1) mode — the process of acquiring or

transferring ownership. (See 3 Sanchez Roman

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES 199-200).

A. DEFINITION AND CONCEPT OF SUCCESSION 2) title — that which is not ordinarily

Art. 712.
“Ownership is acquired by occupation and
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.”
sufficient to convey ownership, but which gives
a juridical justification for a mode; i.e., it
provides the cause for the acquisition of
ownership. (See 3 Sanchez Roman 200).
e.g.
If A sells to B a specific car for a specific
amount, the sale is the title; by virtue of such
title, A should now deliver the property to B. It
is the delivery or tradition that makes B the
owner; it is tradition that is the mode.)
(b) Tabular Distinction
MODE TITLE

Modes of Acquiring Ownership 1. proximate cause 1. remote cause

(a) Original modes. (Acap v. CA, 251 SCRA 30 2. the true cause (or 2. the justification for
[1995]) process) the process

= independent of any pre-existing or preceding 3. directly produces a 3. serves merely to

title or right of another: real right give an opportunity
for the existence
1) Occupation of a real right;
2) Creation or work (in the Code, only meantime, only a
intellectual creation is mentioned). personal right
exists
(b) Derivative modes. (Acap v. CA, supra)
(somebody else was the owner before): = NOTE:
In some cases, like succession, the
1) Succession mode is at the same time the title, namely
2) Donation SUCCESSION.
3) Prescription Hence, in succession, the delivery or
4) Law tradition is NOT NEEDED to transfer ownership.
5) Tradition, as a consequence of
certain contracts (like the contract of sale, Art. 774.
barter, assignment, simple loan or mutuum).
“Succession is a mode of acquisition by virtue of
which the property, rights and obligations to the
Mode’ Distinguished from ‘Title’ extent of the value of the inheritance, of a
person are transmitted through his death to
(a) Definitions another or others either by his will or by
operation of law. (n)
Succession: General and technical sense
GENERIC SENSE
= from the Latin “sub”and “cedere,” meaning
the placing of one person in the place of
another
the transmission of rights and
properties from one person to another. In this
sense, succession may be inter vivos or mortis
causa,
depending upon whether the transfer is
effective during the lifetime (inter vivos) of the
giver, or after his death (mortis causa).
An example of succession inter vivos
occurs in an ordinary donation.
TECHNICAL
= succession is restricted to succession
mortis causa
denotes the transfer of title to
property under the laws of descent and
distribution, taking place as it does, only on the
death of a person.
Kinds of Succession: (EWTRS)
(1) As to effectivity
(a) succession inter vivos (example:
donation)
(b) succession mortis causa (this is
succession in the specific sense meant
in Art. 774)
(2) As to whether a will exists or not
(a) testamentary succession (there is a
will)
(b) intestate or legal succession (there is
NO will)
(c) mixed succession (part of the
property has been disposed of in a will)
(3) As to the transferees of the property
(a) compulsory succession (refers to the
legitime)
NB:
It is compulsory for the testator
to give his compulsory heirs their
legitimes;
But it is not compulsory for the
heirs to receive or accept said legitimes,
for no one is compelled to accept an
economic advantage or benefit from
another
(b) voluntary succession (refers to the
free disposal)
(4) As to the extent of rights and obligations
involved
(a) universal succession (covering ALL
juridical relations involving the
deceased)
(b) particular succession (covering only
certain items or properties)
(5) Special kind
Contractual succession —This happens
when a future husband and future wife give to
each other in their marriage settlement as
much of their future property, in the event of
death, as they may validly dispose of in a will.
(Art. 130)
It does not need the formalities of a
will; a marriage settlement is sufficient.(so long
as it is in compliance with the Statute of Frauds)
Law on Succession is Animated by a Uniform
General Intent
= Being so, no part should be rendered
inoperative by (generally), but must be
construed in relation to, any other part as to
produce a harmonious whole. (Manuel v. Ferrer,
63 SCAD 764 [1995]).
Succession Mortis Causa Defined
= Art. 774 speaks of succession mortis causa; it
also defines the term.
Important Elements of the Definition:
(ATDAW)
(a) mode of acquisition (or ownership)
(b) transfer of property, rights, and obligations
to the extent of the value of the inheritance of a
person (called grantor or transferor, decedent,
testator, or intestate)
(c) transmission thru death (not during life)
(d) transmission to another (called grantee, or
transferee, heir, legatee, or devisee)
(e) by will or by operation of law (testamentary
or legal succession)
Estate and obligation of decedent
= The estate of the decedent pays for the
obligations of the decedent. What is left is
given to the heirs.
Property and Rights
= Passed on to the decedent's successors
Obligations:
a. Monetary.
