Ruben Balane Succession Reviewer - Succession Reviewer Inside: Illustrative Problems by Mr. Patrick, - Studocu
Skip to document
Premium
This is a Premium Document. Some documents on Studocu are Premium. Upgrade to Premium to unlock it.

Ruben Balane Succession Reviewer

civil law
Course

Self Testing Activities 2 (PESELF1)

11 Documents
Students shared 11 documents in this course
Academic year: 2020/2021
Uploaded by:
Anonymous Student
This document has been uploaded by a student, just like you, who decided to remain anonymous.
Harvard University

Comments

Please sign in or register to post comments.

Students also viewed

Related documents

Related Studylists

Mon Mon

Preview text

Succession Reviewer

Inside: Illustrative Problems by Mr. Patrick, Sample Exam Questions, Answer Key and more!!! 1

“Solvitur Ambulando”

I. General Provisions

Art.
774.
Succession
is
a
mode
of
acquisition
by
virtue
of
 which
the
property,
rights
and
obligations
to
the
extent
of
 the
value
of
the
inheritance,
of
a
person
are
transmitted
 through
his
death
to
another
or
others
either
by
his
will
or
 by
operation
of
law.
(n)  2

Class
Notes: Kinds
of
Succession
 - according
to
moment
of
transmission:
 1) mortis
causa
 2) inter
vivos
(none
in
PH
law,
only
donations)


#### 1 Disclaimer:
All
photos
lifted
from
Google
images.
No
copyright


infringement
intended.


#### 2 
provisions
recited

  • accdg
to
extent
of
rights
and
obligations
 transmitted:




  1. universal
–
entire
patrimony
or
an

aliquot
part

  2. particular
–
devise,
legacy




  • accdg
to
importance:




  1. compulsory

  2. testamentary

  3. intestate




Parties:
 - Decedent
 o Testator
 o Decedent
(intestate)
 - Successor
 o Heir
 o Devisee
or
Legatee


Balane: - Only
transmissible
rights
and
obligations
pass
by
 succession
 o Criterion:
if
the
rights
or
obligation
is
 strictly
personal
(intuitu
personae),
it
is
 intransmissible;
otherwise,
it
is
 transmissible.
 - Pecuniary
obligations
must
be
paid
first
before
 distributing
the
residue
of
the
estate
to
the
heirs.


Union
Bank
vs.
Santibañez
(2005)


F:
Decedent
contracted
loans
during
his
lifetime.
After
 decedent
died,
creditor
filed
an
action
for
collection
 against
the
heirs.


H:
The
bank
should
have
filed
its
claim
in
the
probate
 court
pursuant
to
Sec.
5,
Rule
86
of
the
Rules
of
Court.
The
 filing
of
a
money
claim
against
the
decedent’s
estate
in
the
 probate
court
is
mandatory.


Estate
of
K.
Hemady
vs.
Luzon
Surety
(1956)


F:
Lower
court
ruled
that
claims
filed
by
Luzon
Surety
 against
decedent’s
estate
based
on
contracts
of
suretyship
 entered
into
by
the
decedent
were
not
chargeable
because
 death
extinguished
liability
as
surety/guarantor.


H:
Obligations
of
a
guarantor
are
transmissible.
Contracts
 take
effect
only
between
parties,
their
assigns
and
heirs,
 unless
they
are
intransmissible
by
their
nature,
by
 stipulation
or
by
operation
of
law.


Alvarez
vs.
Intermediate
Appellate
Court
(1990)


F:
A
judgment
ordering
decedent
to
return
the
lots
was
 entered
during
his
lifetime
but
was
not
executed
because
 he
sold
the
lots
to
a
3rd
person.
A
suit
for
recovery
of
the
 lots
was
filed
against
the
heirs
of
seller.


H:
Liability
that
arose
from
the
sale
of
decedent
in
bad
 faith
was
not
extinguished
by
his
death
and
was
passed
on
 to
his
heirs.
However,
the
heirs
are
only
liable
to
the
 extent
of
the
value
of
their
inheritance.


Art.
 775.
 In
 this
 Title,
 "decedent"
 is
 the
 general
 term
 applied
 to
 the
 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.
(n)


Rea Bautista

Patrick Manalo

Loraine Saguinsin

Naomi Quimpo

SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

Art.
776.
The
inheritance
includes
all
the
property,
rights
 and
obligations
of
a
person
which
are
not
extinguished
by
 his
death.
(659) 

Art.
777.
The
rights
to
the
succession
are
transmitted
 from
the
moment
of
the
death
of
the
decedent.
(657a) 

Notes: - Infelicitous
wording.
The
rights
to
the
succession
 are
vested;
inheritance
transmitted
 - CONSEQUENCES:

  1. The
law
at
the
time
of
the
decedent’s
death
 will
determine
who
the
heirs
should
be.

Uson
vs.
Del
Rosario
(1953)


F:
Nebreda
died
in
1945
and
was
survived
by
his
wife
and
 4
 illegitimate
 children.
 Wife
 brought
 action
 against
 illegitimate
children
for
the
recovery
of
the
possession
of
 land
left
by
husband
on
the
theory
that
she
is
the
sole
heir.
 Defense:
while
under
the
Old
CC
spurious
children
do
not
 have
 successional
 rights,
 under
 the
 New
 CC
 they
 are
 granted
the
same
status
as
natural
children
thus
entitled
 to
succeed
from
their
father’s
estate.


H:
The
right
granted
under
the
New
CC
cannot
be
given
 retroactive
effect.
New
rights
have
retroactive
effect
only
 when
they
do
not
prejudice
or
impair
vested
or
acquired
 rights
of
the
same
origin.
The
right
of
ownership
of
Wife
 over
the
land
became
vested
in
1945
upon
decedent’s
 death
because
of
Article
657
of
the
Old
Civil
Code
(now
 777)
which
was
in
effect
at
the
time
he
died.


  1. Ownership
passes
to
the
heir
at
the
very
 moment
of
death
who
therefore,
from
that
 moment,
acquires
the
right
to
dispose
of
his
 share.




De
Borja
vs.
Vda.
De
Borja
(1972)


F:
Decedent
died
with
a
will.
Before
probate
of
his
will
and
 to
end
suits
between
them,
D’s
son
by
his
first
marriage
 and
 2nd
 wife
 entered
 into
 a
 compromise
 agreement
 that
 2 nd
 wife
 will
 receive
 P800,000
 as
 full
 and
 complete
 payment
of
her
hereditary
share.


H:
Agreement
is
valid.
There
is
no
legal
bar
for
the
heir
to
 dispose
 of
 her
 share
 immediately
 upon
 death
 of
 the
 decedent
even
if
actual
extent
is
not
yet
determined.
The
 agreement
is
a
sale
of
the
shares
and
not
a
settlement
of
 the
estate.


Alfonso
vs.
Sps.
Andres
(2010)


F:
Jose
inherited
subject
property
from
his
father.
This
 was
assigned
to
him
in
a
Deed
of
Extrajudicial
Settlement.
 Jose
sold
it
Sps
Andres.


H:
The
transfer
is
valid
because
title
of
property
of
person
 who
died
intestate
passes
at
once
to
his
heirs,
subject
to
 the
claims
of
administration
and
payments
of
debts
and
 expenses.


