10/4/2016

G.R.No.L23445

TodayisTuesday,October04,2016

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
ENBANC
G.R.No.L23445June23,1966
REMEDIOSNUGUID,petitionerandappellant,
vs.
FELIXNUGUIDandPAZSALONGANUGUID,oppositorsandappellees.
CustodioO.Partadeforpetitionerandappellant.
Beltran,BeltranandBeltranforoppositorsandappellees.
SANCHEZ,J.:
RosarioNuguid,aresidentofQuezonCity,diedonDecember30,1962,single,withoutdescendants,legitimateor
illegitimate.Survivingherwereherlegitimateparents,FelixNuguidandPazSalongaNuguid,andsix(6)brothers
andsisters,namely:Alfredo,Federico,Remedios,Conrado,LourdesandAlberto,allsurnamedNuguid.
On May 18, 1963, petitioner Remedios Nuguid filed in the Court of First Instance of Rizal a holographic will
allegedly executed by Rosario Nuguid on November 17, 1951, some 11 years before her demise. Petitioner
prayedthatsaidwillbeadmittedtoprobateandthatlettersofadministrationwiththewillannexedbeissuedto
her.
On June 25, 1963, Felix Nuguid and Paz Salonga Nuguid, concededly the legitimate father and mother of the
deceasedRosarioNuguid,enteredtheiroppositiontotheprobateofherwill.Groundtherefor,interalia,isthatby
theinstitutionofpetitionerRemediosNuguidasuniversalheirofthedeceased,oppositorswhoarecompulsory
heirs of the deceased in the direct ascending line were illegally preterited and that in consequence the
institutionisvoid.
On August 29, 1963, before a hearing was had on the petition for probate and objection thereto, oppositors
movedtodismissonthegroundofabsolutepreterition.
OnSeptember6,1963,petitionerregisteredheroppositiontothemotiontodismiss.

1 w p h 1 . t

Thecourt'sorderofNovember8,1963,heldthat"thewillinquestionisacompletenullityandwillperforcecreate
intestacyoftheestateofthedeceasedRosarioNuguid"anddismissedthepetitionwithoutcosts.
Amotiontoreconsiderhavingbeenthwartedbelow,petitionercametothisCourtonappeal.
1.Rightattheoutset,aproceduralaspecthasengagedourattention.Thecaseisfortheprobateofawill.The
court'sareaofinquiryislimitedtoanexaminationof,andresolutionon,theextrinsicvalidityofthewill.Thedue
executionthereof,thetestatrix'stestamentarycapacity,andthecompliancewiththerequisitesorsolemnitiesby
lawprescribed,arethequestionssolely to be presented, and to be acted upon, by the court. Said court at this
stageoftheproceedingsisnotcalledupontoruleontheintrinsicvalidityorefficacyoftheprovisionsofthe
will,thelegalityofanydeviseorlegacytherein.1
A peculiar situation is here thrust upon us. The parties shunted aside the question of whether or not the will
shouldbeallowedprobate.Forthem,themeatofthecaseistheintrinsicvalidityofthewill.Normally,thiscomes
onlyafterthecourthasdeclaredthatthewillhasbeendulyauthenticated.2Butpetitionerandoppositors,inthe
courtbelowandhereonappeal,travelledontheissueoflaw,towit:Isthewillintrinsicallyanullity?
We pause to reflect. If the case were to be remanded for probate of the will, nothing will be gained. On the
contrary,thislitigationwillbeprotracted.Andforaughtthatappearsintherecord,intheeventofprobateorifthe
courtrejectsthewill,probabilityexiststhatthecasewillcomeuponceagainbeforeusonthesameissueofthe
intrinsic validity or nullity of the will. Result: waste of time, effort, expense, plus added anxiety. These are the
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1966/jun1966/gr_l23445_1966.html