= GR: The estate pays for them before the
estate is partitioned
Exception:
Alvarez case. Predecessor fraudulently
disposed of the prop. During litigation. SC held
that heirs cannot escape liability for their
father's transactions w/c gave way to this claim
for damages. Even though they did not inherit
the prop., the monetary equivalent thereof was
devolved into the mass of the estate w/c the
heirs inherited.
Hereditary estates are always liable in
their totality for the payments of the debts of
the estate. Whatever payment made
by the estate is ultimately a payment by the
heirs bec. these payments decrease their
inheritance.
b. Non-monetary.-- Transmitted to the heirs.
Art. 774 w/ Art. 776
For money debts: If not paid in
settlement proceedings, heirs could be liable to
the extent of what they received.
For obligations: E.g., lessee-lessor--
obligation to keep the lessee in the peaceful
possession is transmitted to the heirs.
Art. 776.
“The inheritance includes all the property, rights
and obligations of a person which are not
extinguished by his death.”
Inheritance= Transmissible property, rights and
obligations constitute inheritance.
Guidelines on whether rights/ obligations are
extinguished by death: (PePaMo)
1. Property, rights and obligations which are
purely personal are extinguished by the death
of the decedent. They are not part of the
inheritance
e.g.
membership in the bar or right of
consortium w/ your wife.
2. Those w/c are purely patrimonial.
General rule: They form part of the inheritance,
 e.g.
credits.
Exception:
Money debts.
Obligation to pay is not transmissible,
although purely patrimonial bec. the estate
pays for it.
3. Those obligations transmitted to the heirs
w/c are not monetary
e.g.
obligation of a lessor-- patrimonial. B
leased to C a parcel of land for a term of 3
years. After 2 years, B died.The heirs of B are
bound by the lease contract. Obligation as
lessee and bailee are transmissible.
Bases for Succession: (FSO)
(a) The natural law which obliges a person to
provide for those he would leave behind (this is
a consequence of family relations; a recognition
of the natural law of consanguinity, or of blood,
and the natural affection of a person toward
those nearest him in relationship. (Henry v.
Thomas, 20 N.E. 519, 118 Ind. 23).
(b) A socio-economic postulate which would
prevent wealth from becoming inactive or
stagnant (this is essential from an economic
standpoint to enable social economy to be firm.
(4 Castan 148).
(c) The implicit attributes of ownership which
would be imperfect, if a person is not allowed
to dispose of his property, such disposal to take
effect when he is already dead (this is a
consequence of rights to property). (See 6
Manresa 297-298). (See also Guevara v.
Guevara, et al., L-5405, Jan. 31, 1956).
Art. 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.
Principle of Relativity
contracts are generally effective only between
the PARTIES, their ASSIGNS, and their HEIRS.
= a contract can only bind the parties who had
entered into it or their successors who assumed
their personalities or their juridical positions,
and that, as a consequence, such contract can
neither favor nor prejudice a third person.
(Quano v. CA, et al. GR 95900, Jul. 23, 1992)
Reasons for the rule:
“RES INTER ALIOS ACTA ALIIS NEQUE NOCET
PRODEST.”
The act, declaration, or omission of
another, cannot affect another, except as
otherwise provided by law or agreement.)
(See Sec. 25, Rule 130, Revised Rules of Court).
B. KINDS OF SUCCESSION
Art. 778.
“ Succession may be:
(1) Testamentary;
(2) Legal or intestate; or
(3) Mixed. (n)”
1. TESTAMENTARY (ART. 779.)-- designation of
an heir in a will
2. LEGAL OR INTESTATE .-- w/o a will or the will
is invalid
3. MIXED (ART. 780.)-- partly by will and partly
by operation of law
4. COMPULSORY.-- Succession to the legitime
by a forced heir.
Art. 779.
“Testamentary succession is that which results
from the designation of an heir, made in a will
executed in the form prescribed by law. (n)”
Rules for Testamentary Succession
(a) Testamentary succession may be done thru
a will or thru a codicil.
(b) The will or codicil may be:
(1) notarial (ordinary, attested, or
acknowledged)
(2) holographic (handwritten by the
testator from beginning to end,
complete with date and signature)
(c) In case of doubt, testamentary succession is
preferred to legal or intestate succession. (See
Art. 791).
Art. 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. (n)
Interpretation as a Whole
(a) The will must be interpreted as a whole.
(b) While testacy is preferred over intestacy,
this is true only if the will has been validly
made.
Priority or Preference of Testate Over Intestate
Proceedings
(a) Testate proceedings take precedence over
intestate proceedings (as enunciated in Art 791)
(b) If in the course of intestate proceedings
pending before the CFI (now RTC) it is found
that the decedent left a will,proceedings for the
probate of the will should replace the
intestate proceedings (in the same court)
even if at that stage, an administrator
had already been appointed, the latter being
required to render his final accounts and to
turn over the estate to the executor
subsequently named.
