Padura v. Baldovino (Dec.

27, 1958, unreported)

Jose Benedicto Luna Rees, J.!
"counsels not indicated in t#e case"
CAPTION/PROBLEM: $%ustin &arried t'ice. (e #ad one c#ild ()anuel) *ro& t#e 1st &arria%e and 2 (+andelaria
and ,ortunato) *ro& t#e 2nd. ,ortunato died intestate and c#ildless, so #is properties 'ent to #is &o& Benita
($%ustin-s 2nd 'i*e) as reserva.le propert. /#en Benita died, ,ortunato-s nep#e's and nieces (t#e reservatarios)
too0 possession o* said properties and +,1 su.se2uentl a'arded t#e properties to t#e& in co3o'ners#ip, 'it# e2ual
s#ares. But since onl +andelaria-s 0ids are *ull3.lood nep#e's and nieces o* ,ortunato, t#e too0 issue 'it# t#e
e2ual distri.ution o* t#e properties .et'een t#e& (t#e *ull3.loods) and )anuel-s 0ids (t#e #al*3.loods). 4+ no' #as to
deter&ine t#e s#arin% o* t#e propert a&on% t#e reservatarios.
HELD: +andelaria-s 0ids s#ould %et a s#are dou.le t#at o* )anuel-s 0ids, pursuant to 5++ 1667 and 1668. Bein% an
e8ceptional rule '#ose underlin% principle #as .een suppressed in t#e 5e' +ivil +ode, t#e operation o* t#e reserva
troncal &ust .e li&ited to t#e deter&ination o* '#o t#e reservatarios are. 9#e distri.ution o* t#e reserved propert
a&on% t#e reservatarios s#ould .e %overned . t#e rules on intestate succession. 9#e reservatarios do not in#erit
t#e reserved propert as a class, .ut onl t#ose nearest in de%ree to t#e prepositus in#erit, e8cludin% t#e
reservatarios o* t#e *art#er de%rees. :Proximity of degree and right of representation are basic principles of ordinary
intestate succession; so is the rule that whole blood brothers and nephews are entitled to a share double that of
brothers and nephews of half-blood. If in determining the rights of the reservatarios inter se, proximity of degree and
the right of representation of nephews are made to apply, the rule of double share for immediate collaterals of the
whole blood should li0e'ise appl.
FACTS
;ervacia Landi% $%ustin Padura Benita ;arin%