Note: - Heir
 can
 sell
 his
 aliquot
 share
 but
 not
 specific
 property/physical
 portion
 of
 property.
 Otherwise,
it
is
only
pro
tanto
valid
(to
the
extent
 of
seller’s
share)
[Lee
vs
RTC
(2007)]


  1. The
heirs
have
the
right
to
be
substituted
for
 deceased
as
party
in
an
action
that
survives




Bonilla
vs.
Barcena
(1976)


F:
Decedent,
 during
 her
 lifetime,
 filed
 an
 action
 to
 quiet
 title.
During
the
pendency
of
the
case,
D
died
and
counsel
 asked
that
her
heirs
be
substituted.


H:
The
 heirs
 may
 be
 substituted
 to
 the
 deceased
 party
 because
 upon
 the
 latter’s
 death,
 her
 claim/rights
 to
 the
 land
 were
 not
 extinguished
 but
 were
 transmitted
 to
 her
 heirs.


Note: - What
was
transmitted
was
the
right
to
prosecute
 the
action
 - If
there
is
dispute
as
to
who
are
the
legal
heirs,
 must
 first
 establish
 the
 right
 to
 succeed
 in
 a
 separate
 action
 [Heirs
 of
 Yaptinchay
 vs
 Del
 Rosario,
304
SCRA
18]


Republic
vs.
Marcos
(2012)


F:
Cases
for
reversion,
reconveyance
and
restitution
of
ill‐ gotten
wealth
were
filed
against
persons
including
heirs
of
 Marcos
were
sought
to
be
dismissed
against
the
latter‐ mentioned
defendants.


H:
Despite
the
finding
that
their
involvement
in
the
 alleged
illegal
activities
was
not
established,
they
should
 be
maintained
as
defendants
because
the
case
is
an
action
 that
survives
thus
it
is
imperative
that
the
estate
be
 represented.
As
to
Imelda
and
Bongbong,
they
are
the
 executors
of
FM’s
estate,
and
as
to
Imee
and
Irene,
they
 possibly
possess/ed
ill‐gotten
properties.


Art.
778.
Succession
may
be:
 (1)
Testamentary;
 (2)
Legal
or
intestate;
or
 (3)
Mixed.
(n)

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)


Art.
780.
Mixed
succession
is
that
effected
partly
by
will
 and
partly
by
operation
of
law.
(n)

Balane: - Some
inaccuracies:
 o Did
not
mention
compulsory
 o Mixed
is
not
really
a
type
of
succession
 o No
definition
of
Legal/intestate
 - Per
Agbayani,
our
Expert
in
Succession,
the
3
 Kinds
of
Succession
according
to
importance
are:
 1. Compulsory
 2. Testamentary
 3. Intestate


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

  1. determination
 of
 portions
 they
 are
 to
 receive




Art.
 786.
The
testator
may
entrust
to
a
third
person
the
 distribution
of
specific
property
or
sums
of
money
that
he
 may
 leave
 in
 general
 to
 specified
 classes
 or
 causes,
 and
 also
 the
 designation
 of
 the
 persons,
 institutions
 or
 establishments
to
which
such
property
or
sums
are
to
be
 given
or
applied.
(671a) 

Notes: - Two
things
the
T
must
determine: 1. Property
or
amount
of
money
to
be
given
 2. Class
or
cause
to
be
benefitted
 - Two
things
he
may
delegate: 1. Designation
 of
 persons,
 institutions
 or
 establishments
within
the
class
or
cause
 2. Manner
of
distribution


Art.
 787.
 The
 testator
 may
 not
 make
 a
 testamentary
 disposition
 in
 such
 manner
 that
 another
 person
 has
 to
 determine
whether
or
not
it
is
to
be
operative.
(n)

Notes: - This
 does
 not
 prejudice
 right
 of
 heirs,
 devisee,
 legatee
to
accept
or
renounce.

RULES
OF
CONSTRUCTION
AND
INTERPRETATION


In
case
of
doubt
as
to
different
interpretations


Art.
788.
If
a
testamentary
disposition
admits
of
different
 interpretations,
 in
 case
 of
 doubt,
 that
 interpretation
 by
 which
the
disposition
is
to
be
operative
shall
be
preferred.
 (n)

  • The
 thing
 may
 rather
 be
 effective
 than
 be
 without
effect




Ambiguity;
Latent
or
Patent


Art.
789.
When
there
is
an
imperfect
description,
or
when
 no
 person
 or
 property
 exactly
 answers
 the
 description,
 mistakes
 and
 omissions
 must
 be
 corrected,
 if
 the
 error
 appears
 from
 the
 context
 of
 the
 will
 or
 from
 extrinsic
 evidence,
excluding
the
oral
declarations
of
the
testator
as
 to
his
intention;
and
when
an
uncertainty
arises
upon
the
 face
 of
 the
 will,
 as
 to
 the
 application
 of
 any
 of
 its
 provisions,
 the
 testator's
 intention
 is
 to
 be
 ascertained
 from
the
words
of
the
will,
taking
into
consideration
the
 circumstances
 under
 which
 it
 was
 made,
 excluding
 such
 oral
declarations.
(n)

  • Latent
=
not
obvious
on
the
face
of
the
will

  • Patent
=
Obvious
on
the
face
of
the
will

  • How
to
deal
with
ambiguities
whether
latent
or
 patent:
Clear
up/resolve
in
order
to
give
effect
to
 the
 disposition
 by
 any
 evidence
 admissible
 and
 relevant
 excluding
 in
 either
 case,
 oral
 declarations
of
the
testator
(Dead
Man’s
Statute)




Words;
Technical
Words


Art.
 790.
 The
 words
 of
 a
 will
 are
 to
 be
 taken
 in
 their
 ordinary
and
grammatical
sense,
unless
a
clear
intention


to
 use
 them
 in
 another
 sense
 can
 be
 gathered,
 and
 that
 other
can
be
ascertained.


Technical
words
in
a
will
are
to
be
taken
in
their
technical
 sense,
 unless
 the
 context
 clearly
 indicates
 a
 contrary
 intention,
 or
 unless
 it
 satisfactorily
 appears
 that
 he
 was
 unacquainted
with
such
technical
sense.
(675a)

Preference
to
testacy
 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)

Invalidity
of
one
of
several
dispositions
 Art.
 792.
 The
 invalidity
 of
 one
 of
 several
 dispositions
 contained
in
a
will
does
not
result
in
the
invalidity
of
the
 other
 dispositions,
 unless
 it
 is
 to
 be
 presumed
 that
 the
 testator
 would
 not
 have
 made
 such
 other
 dispositions
 if
 the
first
invalid
disposition
had
not
been
made.
(n)

  • severability




Property
acquired
after
will
was
made
 Art.
 793.
 Property
 acquired
 after
 the
 making
 of
 a
 will
 shall
only
pass
thereby,
as
if
the
testator
had
possessed
it
 at
the
time
of
making
the
will,
should
it
expressly
appear
 by
the
will
that
such
was
his
intention.
(n)

Devise/Legacy
 Art.
794.
Every
devise
or
legacy
shall
cover
all
the
interest
 which
 the
 testator
 could
 device
 or
 bequeath
 in
 the
 property
 disposed
 of,
 unless
 it
 clearly
 appears
 from
 the
 will
that
he
intended
to
convey
a
less
interest.
(n)


Art.
795.
The
validity
of
a
will
as
to
its
form
depends
upon
 the
observance
of
the
law
in
force
at
the
time
it
is
made.