This is without prejudice to the fact that
if, the will be disallowed, the intestate
proceedings should be resumed.
(Vicente Uriarte v. CFI of Negros Occidental, et
al. L-21938-39, May 29, 1970)
Legal or Intestate succession is inexplicably not
defined.
Curiously, the draft code contained a
definition of this kind of succession but for
some unknown reasons it was not included. It
stated that an “Intestate succession takes place
by operation of law in the absence of a valid
will.”
Art. 780.
“Mixed succession is that effected partly by will
and partly by operation of law.”
Sample problem:
A made a will, disposing half of his
properties. the will is later on declared null and
void for lack of the proper signature, is this a
case of legal or mixed succession?
ANS.: Legal because the will being void,
the entire estate descends to the heirs by
operation of law.
The decedent may have died partly
testate and partly intestate. Insofar as the will
disposes of certain properties, this is generally
the law that should govern.( Parish Priest of
Roman Catholic Church of Victoria, Tarlac v.
Rigor L-22036, Apr. 30, 1979) (?)
Art. 960.
“Legal or intestate succession takes place:
(WHSI)
(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, of 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.
Legal Succession’ Defi ned
= Legal succession is that kind of succession
prescribed by the law (and presumed by it to be
the desire of the deceased),
which takes place when the expressed
will of the decedent has not been set down in a
will. (or causes as specified in Art 960 and other
causes)
Legal or Intestate
It is called LEGAL, because its terms are
fixed by law.
It is called INTESTATE, because it takes
place when there is NO WILL or no particular
disposition of the property concerned.
Kinds of succession (Superiority)
1) forced succession
2) testamentary succession
3) intestate succession
Legal or Intestate and Forced Succession
In legal succession, the law tries to
follow the presumed will of the decedent.
In forced succession (succession to the
legitime), regardless of the decedent’s desire,
he must comply with the rules on the legitime.
@ Probate Court
Q:
In an intestate proceeding, the heirs
presented a partition which was subsequently
approved by the court.
Later an alleged will turned up, and
some of the heirs benefited moved for the
reopening of the case.
The court ruled among other things that
the discovered will had already been
previously revoked. Can the intestate court
make this declaration?
Ans:
No, because a court before whom the
intestate case has been filed has no jurisdiction
in matters of probate. The allegation that this is
a valid will to consider is a matter over which
only a probate court has jurisdiction. The court
must order that a separate case be filed in a
probate court.
(Testate Estate of the Late Adrian Maloto v.
Maloto L-32328, Sep. 30, 1977)
= The jurisdiction of the regional trial court as a
probate or intestate court relates only to
matters having to do with the settlement of the
estate and probate of will of deceased persons
It does not extend to the determination
of questions of ownership that arise during the
proceedings. (Ortañez-Enderes v. CA 321 SCRA
178 (1999))
Reason, Purpose, or Basis for Legal Succession
Because unexpected death may come to
any person, the law presumes what would have
been the last wishes of a person had such
person made a will while still alive, taking into
consideration his love and affection for those
closest to him.
Enumeration not Exclusive
= This enumeration is not exclusive. There are
other causes.
A. Kinds
1. Total - No testamentary disposition
at all.
2. Partial - A will that disposes of part of
the free portion
B. Causes
1)
a. No will.-- Total intestacy
b. Void will = no will.-- Total intestacy
c. Erroneous.-- will, once valid, always
valid but may lose its efficacy, e.g.,when
revoked.
2)
a. "does not institute an heir."-- Useless
will as far as succession is concerned.
b. "Does not dispose all."-- Partial
intestacy (?)
3)
"Suspensive condition does not
happen."-- Intestacy as to that specific
institution.
4)
"Incapable of succeeding-- Only specific
provision will give rise to intestacy.
5)
Others not in Art. 960.
a. upon the expiration of the resolutory
term;(?)
b. upon the fulfillment of the resolutory
condition. (7 Manresa 36).]
c. Non-compliance (?) or Impossibility of
ascertaining the will of the testator.
d. preterition of the compulsory heirs,
there being no devisees or legatees or
without prejudice to devisees or
legatees in so far as they are not
innofficious,,shall annul the institution
of heirs (in connection with paragraph
2)
Explanation of First Paragraph(W)
(a) “Without a will” — no will made
(b) “Void will” — lacks essential requisites;
denied probate
(c) “Subsequently lost its validity” — revoked or
ineffective
A void will and a will that later lost its validity
= are essentially the same.
The only difference between the two
lies in the fact that the first refers to a will that
has never been valid, but isnull and void ab
origine, ipso facto,
while the second refers to a valid will
which later lost its validity.