1/5

10/4/2016

G.R.No.L23445

practicalconsiderationsthatinduceustoabeliefthatwemightaswellmeetheadontheissueofthevalidityof
theprovisionsofthewillinquestion.3Afterall,thereexistsajusticiablecontroversycryingforsolution.
2. Petitioner's sole assignment of error challenges the correctness of the conclusion below that the will is a
completenullity.Thisexactsfromusastudyofthedisputedwillandtheapplicablestatute.
Reproducedhereunderisthewill:
Nov.17,1951
I, ROSARIO NUGUID, being of sound and disposing mind and memory, having amassed a certain
amountofproperty,doherebygive,devise,andbequeathallofthepropertywhichImayhavewhen
IdietomybelovedsisterRemediosNuguid,age34,residingwithmeat38BIriga,Q.C.Inwitness
whereof,IhavesignedmynamethisseventhdayofNovember,nineteenhundredandfiftyone.
(Sgd.)Illegible
T/ROSARIONUGUID
ThestatutewearecalledupontoapplyinArticle854oftheCivilCodewhich,inpart,provides:
ART.854.Thepreteritionoromissionofone,some,orallofthecompulsoryheirsinthedirectline,whether
livingatthetimeoftheexecutionofthewillorbornafterthedeathofthetestator,shallannultheinstitution
ofheirbutthedevisesandlegaciesshallbevalidinsofarastheyarenotinofficious....
Except for inconsequential variation in terms, the foregoing is a reproduction of Article 814 of the Civil Code of
Spainof1889,whichissimilarlyhereincopied,thus
Art.814.Thepreteritionofoneoralloftheforcedheirsinthedirectline,whetherlivingatthetimeofthe
executionofthewillorbornafterthedeathofthetestator,shallvoidtheinstitutionofheirbutthelegacies
andbetterments4shallbevalid,insofarastheyarenotinofficious....
Acomprehensiveunderstandingofthetermpreterition employed in the law becomes a necessity. On this point
Manresacomments:
La pretericion consiste en omitar al heredero en el testamento. O no se le nombra siquiera o aun
nombrandolecomopadre,hijo,etc.,noseleinstituyaherederoniseledesheredaexpresamentenisele
asignapartealgunadelosbienes,resultandoprivadodeunmodotacitodesuderechoalegitima.
Paraqueexistapretericion,conarregloalarticulo814,bastaqueeneltestamentoomitaeltestadorauno
cualquieradeaquellosaquienesporsumuertecorrespondalaherenciaforzosa.
Se necesita, pues, a) Que la omision se refiera a un heredero forzoso. b) Que la omision sea completa
queelherederoforzosonadarecibaeneltestamento.
Itmaynowappeartritebatnonethelesshelpfulingivingusaclearperspectiveoftheproblembeforeus,tohave
onhandaclearcutdefinitionofthewordannul:
To"annul"meanstoabrogate,tomakevoid...InreMorrow'sEstate,54A.342,343,204Pa.484.6
The word "annul" as used in statute requiring court to annul alimony provisions of divorce decree upon
wife'sremarriagemeanstoreducetonothingtoannihilateobliterateblotouttomakevoidorofnoeffect
to nullify to abolish. N.J.S.A. 2:50 38 (now N.J.S. 2A:3435). Madden vs. Madden, 40 A. 2d 611, 614,
136N..JEq.132.7
ANNUL.Toreducetonothingannihilateobliteratetomakevoidorofnoeffecttonullifytoabolishtodo
awaywith.ExparteMitchell,123W.Va.283,14S.E.2d.771,774.8
And now, back to the facts and the law. The deceased Rosario Nuguid left no descendants, legitimate or
illegitimate.Butsheleftforcedheirsinthedirectascendinglineherparents,nowoppositorsFelixNuguidandPaz
SalongaNuguid.And,thewillcompletelyomitsbothofthem:Theythusreceivednothingbythetestamenttacitly,
theyweredeprivedoftheirlegitimeneitherweretheyexpresslydisinherited.Thisisaclearcaseofpreterition.
SuchpreteritioninthewordsofManresa"anularasiemprelainstituciondeheredero,dandocaracterabsolutoa
este ordenamiento referring to the mandate of Article 814, now 854 of the Civil Code.9 The onesentence will
hereinstitutespetitionerasthesole,universalheirnothingmore.Nospecificlegaciesorbequestsaretherein
providedfor.Itisinthisposturethatwesaythatthenullityiscomplete.Perforce,RosarioNuguiddiedintestate.
SaysManresa:
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1966/jun1966/gr_l23445_1966.html