Notes: - Aspects
of
Validity:
 o Extrinsic
–
Formal
 o Intrinsic
–
Substantive


  1. Testamentary Capacity and Intent

Art.
796.
All
persons
who
are
not
expressly
prohibited
by
 law
may
make
a
will.
(662)


Art.
 797.
 Persons
 of
 either
 sex
 under
 eighteen
 years
 of
 age
cannot
make
a
will.
(n)


Art.
 798.
In
order
to
make
a
will
it
is
essential
that
the
 testator
be
of
sound
mind
at
the
time
of
its
execution.
(n)
 

Art.
799.
To
be
of
sound
mind,
it
is
not
necessary
that
the
 testator
be
in
full
possession
of
all
his
reasoning
faculties,
 or
 that
 his
 mind
 be
 wholly
 unbroken,
 unimpaired,
 or


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

unshattered
by
disease,
injury
or
other
cause.


It
shall
be
sufficient
if
the
testator
was
able
at
the
time
of
 making
 the
 will
 to
 know
 the
 nature
 of
 the
 estate
 to
 be
 disposed
 of,
 the
 proper
 objects
 of
 his
 bounty,
 and
 the
 character
of
the
testamentary
act.
(n)


Art.
800.
The
law
presumes
that
every
person
is
of
sound
 mind,
in
the
absence
of
proof
to
the
contrary.


The
 burden
 of
 proof
 that
 the
 testator
 was
 not
 of
 sound
 mind
 at
 the
 time
 of
 making
 his
 dispositions
 is
 on
 the
 person
 who
 opposes
 the
 probate
 of
 the
 will;
 but
 if
 the
 testator,
 one
 month,
 or
 less,
 before
 making
 his
 will
 was
 publicly
 known
 to
 be
 insane,
 the
 person
 who
 maintains
 the
validity
of
the
will
must
prove
that
the
testator
made
it
 during
a
lucid
interval.
(n)

Art.
 801.
 Supervening
 incapacity
 does
 not
 invalidate
 an
 effective
will,
nor
is
the
will
of
an
incapable
validated
by
 the
supervening
of
capacity.
(n)

Ortega
vs.
Valmonte
(2005)


F:
81
year
old
testator’s
will
was
opposed
on
the
ground
 that
he
was
not
of
sound
mind.


H:

Mere
old
age
does
not
mean
that
a
person
is
not
of
 sound
mind.
To
be
of
sound
mind,
at
the
time
of
making
 the
will,
the
testator
need
only
know
(1)
the
nature
of
the
 estate
to
be
disposed
of,
(2)
the
proper
objects
of
his
 bounty,
and
(3)
the
character
of
the
testamentary
act.


Baltazar
vs.
Laxa
(2012)


F:
78‐year‐old
spinster’s
will
was
being
assailed
because
 she
 was
 allegedly
 not
 of
 sound
 mind
 when
 it
 was
 made
 (because
she
was
“forgetful”)


H:
Soundness
 of
 mind
 is
 presumed.
 Forgetfulness
 is
 not
 equivalent
to
unsoundness
of
mind.


Art.
802.
A
married
woman
may
make
a
will
without
the
 consent
of
her
husband,
and
without
the
authority
of
the
 court.
(n)


Art.
803.
A
married
woman
may
dispose
by
will
of
all
her
 separate
 property
 as
 well
 as
 her
 share
 of
 the
 conjugal
 partnership
or
absolute
community
property.
(n)

  1. Forms of Wills

Art.
804.
Every
will
must
be
in
writing
and
executed
in
a
 language
or
dialect
known
to
the
testator.
(n)


Suroza
vs.
Honrado
(1981)


F:
 Will
 of
 illiterate
 testatrix
 was
 written
 in
 English,
 a
 language
she
did
not
understand.


H:
Will
is
void
because
of
the
mandatory
provision
of
Art
 804
 that
 every
 will
 must
 be
 executed
 in
 a
 language
 or
 dialect
known
to
the
testator.


Abangan
vs.
Abangan
(1919)


F:
Records
do
not
show
that
the
will,
executed
in
Cebu
and
 written
in
the
dialect
of
that
locality
where
the
testatrix
is
 neighbor,
was
in
a
language
known
to
the
testatrix.


H:
 Compliance
 with
 the
 language
 requirement
 is
 presumed
if
(but
Sir
says
“proved
by”):
(1)
the
will
is
in
 the
 language/dialect
 generally
 spoken
 in
 the
 place
 of
 execution
 and
 (2)
 the
 testator
 is
 a
 native
 or
 resident
 of
 said
locality.


Art.
 805.
Every
will,
other
than
a
holographic
will,
must
 be
subscribed
at
the
end
thereof
by
the
testator
himself
or
 by
 the
 testator's
 name
 written
 by
 some
 other
 person
 in
 his
 presence,
 and
 by
 his
 express
 direction,
 and
 attested
 and
subscribed
by
three
or
more
credible
witnesses
in
the
 presence
of
the
testator
and
of
one
another.


The
testator
or
the
person
requested
by
him
to
write
his
 name
and
the
instrumental
witnesses
of
the
will,
shall
also
 sign,
as
aforesaid,
each
and
every
page
thereof,
except
the
 last,
 on
 the
 left
 margin,
 and
 all
 the
 pages
 shall
 be
 numbered
correlatively
in
letters
placed
on
the
upper
part
 of
each
page.


The
attestation
shall
state
the
number
of
pages
used
upon
 which
 the
 will
 is
 written,
 and
 the
 fact
 that
 the
 testator
 signed
 the
 will
 and
 every
 page
 thereof,
 or
 caused
 some
 other
 person
 to
 write
 his
 name,
 under
 his
 express
 direction,
in
the
presence
of
the
instrumental
witnesses,
 and
that
the
latter
witnessed
and
signed
the
will
and
all
 the
 pages
 thereof
 in
 the
 presence
 of
 the
 testator
 and
 of
 one
another.


If
the
attestation
clause
is
in
a
language
not
known
to
the
 witnesses,
it
shall
be
interpreted
to
them.
(n) 

Art.
 806.
 Every
 will
 must
 be
 acknowledged
 before
 a
 notary
 public
 by
 the
 testator
 and
 the
 witnesses.
 The
 notary
public
shall
not
be
required
to
retain
a
copy
of
the
 will,
or
file
another
with
the
Office
of
the
Clerk
of
Court.
 (n)


(1)
subscribed
by
the
T
or
his
agent
in
his
presence
 and
by
his
express
direction
at
the
end
thereof,
in
the
 presence
of
the
witnesses


  • signature




Payad
vs.
Tolentino
(1936)


F:
Testatrix
thumb
marked
end
and
each
and
every
page
 of
the
will
then
her
lawyer
wrote
her
name
to
indicate
the
 places
where
her
thumb
marks
were.


H:

Will
is
valid.
A
statute
requiring
a
will
to
be
“signed”
is
 satisfied
if
the
signature
is
made
by
the
testator’s
mark.


Matias
vs.
Salud
(1958)


F:
The
testatrix
placed
her
thumb
mark
in
lieu
of
her
usual
 signature
 on
 the
 will.
 Beside
 the
 thumb
 mark
 was
 the
 name
of
the
testatrix
as
purportedly
written
by
one
of
the
 witnesses.
 The
 attestation
 clause,
 however,
 does
 not


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

F:
The
signatures
of
the
instrumental
witnesses
were
not
 at
the
bottom
of
the
attestation
clause
but
on
the
left‐hand
 margin
of
the
page
containing
the
AC.