When can intestate heirs can inherit on the
ground that the will is void:
= Before intestate heirs can inherit on the
ground that the will is void, there must first be a
declaration of the nullity of the will or a positive
disallowance of a will.
If the intestate heirs merely petition to
be declared the owners without the
abovementioned requirement, they cannot as
yet inherit. (Castro, et al. v. Gallegos, et al., 10
Phil. 306).
Explanation of Second Paragraph(H)
This refers to cases where there is no
heir, no legatee, no devisee or when there is
partial disposition. Intestacy controls the
remainder.
Explanation of Third Paragraph(S)
(a) If the suspensive condition does not happen
(b) in case of predecease
(c) in case of repudiation
But there will be NO INTESTACY IN THE ABOVE
CASES if there is:
1) substitution
2) or accretion
@ Substitution or Accretion
Q:
A has a brother B. In his will, A gave a
house to C provided C passes the bar in 2003;
and a car to D. E was designated as D’s
substitute in case of predecease.
In 2003, D dies. In 2004, A dies. In 2005, C flunks
the bar examinations. Who gets the properties?
A:
The house goes to B, the intestate heir,
because the devise to C has become ineffective.
The car goes to E, because he is the substitute
of D.
[NOTE: See Arts. 872, 871, 880, 856, 1025, 1041,
977, 1015.].
Explanation of Fourth Paragraph (I)
@ Incapacity
Q:
A instituted B as heir, but B is
incapacitated.
A:
The estate descends by intestate
succession unless there is a substitute or unless
the right of accretion exists.
Other Causes of Intestacy:
(a) upon the expiration of the resolutory
term;(?)
(b) upon the fulfillment of the resolutory
condition. (7 Manresa 36).]
Does Preterition Convert a Court Proceeding
into an Intestate Proceeding?
= It depends:
A1:
If the proceeding is a TESTATE
proceeding, the same is converted into a
proceeding for the settlement of an intestate
estate (except insofar as there are legacies and
devises which are not inofficious).
Reason for allowing the conversion
— the court would have jurisdiction
over all the properties of the deceased,
whether or not included in the institution or
partition that is annulled on account of the
preterition.
Ordinarily, when the probate of a will is
pending in one court, this must first be
terminated before an intestate proceeding,
based on the alleged preterition can start.
Reason: Normally, the matter of
preterition deals with intrinsic not extrinsic
validity.
 However, when the only provision of
the will deals with an institution of a sister or
brother, to the exclusion of the parents (who
are the only compulsory heirs left), to continue
with the probate would be USELESS. (?)
A2:
If the proceeding is an ORDINARY CIVIL
ACTION TO ANNUL THE PARTITION already
made by the other heirs of certain properties,
the action cannot be converted into an
intestate proceeding with jurisdiction over any
and all properties of the deceased.
Reason:
In the ordinary civil action, the
authority of the court is limited to the
properties described in the pleadings, hence, it
cannot order the collation and partition of
properties which were not included in the
partition, which was the subject matter of the
action for annulment. (See Lajom v. Leuterio, et
al., L-13557, Apr.
25, 1960, where an acknowledged natural child
of the
testator was preterited.).
Art. 84.
“If the future spouses agree upon a regime
other than the absolute community of property,
they cannot donate to each other in their
marriage settlements more than one-fifth of
their present property. Any excess shall be
considered void.
DONATIONS OF FUTURE PROPERTY SHALL BE
GOVERNED BY THE PROVISIONS ON
TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION AND THE
FORMALITIES OF WILLS. (130a)”
Future Property
(a) This is anything which the donor cannot
dispose of at the time he makes the donation.
E.g.
The land of his father who is still alive.
(b) The future spouses (not other people) may
donate future property to each other, but this
shall be governed not by the rules on ordinary
donations but by the provisions of testamentary
succession and the formalities of wills.
Donation to take effect upon death of Donor
Spouse
= These donations, unlike donations of present
property which take effect upon the celebration
of the marriage, take effect upon the death of
the donor spouse.
It cannot be made in the marriage
settlement but in a will or testament. Its limits
are governed by the rules of testamentary
succession provided by the Civil Code.
Since a will can be revoked by the
testator at any time before his death the
donation propter nuptias of future property
may be so revoked.
Persons other than the
affianced parties cannot give donations propter
nuptial of future property.
Art. 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 Succession
= There is no more contractual succession by
virtue of the repeal of Article 130 of the Old
Civil Code which was amended under Article 84
of the Family Code.
In mandating the applicability of the
rules on Succession to donation of future
property between spouses, the law, therefore,
eliminated this kind of succession. Hence, by
implication such type of succession under
Article 84 is considered an ordinary
testamentary succession.

Art. 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.”
Art. 750.
