Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
MODES
1. Legitime
2. Will
3. Intestate
4. Mixed
Two parties:
1. He who dies
2. He who succeeds
There is a very important distinction between a universal heir and a particular heir
- Preterition, if a compulsory heir is pretirited annuls institution of all heirs except devisee
or legatee
- Legatees and devices are respected
782
an heir can be a:
1. Voluntary
2. Compulsory
1. Universal
2. Particular
A testamentary heir is not necessarily a compulsory heir
Concurring (exclusiiiive)
1. (SS) Surviving Spouse (CAN NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER BE REDUCED)
a. SHE CONCURS WITH EVERYONE
b. Must be a valid marriage
2. IC
a. Filiation must be proved
COMMON LAW IN 147 DO NOT DISMISS THE SPOUSE KASI CO-OWNERSHIP MUST BE
DISSOLVED FIRST BAGO IPAMANA ANG MGA BAGAY
ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND DESCENDANTS: IRON CURTAIN RULE WITH RESPECT TO THE
RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION
- Look at what 888 tells you: MEMORIZE
o ½ : strict legitime WILL ALWAYS GO TO ONE SET OF HEIRS
- SS comes from the free portion
o Flexible legitime
- IC comes from the free portion
- Free portion vs. FREE DISPOSABLE PORTION
Distinction between the direct line vs. collateral line (brothers and sisters)
Direct excludes collateral: very important in reserva troncal (within the 3 rd degree)
1039: one sentence rule, 16(2) NATIONAL LAW OF THE DEAD PERSON APPLIES
- REGARDLESS, therefore, of public policy DO NOT APPLY TO FOREIGN DECEDENT
1026 does not require these organization to have been organized in accordance with law
>>>>
For representation, only as to the legitime or to the intestate portion, never to representation
in testamentary succession
(In)Testate(?):
GR: Only by children or descendants
Exc. Collateral line
Testamentary Succession
Code does not describe what sound mind is: presumption of sound mind
Presumption of sanity overturned only if testator one month or less was known to be publicly
insane
joint wills are prohibited : take note ONLY FOR FILIPINO 819: talks only about Filipinos
787 prohibits the delegation to a third person whether a disposition should take effect or not
1. who will inherit?
2. What and how much will be inherited?
786 can entrust to a third person the manner of distribution and the designation of persons
within a class;
1030 vis a vis 786: allows 3rd person to decide the poor in his community
Rules of Interpretation
3 defective testamentary
1. Imperfect description of property
2. Imperfect description of person
3. On the face of the will there is uncertainty in the application of any of its disposition
816 ALIEN ABROAD who wants to have his will probated in Phil
note: domicile or nationality or Philippine law
795 talks about the time of execution: law in force AT THE TIME THE WILL WAS MADE
Succession:
WILL: at the time it was made
Who inherits?: at the time of death
NOTARIAL WILL
805: ATTESTATION NOT PART OF THE WILL (altho most important) wat
if you read 809, SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE APPLIES ONLY TO THE ATTESTATION CLAUSE NOT
ANY OTHER PART OF THE WILL
logical end: END OF ALL DISPOSITIONS, not necessarily end of the will
HOLOGRAPHIC WILL
What if the will does not state the number of pages? Sometimes fatal sometimes not, depends
on what else might be defective
What if attestation clause fails to state the number of witnesses? If it can be discovered, ok
“ fails to state that the testator instructed an agent to write on his behalf? Fatal if it can be seen
during the estate proceedings: GARCIA v. DELA CUESTA (if iba iba sinasabi ng witnesses, fatal)
if sa side nag sign and not at the bottom ng attestation? Fatal. Void if the witnesses do not sign