H:
Fatally
defective.
Signatures
at
the
left‐hand
side
were
 in
compliance
with
the
mandate
that
the
will
be
signed
on
 the
left‐hand
margin
of
all
its
pages


Azuela
vs.
CA
(2006)


F:
Witnesses
did
not
sign
at
the
bottom
of
the
attestation
 clause
 but
 they
 signed
 the
 left‐hand
 margin
 of
 the
 page
 where
the
AC
is
found.


H:
Will
void.
Signatures
on
the
left‐hand
margin
comply
 with
the
requirement
that
witnesses
sign
each
page
of
the
 will.
The
signatures
to
the
attestation
clause
establish
that
 the
witnesses
are
referring
to
the
statements
contained
in
 the
attestation
clause
itself.
The
attestation
clause
is
 separate
and
apart
from
the
disposition
of
the
will.
An
 unsigned
attestation
clause
results
in
an
unattested
will.


(7)
acknowledgement
before
a
notary
public


Javellana
vs.
Ledesma
(1955)


F:
 The
 notary
 public
 signed
 the
 certificate
 of
 acknowledgement
in
his
office
and
not
in
the
presence
of
T
 and
witnesses.


H:
VALID.
The
Civil
Code,
while
requiring
that
a
will
must
 be
signed
by
the
T
and
the
witnesses
in
the
presence
of
 each
other,
does
not
require
that
the
acknowledgement
by
 the
notary
happen
in
the
presence
of
the
parties.


Obiter:
It
is
not
required
that
the
T
and
the
Ws
 acknowledge
on
the
same
day
it
was
executed.
 Logical
inference:
Neither
does
Art
806
require
that
T
and
 Ws
acknowledge
in
each
other’s
presence.

Cruz
vs.
Villasor
(1973)


F:
There
were
only
three
witnesses
to
the
will
and
it
was
 acknowledged
before
a
notary
public
who
was
one
of
the
 witnesses.


H:
VOID
for
failing
to
meet
the
3‐witness
requirement.
The
 notary
 public
 cannot
 acknowledge
 before
 himself
 his
 having
signed
the
will.


Balane
 asks:
If
 one
 of
 the
 witnesses
 is
 a
 duly
 commissioned
notary
public
and
he
notarizes
the
 will,
the
will
is
void.
TRUE
OR
FALSE?
 A:
FALSE
(If
there
are
more
than
3
witnesses,
the
 will
meets
the
3‐witness
requirement
hence
still
 valid)


Guerrero
vs.
Bihis
(2007)


F:
Notary
 public
 who
 acknowledged
 the
 will
 was
 acting
 outside
the
place
of
his
commission.


H:
VOID.
No
notary
shall
possess
authority
to
do
any
 notarial
act
beyond
the
limits
of
his
jurisdiction.
Since
 Atty.
in
this
case
was
not
commissioned
in
the
place
where


he
notarized
the
document,
he
lacked
the
authority
to
take
 the
acknowledgment
of
the
testatrix
and
the
witnesses.

Ortega
vs.
Valmonte
(2005)


F:
Valmonte’s
will
is
being
contested
because
the
date
of
 execution
and
the
date
of
acknowledgment
are
different.

H:
Will
is
valid.
Conflict
between
the
dates
does
not
 invalidate
the
will
because
the
law
does
even
require
that
 a
notarial
will
be
executed
and
acknowledged
on
the
same
 occassion.


Q:
Must
an
attested
will
be
dated?
 A:
No.
 Consequently,
 variance
 between
 the
 indicated
dates
does
not
in
itself
invalidate
a
 will
(Ortega
vs.
Valmonte
[2005])


Art.
 807.
If
the
testator
be
deaf,
or
a
deaf‐mute,
he
must
 personally
 read
 the
 will,
 if
 able
 to
 do
 so;
 otherwise,
 he
 shall
designate
two
persons
to
read
it
and
communicate
to
 him,
in
some
practicable
manner,
the
contents
thereof.
(n)
 

Art.
 808.
If
the
testator
is
blind,
the
will
shall
be
read
to
 him
twice;
once,
by
one
of
the
subscribing
witnesses,
and
 again,
 by
 the
 notary
 public
 before
 whom
 the
 will
 is
 acknowledged.
(n)


  • Arts
807
and
808
are
mandatory




Garcia
vs.
Vasquez
(1970)


F:
The
will
and
the
AC
were
crammed
together
on
a
single
 page
 and
 had
 typographical
 errors.
 It
 was
 alleged
 by
 proponents
that
T
read
the
will
silently
before
she
signed
 it
BUT
there
was
evidence
that
T’s
vision
was
for
counting
 fingers
at
5
ft
and
for
distant
objects
only.

H:
VOID.
T
could
not
have
read
the
will
silently
as
she
was
 not
 unlike
 a
 blind
 testator
 and
 execution
 of
 the
 will
 requires
observance
of
Art.
808.


Alvarado
vs.
Gaviola,
Jr
(1993)


F:
Testator
 had
 glaucoma.
 When
 the
 will
 was
 executed,
 each
witness
and
the
notary
were
given
their
own
copies
 of
the
will.
It
was
read
aloud
by
the
lawyer
to
the
testator.
 The
court
held
there
was
substantial
compliance.

H:
T
 was
 blind
 for
 purposes
 of
 Art
 808
 but
 there
 was
 substantial
compliance
in
this
case.
The
purpose
of
the
law
 was
satisfied
(to
make
known
to
the
T
the
contents
of
the
 will
and
confirm
his
desires)


Art.
809.
In
the
absence
of
bad
faith,
forgery,
or
fraud,
or
 undue
and
improper
pressure
and
influence,
defects
and
 imperfections
in
the
form
of
attestation
or
in
the
language
 used
therein
shall
not
render
the
will
invalid
if
it
is
proved
 that
 the
 will
 was
 in
 fact
 executed
 and
 attested
 in
 substantial
 compliance
 with
 all
 the
 requirements
 of
 Article
805.
(n)

Note:

SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

  • This
is
criticized
as
“liberalization
running
riot”.
 JBL’s
suggested
rewording:
 “In
 the
 absence
 of
 bad
 faith,
 forgery,
 or
 fraud,
 or
 undue
 and
 improper
 pressure
 and
 influence,
 defects
 and
 imperfections
 in
 the
 form
 of
 the
 attestation
 or
 in
 the
 language
used
therein
shall
not
render
the
will
invalid
if
 such
 defects
 and
 imperfections
 can
 be
 supplied
 by
 an
 examination
of
the
will
itself
and
it
is
proved
that
the
will
 was
 in
 fact
 executed
 and
 attested
 in
 substantial
 compliance
with
all
the
requirements
of
Article
805.”




Caneda
vs.
Court
of
Appeals
(1993)


F:
The
attestation
clause
failed

to
specifically
state
the
fact
 that
 the
 attesting
 witnesses
 and
 the
 testator
 signed
 the
 will
and
all
its
pages
in
their
presence
and
that
they,
the
 witnesses,
likewise
signed
the
will
and
every
page
thereof
 in
the
presence
of
the
testator
and
of
each
other.