“The donations may comprehend all the present
property of the donor, or part thereof, provided
he reserves, in full ownership or in usufruct,
sufficient means for the support of himself, and
of all relatives who, at the time of the
acceptance of the donation, are by law entitled
to be supported by the donor. Withoutsuch
reservation, the donation shall be reduced in
petition of any person affected. (634a).”
Donation without Reservation o Required by
Law
= A donation of all the present property of the
donor, without the reservation of a sufficient
amount for his subsistence, is not void, but only
susceptible of reduction.
It is voidable with respect to the
amount necessary for the support of the donor
or his dependent relatives.
Limitation on the Giver
= The limitation is really on the giver and not
on the recipient, despite the misleading phrase
“may give or receive.”
e.g.
Thus, a beggar may receive a million
pesos as a donation, even if he has no property
of his own, provided that the giver has still
enough left for his own compulsory heirs
= The limitation naturally applies only to
persons who have compulsory heirs at the time
of the former’s death.
Meaning of the Article
(a) A person may not give by donation more
than what he can give by will;
(b) And, a person may not receive by way of
donation more than what the giver may give by
virtue of a will.
Amount to be Donated
= The amount that can be donated depends
upon the character of the compulsory heirs and
the amount of property at the time of the death
of the donor.
The donation itself is not a nullity, but
only subject to reduction in so far as it exceeds
what the donor could have given by will to the
donee.
This amount is determinable only at the
time of the death of donor.
e.g.1
I can give as a donation as much as I am allowed
to do so, in case I make a will.
Now then, suppose today I have P1
million and I have one legitimate child, it is clear
that I can validly dispose of P500,000 in favor of
strangers. Surely, the donation here would not
be inofficious.
e.g.2
If tomorrow I should die, leaving one
legitimate child (same as when I made the
donation) and leaving an estate of P500,000
(since P500,000 had already been given
by way of donation), then, if we follow
Manresa’s opinion, this will happen: P500,000
will be the hereditary estate. (The donation of
P500,000 will not be added.) The free disposal
will therefore be P250,000. Since the donation
exceeds the free portion, it will be reduced by
P250,000, and the effect would be that
the donation is valid only to the extent of
P250,000, which would then be a clear
absurdity. We should not construe the law in
such a way as to create an absurdity, otherwise
the purpose of the law would be frustrated (?)
Rule in case of innoficious Donations
= Donations to strangers SHOULD BE
COLLATED, not as advances of the legitime--for
they are not compulsory heirs and have
therefore no legitime — but as advances of the
FREE DISPOSAL.
Prescriptive Period
= The action to revoke or reduce the inofficious
donation must be brought by the donor’s
compulsory heirs, within five years after the
donor’s death. (Art. 1149).
@ Prescriptive Period; Donations Propter
Nuptias, Liberal in Nature
Q:
In 1917, a father of two sons gave to
one son two parcels of land as donations
propter nuptias.In 1957, the second son sued
for annulment of one half of the donation on
the allegation that the two lots donated were
the only properties of the father-donor and
consequently the donation impaired his (the
second son’s legitime).
While the action was pending, the
father died. This was in 1958. The donee
contended that the donation should be
completely upheld on the theory:
(a) that the action had already
prescribed, the donation having
taken place some 40 years ago; and
(b) that donations propter nuptias can
be revoked only on the grounds stated in Art.
132 of the Civil Code [now Art. 86 of the Family
Code] (enumerating the grounds for the
revocation of such donations).
A:
Annulment or revocation or reduction
on the ground of inofficiousness can still be
allowed —
(a) because the action for reduction has
not yet prescribed, the cause having
arisen only in 1958, the death of the
donor.
It is only from such death in
1958 when we can begin to consider
the matter of inofficiousness (upon
computation of the hereditary estate);
and;
(b) because, being in the nature of a
“liberality,” donations propter nuptias
remain subject to reduction, if found
inofficious.
Reason Why Additional Restrictions Are Not
Imposed
= It should be noticed that the only limitations
on the right to give donations are that they
must not be (1) inofficious, (2) must
not prejudice creditors, (3) and must not harm
the donor’s and his relative’s support.
To add more restrictions would be to
subdue the generous impulse of the heart.
(Martinez v. Martinez, 1 Phil. 182).
Art. 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.”
Object or Subject Matter of a Contract
= the object of a contract is a thing
or a service.
Requisites
(a) the thing or service must be within the
commerce of man;
(b) must be transmissible;
(c) must not be contrary to law, morals, good
customs, public order, or public policy;
(d) must not be impossible (Art. 1348, Civil
Code);
(e) must be determinate as to its kind or
determinable without the need of a new
contract or agreement. (Art. 1349, Civil
Code).