2/5

10/4/2016

G.R.No.L23445

Encuantoalainstituciondeheredero,seanula.Loqueseanuladejadeexistir,entodooenparte?Nose
aade limitacion alguna, como en el articulo 851, en el que se expresa que se anulara la institucion de
herederoencuantoprejudiquealalegitimadeldeseheredadoDebe,pues,entendersequelaanulaciones
completaototal,yqueestearticulocomoespecialenelcasoquelemotivarigeconpreferenciaal817.10
ThesameviewisexpressedbySanchezRoman:
La consecuencia de la anulacion o nulidad de la institucion de heredero por pretericion de uno, varios o
todoslosforzososenlinearecta,eslaaperturadelasucesionintestadatotaloparcial.Seratotal,cuando
el testador que comete la pretericion, hubiese dispuesto de todos los bienes por titulo universal de
herenciaenfavordelosherederosinstituidos,cuyainstitucionseanula,porqueasiloexigelageneralidad
delpreceptolegaldelart.814,aldeterminar,comoefectodelapretericion,eldeque"anularalainstitucion
deheredero."...11
Really, as we analyze the word annul employed in the statute, there is no escaping the conclusion that the
universal institution of petitioner to the entire inheritance results in totally abrogating the will. Because, the
nullificationofsuchinstitutionofuniversalheirwithoutanyothertestamentarydispositioninthewillamounts
toadeclarationthatnothingatallwaswritten.Carefullywordedandinclearterms,Article854offersnoleeway
forinferentialinterpretation.Givingitanexpansivemeaningwilltearupbytherootsthefabricofthestatute.On
thispoint,SanchezRomancitesthe"MemoriaannualdelTribunalSupreme,correspondientea1908",whichin
ouropinionexpressestheruleofinterpretation,viz:
... El art. 814, que preceptua en tales casos de pretericion la nulidad de la institucion de heredero, no
consienteinterpretacionalgunafavorablealapersonainstituidaenelsentidoantesexpuestoauncuando
parezca,yenalguncasopudieraser,masomenosequitativa,porqueunanulidadnosignificaenDerecho
sinolasuposiciondequeelhechooelactonoseharealizado,debiendoporlotantoprocedersesobretal
baseosupuesto,yconsiguientemente,enuntestamentodondefaltelainstitucion,esobligadollamaralos
herederos forzosos en todo caso, como habria que llamar a los de otra clase, cuando el testador no
hubiesedistribudotodossusbienesenlegados,siendotantomasobligadaestaconsecuencialegalcuanto
que,enmateriadetestamentos,sabidoes,seguntienedeclaradolajurisprudencia,conrepeticion,queno
basta que sea conocida la voluntad de quien testa si esta voluntad no aparece en la forma y en las
condiciones que la ley ha exigido para que sea valido y eficaz, por lo que constituiria una interpretacion
arbitraria,dentrodelderechopositivo,reputarcomolegatarioaunherederocuyainstitucionfueseanulada
conpretextodequeestoseacomodabamejoralavoluntaddeltestador,puesauncuandoasifuese,sera
esto razon para modificar la ley, pero no autoriza a una interpretacion contraria a sus terminos y a los
principios que informan la testamentifaccion, pues no porque parezca mejor una cosa en el terreno del
Derecho constituyente, hay razon para convereste juicio en regla de interpretacion, desvirtuando y
anulandoporesteprocedimientoloqueellegisladorquiereestablecer.12
3.WeshouldnotbeledastraybythestatementinArticle854that,annullmentnotwithstanding,"thedevisesand
legacies shall be valid insofar as they are not inofficious". Legacies and devises merit consideration only when
they are so expressly given as such in a will. Nothing in Article 854 suggests that the mere institution of a
universalheirinawillvoidbecauseofpreteritionwouldgivetheheirsoinstitutedashareintheinheritance.
Astohim,thewillisinexistent.Theremustbe,inadditiontosuchinstitution,atestamentarydispositiongranting
himbequestsorlegaciesapartandseparatefromthenullifiedinstitutionofheir.SanchezRoman,speakingofthe
twocomponentpartsofArticle814,now854,statesthatpreteritionannulstheinstitutionoftheheir"totalmente
porlapretericion"butadded(inreferencetolegaciesandbequests)"perosubsistiendo...todasaquellasotras
disposicionesquenoserefierenalainstituciondeheredero....13AsManresaputsit,annulmentthrowsopento
intestate succession the entire inheritance including "la porcion libre (que) no hubiese dispuesto en virtud de
legado,mejoraodonacion.14
Asaforesaid,thereisnootherprovisioninthewillbeforeusexcepttheinstitutionofpetitionerasuniversalheir.
Thatinstitution,byitself,isnullandvoid.And,intestatesuccessionensues.
4.Petitioner'smainstayisthatthepresentis"acaseofineffectivedisinheritanceratherthanoneofpreterition".15
Fromthis,petitionerdrawstheconclusionthatArticle854"doesnotapplytothecaseatbar".Thisargumentfails
toappreciatethedistinctionbetweenpretentionanddisinheritance.
Preterition"consistsintheomissioninthetestator'swilloftheforcedheirsoranyoneofthem,eitherbecausethey
are not mentioned therein, or, though mentioned, they are neither instituted as heirs nor are expressly
disinherited."16Disinheritance,inturn,"isatestamentarydispositiondeprivinganycompulsoryheirofhisshare
inthelegitimeforacauseauthorizedbylaw." 17InManresa'sownwords:"Laprivacionexpresadelalegitima
constituye la desheredacion. La privacion tacita de la misma se denomina pretericion." 18 Sanchez Roman
emphasizesthedistinctionbystatingthatdisinheritance"essiemprevoluntaria"preterition,upontheotherhand,
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1966/jun1966/gr_l23445_1966.html