H:
AC
 not
 valid.
 Art
 809
 does
 not
 apply.
 It
 cannot
 be
 conclusively
inferred
from
the
signatures
that
they
were
 made
 in
 the
 presence
 of
 each
 other.
 Furthermore,
 the
 defects
were
not
in
the
“form..
language.”
 Rule:
Omissions
which
can
be
supplied
by
an
examination
 of
the
will
itself,
without
the
need
of
resorting
to
extrinsic
 evidence,
 will
 not
 be
 fatal..,
 those
 omissions
 which
 cannot
 be
 supplied
 except
 by
 evidence
 aliunde
 would
 result
 in
 the
 invalidation
 of
 the
 attestation
 clause
 and
ultimately,
of
the
will
itself.


Azuela
vs.
Court
of
Appeals
(2006)


F:
Attestation
clause
failed
to
state
the
number
of
pages.


H:
VOID.
Art
809
was
not
applied
because
there
was
no
 indication
in
any
part
of
the
will
that
it
was
composed
of
 such
a
number
of
pages.


Lopez
vs.
Lopez
(2012)


F:
The
 will
 stated
 that
 it
 contained
 7
 pages
 but
 the
 acknowledgement
 stated
 that
 there
 were
 8.
 AC
 did
 not
 state
the
number
of
pages.


H:
Art
 809
 does
 not
 apply.
 The
 discrepancy
 cannot
 be
 explained
 by
 mere
 examination
 of
 the
 will
 itself
 but
 through
the
presentation
of
evidence
aliunde.


Art.
810.
A
person
may
execute
a
holographic
will
which
 must
be
entirely
written,
dated,
and
signed
by
the
hand
of
 the
 testator
 himself.
 It
 is
 subject
 to
 no
 other
 form,
 and
 may
be
made
in
or
out
of
the
Philippines,
and
need
not
be
 witnessed.
(678,
688a)


(1)
Entirely
written
by
the
hand
of
the
T
 (2)
Dated
by
the
T


Roxas
vs.
De
Jesus
(1985)


F:
The
holographic
will
was
dated
FEB./61


H:
VALID.
 GR:
 Date
 in
 a
 holographic
 will
 should
 include
 the
day,
month
and
year
of
its
execution
as
this
is
relevant
 to
provide
for
contingencies
of
ascertaining
soundness
of
 mind,
or
when
there
are
two
competing
wills.


XPN:
Substantial
compliance
is
considered
valid
if
there
is
 no
appearance
of
fraud,
BF,
undue
influence
and
pressure
 and
the
authenticity
of
the
will
is
established.


Labrador
vs.
Court
of
Appeals
(1990)


F:
Date
 was
 stated
 in
 the
 first
 paragraph
 of
 the
 second
 page
of
the
will.


H:
VALID.
The
law
does
not
specify
a
particular
location
 where
the
date
should
be
placed
in
a
will.


(3)
Signed
by
the
T


SUMMARY:
FORMAL
REQUIREMENTS
OF
WILLS
 Testamentary
Capacity
 1. There
is
a
general
grant
of
testamentary
capacity
 to
natural
persons
 2. Exceptions:
 a. Under
18
 b. Unsound
mind
 - A
legal
question,
not
medical
 - Soundness
of
mind
was
defined
 Negatively
 ‐ Not
necessary
that
testator
be
in
full
possession
 of
reasoning
faculties
 ‐ Not
 necessary
 that
 testator’s
 mind
 be
 wholly
 unbroken,
 unimpaired,
 or
 unshattered
 by
 disease,
injury
or
other
cause
 Positively
 Ability
to
know:
 ‐ Nature
of
estate
to
be
disposed
of
 ‐ Proper
objects
of
one’s
bounty
 ‐ Character
of
testamentary
act
 3. There
 is
 a
 presumption
 of
 soundness
 of
 mind,
 but
a
presumption
of
insanity
exists
when:
 (1)
one
month
or
less
before
making
his
will,
T
 was
publicly
known
to
be
insane
 (2)
 executed
 after
 being
 placed
 under
 guardianship
 or
 ordered
 committed
 because
 of
 insanity
and
before
said
order
was
lifted


Common
Requirements
(Attested
and
Holographic)
 1.
in
writing
 2.
language
and
dialect
known
to
the
testator
 - There
 is
 no
 presumption
 that
 language
 is
 known
to
the
T
 - BUT
 the
 will
 need
 not
 state
 that
 it
 is
 a
 language
known
to
the
T.
It
may
be
proven
 by
extrinsic
evidence


Special
Requirements;
Attested
Wills
 1.
That
the
testator
sign
 ‐
in
the
presence
of
the
witnesses
 - Remember
the
test
of
presence!
 ‐
at
the
end
 ­
 on
 each
 and
 every
 page,
 except
 the
 last,
 on
 the
 left­ hand
margin ‐
if
signing
through
an
agent
 - In
the
T’s
presence
 - Under
his
express
direction
 - Write
in
his
own
hand
the
T’s
name
in
the
 proper
places
 - There
 is
 no
 need
 to
 sign
 the
 agent’s
 name
 (Barut)


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

that
the
will
was
forged
and
that
the
same
is
illegible.
 Probate
allowed,
lower
court
citing
Azaola
v.
Singson.


Held:
That
the
provisions
of
Article
811
are
mandatory
 because
of
the
word
“shall.”
That
not
all
of
the
witnesses
 presented
by
the
proponents
were
familiar
with
the
 testatrix’s
handwriting.
That
a
visual
examination
of
the
 will
reveals
that
the
strokes
are
different
compared
with
 other
documents
written
by
the
testatrix.
That
case
must
 be
remanded
to
allow
contestants
to
adduce
evidence
in
 support
of
their
opposition.


Balane
Asks:
Did
Codoy
reverse
Azaola?



Balane
Thinks:
No,
for
the
following
reasons:
 ‐ Codoy
ruling
not
based
on
there
being
less
than
 three
witnesses
(there
were
in
fact
six)
 ‐ Codoy
ruling
did
not
state
that
since
there
were
 less
than
three
witnesses,
even
if
their
 testimonies
were
convincing,
probate
must
be
 denied
(testimonies
were
indecisive)
 ‐ Codoy
ruling
said
that
visual
examination
of
the
 will
reveals
that
strokes
are
different
compared
 with
standard
documents
 ‐ basis
of
Codoy
ruling:
evidence
for
authenticity,
 inadequate,
not
failure
on
the
part
of
proponents
 to
present
three
witnesses


Balane
Notes: ‐ Codoy
is
consistent
with
Azaola
(quality
of
 testimony
over
quantity
of
witnesses)
 ‐ Codoy,
rather
than
reversing
Azaola,
may
have
 affirmed
it
 ‐ the
statement
of
the
Court
in
Codoy
to
the
effect
 that
the
use
of
the
word
“shall”
in
Article
811
 denotes
that
it
is
mandatory,
is
too
shallow



In
the
probate
of
a
holographic
will,
the
document
 itself
must
be
produced;
a
lost
holographic
will
cannot
 be
probated


Gan
v.
Yap
(1958)


Facts:
Petition
for
probate
of
testatrix’s
will.
Opposition:
 that
testatrix
left
no
will.
Proponent
did
not
present
will
 and
instead
tried
to
establish
contents
and
due
execution
 thru
testimonies.