Within the Commerce of Man
= If the object is outside the commerce of man,
such as sidewalks (Muyot v. De la Fuente, [C.A.]
48 O.G. 4866)
or public plazas (Mun. of Cavite v.
Rojas, 30 Phil. 602), or public bridges,
they cannot be the object of contracts of
alienation (but may be the object, for example,
of a contract for repair).
= Taxes are fixed by law, and are not subject to
contract between the taxpayer and tax officer,
except when there is an actual compromise.
(Coll. of Int. Rev. v. Ellen Wood McGrath, L-
12710, L-12721, Feb. 28, 1961).
= The right to present one’s candidacy for a
public office cannot be the object of a contract.
Hence, a defeated candidate in a party
convention who has previously agreed not to
run for public offi ce (if defeated in such
convention) cannot be successfully sued for
breach of the agreement. (Saura v. Sindico,
L-13403, Mar. 23, 1960).
Transmissible
= All rights which are not intransmissible may
be the object of contracts.
But strictly political rights (like the right
to vote) or strictly personal rights (like parental
authority) cannot be the subject of a contract.
Not Contrary to Law, Morals, etc.
(a) Future things may be the object of a
contract;
e.g.
thus, the future harvest of sugarcane in
a specific field may be sold; but by express
provision of law, said future property may
not be donated.
(b) Future inheritance (one where the source of
property is still alive) cannot be the subject of a
contract
except:
1) in the case of marriage settlements.
(See Art. 130,Civil Code now Art. 84);
2) in the case of partitions of property
inter vivos by the deceased. (See Art.
1080, Civil Code).
NOTE:
Future inheritance is any property or
right not in existence or capable of
determination, at the time of the contract, that
a person may in the future acquire by
succession. (Maria Gervacio Blas, et al. v.
Rosalinda Santos, et al., L-14070, Mar. 29,
1961).]
@ Inheritance transferred automatically to the
heirs upon death of the Decedent; Inheritance
is not a Future Property
QUES:
A’s father died, but before delivery of the
property to him, A sold his share of the
property inherited. Is the sale valid?
ANS.: Yes, the sale is valid. The inheritance
here is not future inheritance, but existing
inheritance, although as yet undelivered.
Ownership is transferred automatically
to the heir upon the death of the decedent.
Said the Supreme Court: “The
properties of an existing inheritance cannot be
considered as another’s property with relation
to the heirs who, through a fiction of law,
continue the personality of the owner.
Nor do they have the character of
future property because the predecessor in
interest having already died, his heirs acquired a
right to succeed him from the moment of his
death. An inheritance already existing, which is
no longer future from the moment of death of
the predecessor, may legally be the object of
contract.” (Osorio v. Osorio and Inchausti
Steamship Co., 41 Phil. 513).
@ Future Inheritance
(1) QUES:
While his father was still alive, A sold to
B the property he (A) expected to receive from
his father. Is the contract valid?
ANS.:
No, because the object of the contract
here is really future inheritance, and the
particular contract in this case is not one of
those authorized by law regarding inheritance.
(Tordilla v. Tordilla, 60 Phil. 162).
(2) QUES:
Some future heirs divided the property
they expected to inherit from their mother, at a
time when she was still alive. Is such partition of
property valid?
ANS.:
No. This is a contract relating to a future
inheritance (for the mother is still alive) and
does not come under the category of those
contracts authorized by law concerning future
inheritance.
The owner (the mother) could have
made a partition among the heirs, but since the
partition was made here not by her, but by the
heirs, the same is void, under the second
paragraph of Art. 1271 of the old Civil Code.
(Now the second paragraph of Art. 1347 of the
New Civil Code). (Arroyo v. Gerona, 58 Phil.
226).
No Extension After Expiration
= If a lease has expired, the trial court can no
longer extend the same without the consent of
both lessor and lessee.( Gindoy v. Tapucar 76
SCRA 31)
Human Blood is not an Object of Contract
= The human blood, like other parts of the
human body, cannot be considered object of
contracts because they are outside the
commerce of men(Art. 1347(1)(3), Civil Code).
As such, the extraction, collecting, and
selling of human blood by any individual
or agency (e.g., People’s Blood Bank) is an
aspect of the medical profession and should not
be considered a taxable entity for business tax
purposes.
The word “donation” instead of
“selling” should be used as the euphemisms for
the act of “giving away” or “transferring to
another “any part of the human body for
scientific purposes, to save life or to advance
the cause of medical science. ”Sale” of
human blood is not taxable activity for business
tax purposes.
Art. 1348.
“Impossible things or services cannot be the
object of contracts.”
Art. 905
C. OPENING OF SUCCESSION
Art. 777.
“The rights to the succession are transmitted
from the moment of the death of the decedent.”