below the attestation
Not required na acknowledged all at the same time, but what needs to remain in the last day
(or to continue): THE TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY OF ALL THE WITNESSES AND THE TESTATOR
SHOULD BE PRESENT
Can a notary public be an instrumental witness: pwede if may 3 other witnesses, if not VOID
WITNESSES:
809: JBL Reyes: liberalization running right, does not provide sufficient guidelines to limit the
discretion of a judge
Bad faith, forgery, fraud, undue pressure, etc = must be ruled out, 809 presumes that witnesses
are in good faith
If the attestation clause does not state that the testator sign the will, fatal defect Mauciano
case
Total number of pages (?) and signed in the presence of each other = must appear
Holographic will
Written, dated, signed by hand
What if there is a typewritten dispositions below the signature and then signed subsequently by
testator? VOID WILL, ma’am: the whole thing must be the handwriting, UNLESS, it has nothing
to do with dispositions
Can a testator sign by a thumbark: NO, kasi it means di marunong magread or write (ENTIRELY
HANDWRITTEN)
813: only with respect to the date, but each disposition MUST BE SIGNED
date you can have at the end and at the beginning
811: at least one witness who knows, handwriting and signature + explicit declaration,
contested: 3 witnesses
- rule of evidence
- doesn’t state that the will must be presented
- implies the need for presenting the will itself
- DOES NOT REFER TO GROUNDS OF FRAUD AND VITIATION OF CONSENT
- Probate has 2 steps
839: 2 cases
if holographic will is uncontested only one witness is unnecessary. If contested, 2 views:
1. 3 witnesses are required : codoy
a. all witnesses in codoy are useless, none of the knew the handwriting
b. so the reason for denying probate: witnesses were of poor quality
c. Balane: the rule requiring 3 witnesses is not mandatory and Azaula case is still
preserved
2. Azaula : 3 witnesses are directory
814: cancellation without following it, whole will is void, if signed valid
- Whole thing is void unless everything is signed
- If di main portion, hindi void yung will (who and what)
can you have a notarial codicil to a holographic will – yes. Treated as a different will.
A notarial will can have a holographic codicil
doctrine of dependent relative revocation: revocation of the first will is conditional and
dependent on the efficacy of the second will or the capacity of the new heirs
--
Probate
1. ante-mortem
2. post-mortem
3. reprobate: after it’s been probated abroad
REMEMBER:
2 STEPS IN PROBATE
1. Formal
2. Disposition
IF and when probate court issues decree of probate, which refers to extrinsic validity of a will,
(proper form, capacity, vitiated consent) FINAL AND EXECUTORY RES JUDICATA YOU CANNOT
QUESTION IT
- conclusive as to due execution
exception: if it appears on the face of the will that it is also intrinsically void
--
codicil – has to follow the form of the will (add and alters)
Legitimes
LC – 25k (strict legitime). 25k/3 pinakaminimum legitime, so dapat yung dispositions niya sa will
meets the minimum
890 if it is the parents who inherit, the grandparents, the legitime is divided equally by line
Even if all children renounce in favor of the mother, still compute the legitime on the basis of
the child (?)
175, FC – talks about an action, so we cannot understand, do you mean that illegitimate
children would always have to bring an action?? Ma’am: IGNORE IT BECAUSE OF THE CONCEPT
OF VOLUNTARY RECOGNITION
WHEN IC CONCURS WITH ILLEGIT, THEY GET ½ SHARE OF LC, IF CONCURS WITH SS, ¼ OF SS
Exceptions
1080(2) – condition to impose burdens on legitimes?