Held:
That
holographic
will
must
be
presented
to
court
for
 probate,
the
document
itself
being
material
proof
of
 authenticity.
That
if
holographic
will
not
presented,
 opportunity
to
oppose
and
assess
the
handwriting
of
the
 testator,
foreclosed.
That
lost
or
destroyed
holographic
 will
may
be
proved
by
a
photographic
or
photostatic
copy
 or
by
other
similar
means.


Exception
to
the
Gan
ruling:


Rodelas
v.
Aranza
(1982)


Facts:
A
photostatic
copy
of
testator’s
holographic
will
 was
presented
for
probate.
Opposition:
that
the
original
 must
be
presented.


Held:
That
a
photostatic
copy
or
photocopy
of
the
 holographic
will,
allowed
because
comparison
can
be


made
with
the
standard
writings
of
the
testator.
That
this
 exception
to
the
general
rule
was
stated
in
a
footnote
in
 Gan
v,
Yap
(1958).


ART.
812.
In
holographic
wills,
the
dispositions
of
the
 testator
written
below
his
signature
must
be
dated
and
 signed
by
him
in
order
to
make
them
valid
as
 testamentary
dispositions.

ART.
813.
When
a
number
of
dispositions
appearing
in
 a
holographic
will
are
signed
without
being
dated,
and
 the
last
disposition
has
a
signature
and
date,
such
date
 validates
the
dispositions
preceding
it,
whatever
be
the
 time
of
prior
dispositions.

Formal
requirement
for
additional
dispositions
in
a
 holographic
will
 ‐ signature,
and
 ‐ date


When
there
are
several
additional
dispositions
 ‐ signature
and
date,
or
 ‐ each
additional
disposition
signed
and
undated,
 but
the
last
disposition
signed
and
dated


If
(in
case
of
several
additional
dispositions)
the
 additional
ones
before
the
last
are
dated
but
not
 signed—
 ‐ only
the
last
will
be
valid,
provided
the
last
is
 signed
and
dated


If
there
are
several
additional
dispositions
and
the
 additional
ones
before
the
last
are
neither
signed
nor
 dated,
but
the
last
is
both
signed
and
dated—
 ‐ intermediate
dispositions:
 o VALID
if
all
dispositions
made
on
one
 occasion
(signature
and
date
under
last
 additional
disposition
validate
all)
 o INVALID
or
VOID
if
dispositions
made
 on
different
occasions


ART.
814.
In
case
of
any
insertion,
cancellation,
erasure
 or
alteration
in
a
holographic
will,
the
testator
must
 authenticate
the
same
by
his
full
signature.

“Full
signature,”
meaning
 ‐ not
necessarily
full
name
of
testator
 ‐ it
means
his
usual
and
customary
(habitual)
 signature


Effect
of
noncompliance
with
article
 ‐ change
(insertion,
cancellation,
etc.)
is
simply
 considered
as
not
made
 ‐ will
is
not
invalidated
as
a
whole,
but
at
most,
 only
as
regards
the
particular
words
erased,
 corrected,
or
inserted
(Kalaw
v.
Relova
[1984])
 o unless
the
portion
involved
is
an
 essential
part
of
the
will,
such
as
the
 date


Illustration—


Kalaw
v.
Relova
(1984)


Facts:
Proponent
Gregorio
filed
a
petition
for
probate
of
 testatrix’s
will.
Opposition
by
Rosa:
that
she
was
named
as


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

sole
heir
and
sole
executrix.
There
were
two
alterations:
 first,
Rosa’s
name
crossed
out
as
sole
heir
and
Gregorio’s
 name
written
above
it
(no
initial);
second,
Rosa’s
name
 crossed
out
as
sole
executrix
and
Gregorio’s
name
written
 above
it
(with
initial).


Held:
That
ordinarily,
erasures
without
proper
signature
 do
not
invalidate
the
will
as
a
whole,
but
at
most
only
as
 respects
the
particular
words
erased.
That
that
general
 rule
does
not
apply
in
this
case
because
the
holographic
 will
had
only
one
substantial
provision
which
was
altered
 without
proper
authentication.
That
the
entire
will
is
void
 because
nothing
remains
in
the
will
that
could
remain
 valid.
That
not
even
the
original
unaltered
text
can
be
 given
effect
because
of
the
seeming
change
of
mind
of
 testatrix.


Balane
Comments: ‐ it
is
beyond
cavil
that
the
insertion
of
Gregorio’s
 name
cannot
be
given
effect
because
of
lack
of
 proper
authentication
 ‐ but
why
was
the
cancellation
given
effect
when
it
 was
not
properly
done?
 ‐ to
say
that
giving
effect
to
the
will
as
first
written
 would
disregard
the
seeming
change
of
mind
of
 the
testatrix
is
no
argument
at
all
 o it
is
not
enough
that
the
testator
 manifest
his
intent—he
must
manifest
 it
in
a
manner
required
by
law


ART.
815.
When
a
Filipino
is
in
a
foreign
country,
he
is
 authorized
to
make
a
will
in
any
of
the
forms
 established
by
the
law
of
the
country
in
which
he
may
 be.
Such
will
may
be
probated
in
the
Philippines.

ART.
816.
The
will
of
an
alien
who
is
abroad
produces
 effect
in
the
Philippines
if
made
with
the
formalities
 prescribed
by
the
law
of
the
place
in
which
he
resides,
 or
according
to
the
formalities
observed
in
his
country,
 or
in
conformity
with
those
which
this
Code
prescribes.

ART.
817.
A
will
made
in
the
Philippines
by
a
citizen
or
 subject
of
another
country,
which
is
executed
in
 accordance
with
the
law
of
the
country
of
which
he
is
a
 citizen
or
subject,
and
which
might
be
proved
and
 allowed
by
the
law
of
his
own
country,
shall
have
the
 same
effect
as
if
executed
according
to
the
laws
of
the
 Philippines.

ART.
815
to
817
govern
rules
of
formal
validity
in
the
 following
instances
(not
covered:
a
Filipino
executing
 a
will
in
the
Philippines)
 ‐ a
Filipino
abroad
(ART.
815)
 ‐ an
alien
abroad
(ART.
816)
 ‐ an
alien
in
the
Philippines
(ART.
817)


The
rule
(combining
these
three
articles,
ART.
15
and
 17):
 ‐ every
testator,
whether
Filipino
or
alien,
 wherever
he
may
be,
has
five
choices
as
to
what
 law
to
follow
for
the
form
of
his
will,
viz.:
 o law
of
citizenship
 o law
of
place
of
execution
 o law
of
domicile
 o law
of
residence
 o law
of
the
Philippines


Illustration
 ‐ An
engineer
(German
citizen),
with
permanent
 residence
in
Paris
(where
he
and
his
wife
reside),
 was
contracted
by
the
Brazilian
government
to
 construct
a
dam
in
Brasilia.
He
resided
in
Brazil
 for
five
years.
One
summer
on
a
holiday,
he
goes
 to
Tokyo
for
a
tour.
He
also
has
investments
in
 the
Philippines.
The
German
engineer,
while
in
 Tokyo,
made
a
will.
 o the
following
laws
may
govern
the
form
 of
the
engineer’s
will:
  law
of
Germany
–
German
 citizen
  law
of
France
–
domiciled
in
 France
  law
of
Brazil
–
resident
of
 Brazil
  law
of
Japan
–
place
of
 execution
  law
of
the
Philippines


ART.
818.
Two
or
more
persons
cannot
make
a
will
 jointly,
or
in
the
same
instrument,
either
for
their
 reciprocal
benefit
or
for
the
benefit
of
a
third
person.