Death of the Decedent
= the determining point when the heirs
acquire a definite right to inheritance whether
pure or conditional.
= rights of the heirs to the inheritance arise
from the express will of the testator or from
the provisions of the law, but they do not
acquire solidity and effectiveness except from
the moment of death;
before this event, the law may change,
the will of the testator may vary, and even
circumstances may be modified to such an
extent that he who is expected to receive
property may be deprived of it; but once death
supervenes, the will of the testator becomes
immutable,
the law as to the succession can no
longer be changed, disinheritance cannot be
effected
= succession is opened by the death of the
person from whom the inheritance comes.
Right of Inheritance: Origin and Effectivity
= rights to the succession of a person are
transmitted from the moment of his death, and
by virtue of prior manifestations of his will or of
causes predetermined by law.
These Two must be considered,
therefore, the origin of the right, and that which
makes the right effective.
Death Defined
= Death is not limited to natural or
physical death, presumed death by virtue of
prolonged legal absence is included. (What
article)
Art. 390.
“After an absence of seven years, it being
unknown whether or not the absentee still lives,
he shall be presumed dead for all purposes,
except for those of succession.
The absentee shall not be presumed
dead for the purpose of opening his succession
till after an absence of ten years. If he
disappeared after the age of seventy-five
years, an absence of five years shall be sufficient
in order that his succession may be opened. (n)
Art. 391.
“The following shall be presumed dead for all
purposes, including the division of the estate
among the heirs:
(1) A person on board a vessel lost during a sea
voyage, or an aeroplane which is missing, who
has not been heard of for four years since the
loss of the vessel or aeroplane;
(2) A person in the armed forces who has taken
part in war, and has been missing for four years;
(3) A person who has been in danger of death
under other circumstances and his existence
has not been known for four years. (n)
Four Elements of Succession: (DWSA)
1. Death
2. Will or Operation of law
3. Existence and capacity of the successor
4. Acceptance.
Rights to Succession: When Inchoate and
Vested
= Rights to succession vest at the moment of
death, not transmitted. The right should be
made effective from the moment of death.
= the rights to succession before death are
mere inchoate. But from the moment of death,
those inchoate rights become absolute.
= Rights to succession are vested from the
moment of death,
not upon the filing of petition for
testate/ intestate proceedings, not upon the
declaration of heirship or upon settlement of
the estate.
= The rights to succession are automatic.
TRADITION OR DELIVERY is not needed. Fiction
of the law is that from the moment of the death
of the decedent, the right passes to the heirs.
= During the lifetime of the predecessor, rights
to succession are a mere expectancy. Hence, no
contract can be legally entered into regarding
the expected inheritance. When a heir receives
his inheritance, he is deemed to have received
it at the point of death. This is so by legal
fiction to avoid confusion.
@ Rights of heirs vested at the time of Death
of Decedent
Upon the death of the husband before
the NCC, the rights of the wife to the
inheritance were vested. So the rights of the
illegitimate children under the NCC to inherit
cannot prejudice the vested rights of the wife.
We have to apply the OCC bec. at the
time of his death, it is the OCC w/c governed
the law on succession.
For the DETERMINATION OF
SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS, the law at the point of
death should be the one applied. (Uson v. Del
Rosario.)
= The right to inherit is vested at the moment
of death. Even if she did not know how much
she was going to inherit, she could still dispose
of her share in the inheritance.
Said right to the share was hers from
the moment of death and she could do
whatever she wanted w/ her share, even sell it.(
Borja v. Borja)
= You do not need a DECLARATION OF
HEIRSHIP whether testate or intestate,
voluntary, etc.
The rights of the heirs to the prop. vest
in them even before judicial declaration of their
being heirs in the testate proceedings.
An ACTION TO QUIET TITLE is not
extinguished by the death of the decedent, it
being a patrimonial right. Hence, the heirs have
the right to be substituted to the action even
before their having declared as heirs.( Bonilla v.
Barcena)
= Carlos died in 1936, BEFORE THE EFFECTIVITY
OF THE NCC. As such, his illegitimate child
cannot inherit from him. As such, title to the
land belongs to the cousin who inherited the
land w/ Carlos.( Jimenez v. Fernandez)
Art. 84.
“ If the future spouses agree upon a regime
other than the absolute community of property,
they cannot donate to each other in their
marriage settlements more than one-fifth of
their present property. Any excess shall
be considered void.
Donations of future property shall be governed
by the provisions on testamentary succession
and the formalities of wills. (130a)”
Art. 86.