3/5

10/4/2016

G.R.No.L23445

ispresumedtobe"involuntaria".19Expressasdisinheritanceshouldbe,thesamemustbesupportedbyalegal
causespecifiedinthewillitself.20
The will here does not explicitly disinherit the testatrix's parents, the forced heirs. It simply omits their names
altogether.Saidwillratherthanbelabeledineffectivedisinheritanceisclearlyoneinwhichthesaidforcedheirs
sufferfrompreterition.
Ontopofthisisthefactthattheeffectsflowingfrompreteritionaretotallydifferentfromthoseofdisinheritance.
PreteritionunderArticle854oftheCivilCode,werepeat,"shallannultheinstitutionofheir".Thisannulmentisin
toto, unless in the will there are, in addition, testamentary dispositions in the form of devises or legacies. In
ineffectivedisinheritanceunderArticle918ofthesameCode,suchdisinheritanceshallalso"annultheinstitution
ofheirs",putonly"insofarasitmayprejudicethepersondisinherited",whichlastphrasewasomittedinthecase
ofpreterition. 21Betterstatedyet,indisinheritancethenullityislimitedtothatportionoftheestateofwhichthe
disinherited heirs have been illegally deprived. Manresa's expressive language, in commenting on the rights of
the preterited heirs in the case of preterition on the one hand and legal disinheritance on the other, runs thus:
"Preteridos,adquirenelderechoatododesheredados,sololescorrespondeuntercioodostercios, 22elcaso.
23