Joint
will,
meaning
 ‐ one
document
which
constitutes
the
wills
of
two
 or
more
individuals


The
following
is
a
joint
will—
 ‐ “We,
the
testators,
of
legal
age
and
of
sound
and
 disposing
mind...”


The
following
is
NOT
a
joint
will—
 ‐ if
there
are
separate
documents,
each
serving
as
 one
independent
will
(even
if
written
on
the
 same
sheet)
 o e.
will
of
testator
A
on
front
part
of
 sheet;
will
of
testator
B
on
the
back
of
 the
same
sheet
 o e.
will
of
testator
A
on
upper
part
of
 sheet;
will
of
testator
B
on
lower
part
of
 the
same
sheet


Joint
wills
are
VOID,
but
reciprocal
wills
are
VALID
 ‐ reciprocal
wills:
two
wills
instituting
each
of
the
 respective
testators
as
heirs
 o e.
will
of
testator
A
designated
B
as
 heir;
will
of
testator
B
designated
A
as
 heir


Reasons
for
the
prohibition
against
joint
wills
 ‐ limitation
on
modes
of
revocation
 ‐ diminution
of
testamentary
secrecy
 ‐ increased
danger
of
undue
influence
 ‐ increased
danger
of
one
testator
killing
the
other


ART.
819.
Wills,
prohibited
by
the
preceding
article,
 executed
by
Filipinos
in
a
foreign
country
shall
not
be
 valid
in
the
Philippines,
even
though
authorized
by
the
 laws
of
the
country
where
they
may
have
been
 executed.

Outline
on
joint
wills
 ‐ executed
by
Filipinos
in
the
Philippines


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

‐ if
the
party
is
also
entitled
to
a
legitime
or
an
 intestate
share,
that
portion
is
not
affected
by
the
 party’s
witnessing
the
will
 o testamentary
disposition
in
favor
of
a
 witness,
VOID
 o but
if
the
same
witness
is
a
compulsory
 heir,
his
legitime
is
unaffected


EXCEPTION
 ‐ if
there
are
three
other
witnesses
(or
four
 witnesses)—
 o the
testamentary
disposition
in
favor
of
 one
of
them
is
valid


ART.
824.
A
mere
charge
on
the
estate
of
the
testator
 for
the
payment
of
debts
due
at
the
time
of
the
testator’s
 death
does
not
prevent
his
creditors
from
being
 competent
witnesses
to
his
will.

Notes: ‐ the
creditor
does
not
need
the
testator’s
will
in
 order
that
he
may
be
paid
 o his
claim
will
be
proved
in
the
 settlement
of
the
decedent’s
estate
 o the
creditor
is
not
an
heir


Subsection 5 – Codicils and Incorporation by Reference

ART.
825.
A
codicil
is
a
supplement
or
addition
to
a
will,
 made
after
the
execution
of
a
will
and
annexed
to
be
 taken
as
a
part
thereof,
by
which
any
disposition
made
 in
the
original
will
is
explained,
added
to,
or
altered.

ART.
826.
In
order
that
a
codicil
may
be
effective,
it
 shall
be
executed
as
in
the
case
of
a
will.

Codicil
 ‐ explains,
adds
to,
or
alters
a
disposition
in
a
prior
 will


Subsequent
will
 ‐ makes
independent
and
distinct
dispositions


Codicil
need
not
conform
to
the
form
of
the
will
to
 which
it
refers
 ‐ an
attested
will
may
have
a
holographic
codicil
 ‐ a
holographic
will
may
have
an
attested
codicil


ART.
827.
If
a
will,
executed
as
required
by
this
Code,
 incorporates
into
itself
by
reference
any
document
or
 paper,
such
document
or
paper
shall
not
be
considered
 a
part
of
the
will
unless
the
following
requisites
are
 present:

(1)
The
document
or
paper
referred
to
in
the
will
must
 be
in
existence
at
the
time
of
the
execution
of
the
will;

(2)
The
will
must
clearly
describe
and
identify
the
same,
 stating
among
other
things
the
number
of
pages
thereof;

(3)
It
must
be
identified
by
clear
and
satisfactory
proof
 as
the
document
or
paper
referred
to
therein;
and

(4)
It
must
be
signed
by
the
testator
and
the
witnesses
 on
each
and
every
page,
except
in
case
of
voluminous


books
of
account
or
inventories.

Documents
 ‐ inventories,
books
of
accounts,
documents
of
 title,
papers
of
similar
nature
 ‐ must
not
make
testamentary
dispositions
(lest
 formal
requirements
for
wills
be
circumvented)


Holographic
wills
cannot
incorporate
documents
by
 reference
 ‐ par.
4
of
the
article
requires
the
signatures
of
the
 testator
and
the
witnesses
on
every
page
of
the
 incorporated
document
(except
voluminous
 annexes)


Subsection 6 – Revocation of Wills and Testamentary Dispositions

ART.
828.
A
will
may
be
revoked
by
the
testator
at
any
 time
before
his
death.
Any
waiver
or
restriction
of
this
 right
is
void.


A
will
is
essentially
revocable
or
ambulatory
 ‐ this
characteristic
cannot
be
waived
even
by
the
 testator
 ‐ a
will
is
revocable
ad
nutum,
i.
at
the
testator’s
 pleasure,
during
his
lifetime
 ‐ no
such
thing
as
an
irrevocable
will
 ‐ cf.
ART.
777
(successional
rights
vest
only
upon
 death)


ART.
829.
A
revocation
done
outside
the
Philippines,
by
 a
person
who
does
not
have
his
domicile
in
this
country,
 is
valid
when
it
is
done
according
to
the
law
of
the
place
 where
the
will
was
made,
or
according
to
the
law
of
the
 place
in
which
the
testator
had
his
domicile
at
the
time;
 and
if
the
revocation
takes
place
in
this
country,
when
it
 is
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
this
Code.

Rules
for
revocation
 ‐ if
made
in
the
Philippines
 o follow
Philippine
law
 ‐ if
made
outside
the
Philippines
 o if
testator
domiciled
in
the
Philippines
  follow
law
of
place
of
 execution,
or
  follow
law
of
place
where
 testator
was
domiciled
at
the
 time
of
revocation
 o if
testator
domiciled
in
the
Philippines
 (not
governed
by
ART.
829)
  follow
Philippine
law
  follow
law
of
place
of
 revocation
  follow
law
of
place
of
 execution


ART.
830.
No
will
shall
be
revoked
except
in
the
 following
cases:

(a)
By
implication
of
law;
or

(b)
By
some
will,
codicil,
or
other
writing
executed
as
 provided
in
case
of
wills;
or

(c)
By
burning,
tearing,
cancelling,
or
obliterating
the


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

will
with
intention
of
revoking
it,
by
the
testator
 himself,
or
by
some
other
person
in
his
presence,
and
by
 his
express
direction.
If
burned,
torn,
cancelled,
or
 obliterated
by
some
other
person,
without
the
express
 direction
of
the
testator,
the
will
may
still
be
 established,
and
the
estate
distributed
in
accordance
 therewith,
if
its
contents,
and
due
execution,
and
the
 fact
of
its
unauthorized
destruction,
cancellation,
or
 obliteration
are
established
according
to
the
Rules
of
 Court.