)anuel Padura ,ortunato Padura +andelaria Padura
Dionisia Padura et.al. (7 appellees) )elania Baldovino et.al. (< appellants)
$pril 27, 1968 = $%ustin Padura died. (is c#ildren and survivin% spouse (Benita) succeeded #i& under a
'ill.
o 1n t#e pro.ate proceedin%s, ,ortunato received < parcels o* land.
)a 28, 1968 = ,ortunato died c#ildless and intestate. 9#e < lots 'ere in#erited . #is &ot#er, Benita.
$u%. 25, 1917 = Benita 'as issued a 9orrens title in #er na&e, su.>ect to t#e condition t#at t#e properties
'ere reserva.le in *avor o* t#e relatives 'it#in t#e ?rd de%ree .elon%in% to t#e line *ro& '#ic# t#e propert
ca&e.
$u%. 27, 19?< = +andelaria Baldovino (nee Padura) died, leavin% #er < c#ildren (+risteta, )elania, $nicia,
and Pa.lo Baldovino = B$LD@A15@ +(1LDRB5) as #eirs.
@ct. 7, 19<6 = )anuel Padura died, leavin% #is 7 c#ildren (Dionisia, ,elisa, ,lora, +ornelio, ,rancisco,
Juana, and 4everino Padura = P$DCR$ +(1DLRB5) as #eirs.
@ct. 15, 1952 = Benita ;arin% died. 9#e Baldovino and t#e Padura c#ildren too0 possession o* t#e <
reserva.le lots.
$u%. 1, 195? = La%una +,1 a'arded t#e lots to t#e Baldovino and t#e Padura c#ildren, as t#e le%iti&ate
#eirs o* t#e ori%inal reservatarios )anuel Padura and +andelaria Baldovino.
@ct. 22, 1957 = Baldovino c#ildren *iled an action *or partition.
o Baldovino c#ildren 'anted t#e properties divided #al* and #al* .et'een t#e& and t#e Padura
c#ildren, on t#e .asis o* t#e ri%#t o* representation *ro& t#eir parents.
o Padura c#ildren *iled an opposition, ar%uin% t#at t#e 11 reservees &ust eac# in#erit an e2ual s#are.
CFI DECISION = $ll t#e reservees 'ere declared co3o'ners pro indiviso, 'it#out distinction, o* e2ual
s#ares.
Baldovino c#ildren appealed to t#e 4+. 9#e no' ar%ue t#at t#e s#ould %et dou.le t#e s#are o* t#e Padura
c#ildren on t#e .asis o* 5++ 1667 and 1668.
ISSUE (HELD)
1* t#e survivin% reservatarios are nep#e's o* t#e prepositus, so&e o* t#e #al* .lood and so&e o* t#e *ull .lood, s#ould
t#e *ull .lood nep#e's %et a s#are t'ice as lar%e o* t#e #al* .lood nep#e'sD (YES)
RATIO
4+ up#eld t#e contention o* t#e Baldovino c#ildren.
Reserva troncal is a special rule desi%ned to assure t#e return o* t#e propert to t#e ?rd de%ree relatives o*
t#e line '#ere it ori%inall ca&e *ro&, and avoid its .ein% dissipated into t#e line o* t#e reservista.
o Reserva troncal #ad no direct precedent in 4panis# La'. 1t 'as an innovation o* t#e 1889 +ode
+o&&ission, so&e &e&.ers o* '#ic# 'ere scandaliEed . t#e situation '#erein t#e eldest son o*
a tcoon in#erits a lar%e s#are in t#e estate, and t#en dies un&arried, 'it# #is (t#e son-s) estate
%oin% to #is oun% &ot#er, '#o later re&arries, t#us t#e properties co&in% *ro& t#e son-s *at#er
are dissipated into t#e line o* t#e oun% &ot#er and #er ne' .eau, to t#e e8clusion o* t#e relatives
o* t#e deceased tcoon (includin% t#e ric# 0id-s si.lin%s, .ecause in 4pain t#e eldest c#ild usuall
in#erits t#e lar%est part). (an% se8ist lan%)
o 4o&e &e&.ers o* t#e +ode +o&&ission opposed t#is rule, and t#e resultin% con*lict produced t#e
co&pro&ise no' e&.odied as $rt.811 o* t#e 1889 +ode.
9#e purpose o* t#e reserva is acco&plis#ed once t#e propert devolves to t#e reservatarios '#o are t#e
relatives co&in% *ro& t#e line o* ori%in.
1n t#e relations .et'een t#e reservatarios o* t#e sa&e de%ree, 5++ 891 s#ould no lon%er appl, and t#e
situation s#ould .e %overned . t#e rules on intestate succession.
lorentino v. lorentino! 9#e reserva.le propert does not pass to all t#e reservatarios as a class, .ut onl to
t#ose nearest in de%ree to t#e descendant3prepositus, to t#e e8clusion o* t#e reservatarios o* t#e re&oter
de%rees. !ithin the "rd degree of relationship from the prepositus, t#e ri%#t o* representation operates in
*avor o* nep#e's.
Reserva troncal &erel deter&ines t#e %roup o* relatives to '#o& t#e propert s#all .e returned. 9#e
distri.ution o* t#e propert 'it#in t#at %roup s#ould .e %overned . t#e rules on intestate succession. 9#is
vie' is supported . )anresa (t#at t#e reserva .ein% an e8ceptional case, its operation s#ould .e li&ited to
'#at is strictl needed to acco&plis# t#e purpose o* t#e la') and . t#e %eneral intent o* t#e 5e' +ivil +ode
to suppress successional reservas and reversions.
9#e ri%#t o* t#e #eirs o* t#e reservista to t#e propert is a &ere e8pectanc, suc# t#at t#e 'ill onl in#erit o*
t#ere are no reservatarios.
1t is said t#at t#e reservatarios do not in#erit t#e propert *ro& t#e reservista .ut *ro& t#e prepositus.
$ccordin% to 4anc#eE Ro&an, t#e reservatarios are t#e #eirs &ortis causa o* t#e prepositus, su.>ect to t#e
condition t#at t#e survive t#e reservista.
(ad t#e *ull .lood nep#e's in#erited directl *ro& t#e prepositus, t#e 'ould %et a s#are dou.le t#at o* t#e
#al* .lood nep#e's as per 5++ 1667 and 1668. 9#e situation s#ould not c#an%e si&pl .ecause o* t#e
intervenin% p#ase created . t#e reserva ('#o is a*ter all, >ust #oldin% t#e propert in reserve).
JBL .ein% &a%nani&ous! 9#e decision o* t#e +,1 is supported . t#e vie's o* 4anc#eE Ro&an and )ucius
4caevola, .ot# o* '#o& 'ere o* t#e opinion t#at t#e reservatarios in#erit . virtue o* t#e& .elon%in% to t#e
line o* ori%in and not .ecause o* t#eir relations#ip to t#e prepositus. 9#is ar%u&ent, i* *ollo'ed to its lo%ical
conclusion, 'ould &ean t#at t#e propert s#ould pass to any and all reservatarios as a class re%ardless o*
lines and de%rees (eventuall t#is t#eor .eca&e 0no'n as t#e reserva inte%ral). 9#is vie' #as alread
.een re>ected . t#e 4+ in lorentino v. lorentino and . t#e 4panis# 4upre&e +ourt (and . )anresa as
'ell).
:#$%ur considered opinion is that reason and policy favor &eeping to a minimum the alterations introduced by
the reserva in the basic rules of succession mortis causa.F
DISPOSITION: +,1 reversed. +ase re&anded *or *urt#er proceedin%s in accordance 'it# t#e decision.