citizen,

Uribe: The best answer here is ‘Japanese Law’.

The will of a Filipino executed in a foreign country ---

Possible Laws (execution)

X, a Spanish citizen, residing in Los Angeles executed a will in Tokyo, Japan.

! General rule as to real and personal properties

How much is Ernie's share in the net estate.

Legitimate Children (L/C) and Descendants

Intestate Succession: L/C + I/C + SS

Legitimate Parent or Legitime is ½ as they will taker the place of

Legitimate Parents and ½ ½

Legitimate Parents ½ ½ Usually being asked in the bar.

Illegitimate Parents and None Entire Estate to Children