5. Petitioner insists that the compulsory heirs ineffectively disinherited are entitled to receive their legitimes, but
that the institution of heir "is not invalidated," although the inheritance of the heir so instituted is reduced to the
extentofsaidlegitimes.24
ThisisbestansweredbyareferencetotheopinionofMr.ChiefJusticeMoranintheNericaseheretoforecited,
viz:
Butthetheoryisadvancedthatthebequestmadebyuniversaltitleinfavorofthechildrenbythesecond
marriage should be treated as legado and mejora and, accordingly, it must not be entirely annulled but
merelyreduced.Thistheory,ifadopted,willresultinacompleteabrogationofArticles814and851ofthe
Civil Code. If every case of institution of heirs may be made to fall into the concept of legacies and
bettermentsreducingthebequestaccordingly,thentheprovisionsofArticles814and851regardingtotalor
partialnullityoftheinstitution,would.beabsolutelymeaninglessandwillneverhaveanyapplicationatall.
And the remaining provisions contained in said article concerning the reduction of inofficious legacies or
betterments would be a surplusage because they would be absorbed by Article 817. Thus, instead of
construing,wewouldbedestroyingintegralprovisionsoftheCivilCode.
Thedestructiveeffectofthetheorythusadvancedisduemainlytoafailuretodistinguishinstitutionofheirs
fromlegaciesandbetterments,andageneralfromaspecialprovision.Withreferencetoarticle814,which
istheonlyprovisionmaterialtothedispositionofthiscase,itmustbeobservedthattheinstitutionofheirs
isthereindealtwithasathingseparateanddistinctfromlegaciesorbetterments.Andtheyareseparate
anddistinctnotonlybecausetheyaredistinctlyandseparatelytreatedinsaidarticlebutbecausetheyare
inthemselvesdifferent.Institutionofheirsisabequestbyuniversaltitleofpropertythatisundetermined.
Legacyreferstospecificpropertybequeathedbyaparticularorspecialtitle....Butagainaninstitutionof
heirscannotbetakenasalegacy.25
Thedisputedorder,weobserve,declaresthewillinquestion"acompletenullity".Article854oftheCivilCodein
turn merely nullifies "the institution of heir". Considering, however, that the will before us solely provides for the
institutionofpetitionerasuniversalheir,andnothingmore,theresultisthesame.Theentirewillisnull.
Upon the view we take of this case, the order of November 8, 1963 under review is hereby affirmed. No costs
allowed.Soordered.
Concepcion,C.J.,Reyes,J.B.L.,Barrera,Dizon,Regala,Makalintal,Bengzon,J.P.andZaldivar,JJ.,concur.
Footnotes
1Castaedavs.Alemany,3Phil.426,428Pimentelvs.Palanca,etc.,etal.,5Phil.436,440441Limjuco

vs.Ganara,11Phil.393,394395Montaanovs.Suesa,14Phil.676,679Rieravs.Palmorali,etal.,40
Phil.105,116InreEstateofJohnson,39Phil.156,174Palaciosvs.Palacios,58O.G.No.2,220,221
Teoticovs.DelVal,etc.,L18753,March26,1965.
2Section13,Rule76oftheRulesofCourt.
3Section2,Rule1,RulesofCourt.Case,etal.vs.Jugo,etal.,77Phil.517,522.
4BettermentsareeliminatedinthepresentCivilCode.IIPadilla,CivilCodeAnnotated,p.1077.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1966/jun1966/gr_l23445_1966.html

4/5

10/4/2016

G.R.No.L23445

5VIManresa,CommentariosalCodigoCivilEspaol,7thEdition,(1951),p.424.
6Words&Phrases,Vol.3A,PermanentEd.,p.3.
7Id.,p.4.
8Black'sLawDictionary,4thed.,p.117.
9Manresa,id.,p.426.
10Manresa,id.,pp.431432.
11VISanchezRoman,EstudiosdeDerechoCivil,2ndEdition,Volumen2.o,p.1140.
12VISanchezRoman,id.,p.1138.ThisisalsocitedintheNericase,74Phil.192193.

JusticeJ.B.L.ReyesandJudgeR.C.Puno,intheirworkentitled"AnOutlineofPhilippineCivilLaw",
1956ed.,Vol.III,p.8citingGilvs.Murciano,L3362,March1,1951,likewiseopinedthat"theright
tomakeawillisstatutory,notanaturalright,andmustbesubordinatetolawandpublicpolicy".
13SanchezRoman,id.,p.1141.
14Manresa,id.,p.434.
15Petitioner'sbrief,p.15.
16Neri,etal.vs.Akutin,etal.,supra,72Phil.,atp.325.
17JusticeJ.B.L.ReyesandJudgeR.C.Puno,id.,p.106.
18Manresa,id.,p.424.JusticeReyesandJudgePuno,id.,107,speakingoftherequisitesofavalid

disinheritance,confirmthetheorythatdisinheritance"mustbeexpress(notimplied)(Art.918otherwise
thereispreterition".
19SanchezRoman,id.,p.1131.
20Arts.915,916,CivilCodeIIPadilla,CivilCodeAnnotated,pp.750752.
21IIITolentino,CivilCodeofthePhilippines,1961Edition,p.172.
22Nowonehalf,Articles888and889,CivilCode.
23Manresa,id.,p.430.
24Petitioner'sbrief,p.13.
25Neri,etal.vs.Akutin,etal.,74Phil.pp.191192.

Arts.817and851,CivilCodeofSpainof1889,referredtointheopinionabove,arenowArts.907
and918ofthepresentCivilCode.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1966/jun1966/gr_l23445_1966.html

5/5