- Industrial, agriculture, manufacturing (Chinese), that’s an encumbrance/burden because
that can do so much better than plain cash
1083(1)
- 20 years prohibition against partition
159, FC
- Patricio v. Dario
- The law does not allow a family home of the deceased for as long as there are
beneficiaries living there
- There is an encumbrance by law
891, FC
- Cannot dispose of it in his will
905
- Vis a vis 1347(2), 2035 – that’s how void it is
- Compromises or renunciation between dead person and future heirs
- Repeated 1347 also prohibits renunciations/comp bet prospective compulsory heir and
another person/another heir (NOT EVEN A FUNNY VOID)
o CAN ALWAYS BE QUESTIONED EVEN AFTER THE DEATH
- Future legitime IS NOT future property
o Just a portion of the estate belonging to someone who is still alive, that’s why
you cant do anything with it
907/906
- Read with 911
IMPAIRMENT
- Reduction from free disposable, pro rata
- Get the intent, and the legitime
- Get book of Sebastian
1M – 50k
950k NHE no free portion look only at this, kasi cash on hand
LC 1 -425k
LC 2 -425k
SS - 425k
-------------
1.275M
-950k (cash on hand)
Return is 325k
911 – DONATIONS MC, DEVISES LEGACIES, NOT GIVEN UNTIL LEGITIMES ARE COVERED
All non-collationable means, cannot be imputed to the legitime, but to the free portion
- Reduce first the devices and legacies before you reduce donation intervivos (kasi
owners na yung binigyan)
Art. 51, FC
- All donations intervivos, ADVANCES OF THE LEGITIME, unless non-collationable
-
912
- Vis a vis 1027
1064
- Collation you bring yours what was given to you what was given to your parents
1065
- Parents do not collate whatever is given to their children
1067
there is now a conflict between 194 and 1968 (parents can decide that anything, can be
imputed to your legitime)
Balane: what should be brought to collation is if you were sent to Harvard and your siblings
went to PUP
The only thing you would bring to collation is the sum of money/balance
Wedding gift (10% of that is not collationable; very limited; jewelry/clothing; donor must be a
parent or ascendant; can be given at anytime) different from DPN (treated as an ordinary
donation: chargeable to the legitime; can be given by anyone)
In his lifetime, A the father, gave wedding gifts when his 3 daughters got married
1. Get the value of all the assets at death - e.g. Php 100
2. Deduct (Taxes and Debts) – e.g. 10, 10 (20)
3. Net hereditary estate of Php 80
4. DO NOT COMPUTE LEGITIMES ON THIS NO NO NO
5. Add (all collationable donations – donations inter vivos) – Php 40
6. Theoretical hereditary estate - php 120 (why theoretical? Because your cash in hand is
80)
a. In order not to be prejudiced, calculate your legitime based on THE
b. These collationable donations would need to be imputed against somebody
c. Collation has three meanings
i. Computation – simple accounting arithmetical process where the value of
all donations intervivos is added to available assets to arrive at the value
of the theoretical hereditary estate (908 talks about net estate DO NOT
DO IT THAT WAY)
ii. Imputation - process, donations inter vivos are charged either to legitime
or disposable portion
iii. Return - takes place when DIV found to be inofficious or exceeds
disposable portion (only as much as the value which is inofficious is
returned)
d. Donee returns ownership of the property donated (kasi intervivos, ownership
already acquired) donee only has to restitute THAT’S ALL
7. Never add legacies and devices in this computation
1071 – you only look at values in collation; what value should be computed and thereafter
collated
you compute the estate, the value of the thing donated at time of donation
you impute the value of the legitime, “
donation is a mode of acquiring ownership,
1072 – it assumes that property donated by parents to children form part of the ACP/CPG
(IMPORTANT TINATANONG SA BAR)
what is the child going to collate? Only 1/2
1073 – collation equalizes the shares of the compulsory heirs because you deduct from the
legitimes whatever they have received
1075 – donation: inofficious; you return everything not just pro rata
what is donee entitled to if it’s total return: entitled to necessary and useful expenses dahil GF
del Castillo: PRINCIPLES OF LAW UP TO THE BEGINNING OF THE BAR (CHECK MACKY’S POST ON
9262)
Ma’am: if it’s a 147 situation, he can dispouse to a common law spouse (KASI DONATION TO A
STRANGER)
Presumptive Legitime: if you look at Art. 51, both parents have to give from their separate
properties (collated against the legitimes of the compulsory heir)
- problem is really huge: kasi both still alive
- what if you are incapacitated/disinherited? What will happen?
