REYES V.

COURT OF APPEALS [SC L-5620, July 31, 1954]

DOCTRINE:
- If the contract is void, the property still forms part of the inheritance in order not to prejudice the heir.
- The natural children of the deceased in this case are questioning the intrinsic validity of the will on the ground
that his compulsory heir cannot be one, as theirs was an illicit relationship. SC held that as a general rule,
courts in probate proceedings are limited to pass only upon the extrinsic validity of the will sought to be
probated. There are, however, notable circumstances wherein the intrinsic validity was first determined as
when the defect of the will is apparent on its face and the probate of the will may become a useless ceremony
if it is intrinsically invalid. The intrinsic validity of a will may be passed upon because “practical considerations”
demanded it as when there is preterition of heirs or the testamentary provisions are doubtful legality. In this
case however, there was never an open admission of any illicit relationship. Thus, there was no need to go
beyond the face of the will.

FACTS:
Benedicto delos Reyes, during his lifetime, sold some of his properties to the heirs of his executor. The said sale
was challenged by the heirs of the decedent, contending therein that said properties cannot be legally disposed by
the decedent because it forms part of his estate to be inherited by petitioners, the decedent heirs. Both the trial
court upheld the validity of the sale between decedent and the heirs of the executor having said that the sold
properties were sold before the death of the decedent and can no longer be part of the inheritance.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the petitioners are entitled of the property sold by the decedent during his lifetime.

RULING:
NO. In such case, said alienation is void. Here, the sale was declared void for being absolutely simulated and
because of intent to defraud heirs of their legitimes. Hence, said properties still form part of the inheritance of the
deceased.

The general rule is that the heirs cannot validly claim ownership over the properties in question if alienated prior
to the decedent’s death. The rights to succession are transmitted at the moment of death of the decedent (Art.
777 of the Civil Code) Exception is when said alienation is subsequently declared void as when there is intent to
defraud and to deprive the heirs of their legitimes.

Facts: decedent Benedicto de los Reyes, before his death, sold properties to one of the heirs of the executor. The heirs of the former
claimed that the said properties should be part of the inheritance. Trial Court declared the subject properties having been sold before the
death was no longer part of the inheritance.

Issue: whether the properties sold are part of the inheritance? (Void contract)

Held: yes, the properties are part of the inheritance, according to the Civil Code, even these properties sold by the decedent may still be the
object of succession and would be part of the estate and as much, the heirs may still be entitled to the subject properties. Such case may be
considered as a circumvention of the law as the forced heirs may be deprived of their rights to their legitime.
The appealed decision is reversed and the deed of sale was annulled and the parcel of land involved mere declared as pertaining to the
estate of the decedent Benedicto de los Reyes.
(If the contract is void, the property still forms part of the inheritance in order not to prejudice the heir)