A donation by reason of marriage may be
revoked by the donor in the following cases:
(1) If the marriage is not celebrated or judicially
declared void ab initio except donations made in
the marriage settlements, which shall be
governed by Article 81;
(2) When the marriage takes place without the
consent of the parents or guardian, as required
by law;
(3) When the marriage is annulled, and the
donee acted in bad faith;
(4) Upon legal separation, the donee being the
guilty spouse;
(5) If it is with a resolutory condition and the
condition is complied with;
(6) When the donee has committed an act of
ingratitude as specified by the provisions of the
Civil Code on donations in general. (132a)
Art. 765.
“The donation may also be revoked at the
instance of the donor, by reason of ingratitude
in the following cases:
(1) If the donee should commit some offense
against the person, the honor or the property
of the donor, or of his wife or children under
his parental authority;
(2) If the donee imputes to the donor any
criminal offense, or any act involving moral
turpitude, even though he should prove it,
unless the crime or the act has been
committed against the donee himself, his
wife or children under his authority;
(3) If he unduly refuses him support when
the donee is legally or morally bound to give
support to the donor. (648a)
Donation Propter Nuptias of Future Property
= These donations, unlike donations of present
property which take effect upon the celebration
of the marriage,
take effect upon the death of the donor
spouse.
It cannot be made in the marriage
settlement but in a will or testament.
Its limits are governed by the rules of
testamentary succession provided by the Civil
Code.
Since a will can be revoked by the
testator at any time before his death, the
donation propter nuptias of future property
may be so revoked.
Persons other than the affianced parties
cannot give donations propter nuptial of
future property.
Xxxxxxx
D. Subject and Object of Succession
Art. 775.
“In this Title, “decedent ” is the general term
applied to a 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.”
Testator and Decedent:
Every testator is a decedent but not all
decedents are testators. Under the American
system, a decedent who did not leave a will is
called "intestate." But this is not true in the
Phils.(Balane)
Art. 776.
“The inheritance includes all the property, rights
and obligations which are not extinguished by
his death.”
Art. 777.
“The rights to the succession are transmitted
from the moment of the death of the decedent.”
Art 778.
“Succession may be:
(1)Testatmentary
(2)Legal or intestate; or
(3)Mixed.” (TeLeMi)
Art.779.
“Testatmentary succession is that which results
from the designation of an heir, made in a will
executed in the form prescribed by law.”
Art. 780.
“Mixed succession is that effected partly by will
and partly by operation of law.”
Art. 781.
“The inheritance of a person includes not only
the property and transmissible rights and
obligations existing at the time of his death, but
also those which have accrued thereto since the
opening of the succession.”
Art. 782.
“An heir is a person called to the succession
either by virtue 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.”
Art 887.
“The following are complusry heirs:
(1)Legitimate children and descendants with
repsect 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 Art
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.
In all cases of illegitimate children, their filiation
must be proved
The father or mother of illegitimate children of
the three classes mentioned shall in inherit from
them in the manner and to the extent
established by this code.”
Art. 963.
“Proximity of relationship is determined by the
number of generations. Each generation forms a
degree.”
Art. 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.”
Art. 965.
“The direct line is either descending or
ascending.
The former unites the head of the family from
those who descend from him.
The latter binds a person with those from whom
he descends.”
Art. 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, a 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 “In or der to be capacitated to inherit, the heir,
from his brother, three from his uncle, who is devisee or legatee must be livng at the moment
the brother of his father and four from his first the succession opens, or in the case of
cousin, and so forth.” representation, when it is proper.
Art. 967. A child already conceived after the death of the
“Full blood relationship is that existing between decedent is capable of succeeding provided it be
persons who have the same father and mother. born under the conditions prescribed in Article
Half-blood relationship is that existing between 41.”
persons who have the same father, but not the Art. 1026.
same mother, or the same mother, but not the “A testamentary disposition may be made to
same father.” the State, provinces, municipal corporations,
Art. 968. private corporations, organizations or
“If there are several persons in the same degree, associations for religious, scientific, cultural,
and one or some of them are unwilling or educational or charitable purposes.
incapacitated to succeed, his portion shall All other corporations or entities may succeed
accrue to the others of the same degree, save under a will, unless there is a provision contrary
the right of representation when it should take to their charter, or the laws of their creation,
place.” and always subject to the same.”
Art. 969. Art. 1027.
“If the inheritance should be repudiated by the “The following are incapable of succeeding:
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.”
Art 1003.
“If there are no descendants, ascendants,
illegitimate children or surviving spouse, the
collateral relatives shall succeed to the entire
estate of the deceased in accordance with the
following articles.”
Art 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 dtae the
property was delivered to the State, such person
shall be entitled to the possession of the same, if
sold, the municipality or city shall be
accountable to him for such part of the
proceeds as may not have been lawfully spent.”
Art. 1024.
“Persons not incapacitated by law may succeed
by will or ab intestate.
The provisions relating to incapacity by will are
equally applicable to intestate succession.”
Art. 1025.