PRETERITION
854
PRINCIPLES YOU MUST REMEMBER:
1. compulsory heir in the direct line (heir must come from the direct line) (a spouse cannot
be preterited; you can call her omitted)
906-907:
if omitted compulsory heir dies before preterition, it becomes moot (854 applies because the
omitted descendants of the deceased were preterited) X is dad, A dies before X, A’s
descendants not mentioned in will
D- nullity is limited just to that portion of the estate which the heir was illegally deprived of
P-complete nullity of all
Reserva Troncal
what can reservista do? Can she sell it? Can she register it? Can she encumber? YES
What about reserves? Can they sell, can they register? YES. But they sell it with a condition:
that the reservista dies and that they are still alive,
Reserva:
Disinheritance
1. Can only be made in will
2. Cause specified in law (will must state which cause)
3. Must be unconditional
4. Must be total
5. Must be true (the cause must be true)
Grounds:
9192, 9203, 9212 (THE SAME)
------
institution of heirs
you can make dispositions in favor of strangers = person who tops the 2018 bar
846 = equality, collective designation then every person in that designation inherits equally
If the testator intends the members of the class to inherit as a group, then he should say so
Article 849 illustrates the principle of equality and individuality = “his children” = instituted
simultaneously
The summary of 851: if the testator institutes only 1 heir to an aliquot part of the inheritance,
that’s all he gets
If estate 100k and testator says he wants a to get 25k, then that’s all he gets
If testator institutes more than one heir that’s all they get, and the rest becomes freely
disposable (not remainder of estate but remainder of disposable portion goes into intestacy)
Without art 852 the undisposed balance would pass to the testator’s legal heirs under intestacy
856 vis a vis art 43 = exactly the same, 856 however is another inaccurate provision because it
doesn’t matter if voluntary or compulsory heir, if you die before testator, YOU TRANSMIT
NOTHING TO YOUR OWN HEIRS = rule of non-transmission IS ABSOLUTE – exception is not an
exception – it is by representation and representation IS NOT A TRANSMISSION BUT
SUBROGATION
condition: stop drinking, you stop drinking but you have to give security in case you drink again
(resolutory condition)
a conditional institution must be expressly stated in the will, must be extremely clear
read 871 with 876: article 876 refers to a testamentary disposition which is subject to a…
873: vis a vis 867 (4) VOID (one of those contrary to law or good customs)
- it just says shall not be considered imposed but the disposition continues
- 867(4) may be a problem…(they ask this in the bar)
875: VOID EVERYTHING,
Relative prohibition, pwede. Absolute yung bawal. “you cant marry another lawyer” = VALID
875: THE WHOLE THING IS VOID, disposition captatoria (not just the condition but the whole
disposition)
879: positive potestative, no need for caucion mauciana (up to you completely), if negative
ptestative, (cauciano mauciana)
3 Caucion mauciana:
1. negative potestative
2. modal
3. supensive term
WHO ARE THESE LEGAL HEIRS, they are covered by intestate succession
Here you have to decide whether the instituted heir under a res con/susp term is an LC or IC
If LC
The ranking is
LC and descendants first, default?
LP and LA
IC ID
SS
Brothers/sis
N/N
Collateral relatives
State
If IC,
IP come first
Collateral no longer included stops at illegit siblings
878
if he decides to accept the property and there is a “I need prayers” thing, otherwise you will
lose your security
substitution of heirs
857: not a complete definition because it forgets the fidei commissary substitution
conditional if testator puts in another reason, if she should die before me, B will get
in a compendious substitution
1st heirs: A/B/C
if one of them p/r/I, does D already have a right? NO.ACCRETION KAY B AND C.
Normally, all the original heirs must default before D can come in
But the testator can say if any one of the predeceases, D will get it
863: fidei commissary law specifically allows representation to a testamentary heir (866! If
you don’t believe maam daw lol)
869: FC stops at William, Charles cannot impose on W the duty to transmit or preserve
867:
1. no dual obligation, no FC
2. dfs
3. there can only be two beneficiaries of one pension
4. contrary to law and considered as not imposed
929 – if he knew that he did not own it, then estate should try to acquire it, if not give monetary
equivalent
If he did not realize that he didn’t own it, THEN DISP IS VOID
931: different from 930 bec. 931 t knew that he wasn’t an owner
931 is diff from 929, in both of these, the t knew that he did not own the property but for all,
there is an implied order to acquire, otherwise the testator’s wishes will be dashed
if T orders heir to remove enc, heir does not receive by grat title
merger/cond/legacy of remission
for a generic device, valid only if property exists at the time of death of testator
946: impt
934(3)
so if your dad gives you rice land, you have to respect usufruct if any
Ranking Succession
LC
1. LCs/LDs
2. In default, LPs/Las
3. IC
4. SS
5. B/S;N/N
6. Other collateral
7. State
IC
1. LC = LDs
2. IC
3. IP
4. SS
5. B/S
6. State
Accretion