First
mode
of
revocation:
By
operation
of
law—
 ‐ revocation
may
be
total
or
partial
 ‐ examples
 o preterition
(ART.
854)
 o legal
separation
(ART.
63,
par.
4,
 Family
Code)
 o unworthiness
to
succeed
(ART.
1032)
 o transformation,
alienation,
or
loss
of
 the
object
devised
or
bequeathed
(ART.
 957 )
 o judicial
demand
of
a
credit
given
as
a
 legacy
(ART.
936)


Second
mode
of
revocation:
By
a
subsequent
will
or
 codicil—
 ‐ revocation
may
be
total
or
partial
 ‐ requisites
 o subsequent
instrument
must
comply
 with
the
formal
requirements
of
a
will
 o testator
must
possess
testamentary
 capacity
 o subsequent
instrument
must
either
 contain
an
express
revocatory
clause
 (express)
or
be
incompatible
with
the
 prior
will
(implied)
 ‐ revocatory
will
must
be
probated


Third
mode
of
revocation:
By
physical
destruction—
 ‐ four
ways
of
destroying:
 o burning
 o tearing
 o cancelling
 o obliterating


Physical
destruction
may
be
done—
 ‐ by
testator
personally,
or
 ‐ by
another
person
acting
in
the
testator’s
 presence
and
by
the
testator’s
express
direction


Effect
of
unauthorized
destruction
 ‐ will
may
be
proved
as
lost
or
destroyed
 o but
only
if
will
is
attested
 o if
holographic,
will
cannot
be
probated
 if
lost
or
destroyed
without
authority
 (Gan
v,
Yap),
unless
a
copy
survives
 (Rodelas
v.
Aranza)


Elements
of
a
valid
revocation
by
physical
 destruction*
 ‐ corpus
 o the
physical
destruction
itself
 o there
must
be
evidence
of
physical
 destruction
 ‐ animus
 o capacity
and
intent
to
revoke


 same
as
in
testamentary
 capacity
 o the
testator
must
have
completed
 everything
he
intended
to
do


*must
concur,
otherwise,
no
revocation


Testate
Estate
of
Adriana
Maloto
v.
CA
(1988)


Facts:
Heirs
of
late
Maloto
instituted
intestate
proceeding
 for
settlement
of
decedent’s
estate.
Later,
a
document
 purporting
to
be
the
will
of
decedent
was
discovered.
 Some
heirs
filed
a
petition
for
probate
of
alleged
will.
 Opposition:
that
the
testatrix’s
will
had
been
revoked,
her
 maid
having
burned
the
same.


Held:
That
there
was
no
valid
revocation
by
physical
 destruction
because
animus
revocandi
and
corpus
did
not
 concur.
That
while
animus
revocandi
may
be
conceded
 because
that
is
a
state
of
mind,
corpus
was
not
 established.
That
it
was
not
shown
that
the
paper
burned
 by
the
maid
was
the
will
of
the
testatrix;
that
the
burning
 was
not
proven
to
have
been
done
under
the
testatrix’s
 express
direction;
that
the
burning
was
not
done
in
the
 presence
of
the
testatrix.


The
loss
or
unavailability
of
a
will
may,
under
certain
 circumstances,
give
rise
to
the
presumption
that
it
had
 been
revoked
by
physical
destruction


Gago
v.
Mamuyac
(1927)


Facts:
Proponent
sought
to
have
will
of
decedent
 probated,
presenting
a
carbon
copy
of
same.
Opposition:
 that
original
(will)
had
been
revoked
by
testator,
as
 testified
to
by
witnesses.
Original
copy
of
will
could
not
be
 found.


Held:
That
there
is
a
presumption
that
the
will
had
been
 revoked
(cancelled
or
destroyed)
if
it
cannot
be
found
and
 is
shown
to
be
in
the
possession
of
the
testator
when
last
 seen.
That
the
presumption
is
that
the
will
was
revoked
by
 the
testator
himself.
That
the
will
of
the
testator
in
this
 case
is
presumed
to
have
been
properly
revoked.


ART.
831.
Subsequent
wills
which
do
not
revoke
the
 previous
ones
in
an
express
manner,
annul
only
such
 dispositions
in
the
prior
wills
as
are
inconsistent
with
 or
contrary
to
those
contained
in
the
later
wills.

Note: ‐ the
execution
of
a
subsequent
will
does
not
ipso
 facto
revoke
a
prior
one


ART.
832.
A
revocation
made
in
a
subsequent
will
shall
 take
effect,
even
if
the
new
will
should
become
 inoperative
by
reason
of
the
incapacity
of
the
heirs,
 devisees
or
legatees
designated
therein,
or
by
their
 renunciation.

Efficacy
of
the
revocatory
clause
does
not
depend
on
 the
testamentary
dispositions
of
the
revoking
will
 ‐ unless
the
testator
so
provides


SUCCESSION – RUBEN F. BALANE

modified
by
the
codicil.

Notes: ‐ republication
or
revival
to
give
back
efficacy
to
a
 will
which
has
become
inefficacious


Will,
void
as
to
form
if
it
does
not
comply
with
the
 requirements
of
ART.
804
to
808;
810
to
814;
818
and
 819


How
to
republish
a
will
that
is
void
as
to
its
form—
 ‐ to
execute
a
subsequent
will
and
reproduce
(i.
 copy
out)
the
dispositions
of
the
original
will
 o mere
reference,
not
enough


How
to
republish
a
will
that
is
not
void
as
to
its
form
 but
(a)
void
for
a
reason
other
than
a
formal
defect
 [e.
a
will
that
institutes
one
of
the
three
attesting
 witnesses],
or
(b)
previously
revoked—
 ‐ to
execute
a
subsequent
will
or
codicil
referring
 to
the
previous
will
 o no
need
to
reproduce
the
provisions
of
 the
prior
will
in
the
subsequent
 instrument


ART.
837.
If
after
making
a
will,
the
testator
makes
a
 second
will
expressly
revoking
the
first,
the
revocation
 of
the
second
will
does
not
revive
the
first
will,
which
 can
be
revived
only
by
another
will
or
codicil.

Explanation—
 ‐ the
revocation
of
a
second
will
(revoking
a
first
 will)
by
a
third
will
does
not
revive
the
first
will
 o the
revocatory
clause
of
a
revoked
will
 (second
will)
remains
effective
 (because
third
will
revoking
second
 will
does
not
revive
first
will)


Balane
Notes: ‐ this
article
is
based
on
the
theory
of
instant
 revocation,
which
is
inconsistent
with
the
 principle
that
wills
take
effect
mortis
causa
 ‐ a
revocatory
will,
as
in
every
will,
in
order
to
 have
effect
must
be
probated;
but
a
second
will
 revoking
the
first,
which
second
will
has
already
 been
revoked,
must
be
submitted
to
court
for
 probate?


ART.
837
does
not
apply
in
case
of
implied
revocation
 (i.
the
article
only
applies
if
revocation
of
the
first
 will
by
the
second
will
is
express)—
 ‐ the
revocation
of
a
second
will
(revoking
a
first
 will)
by
a
third
will
would
revive
the
first
will,
 UNLESS
the
third
will
is
itself
inconsistent
with
 the
first


EXCEPTION
 ‐ if
the
second
will
is
holographic
and
is
revoked
 by
physical
dest

Was this document helpful?
Premium
This is a Premium Document. Some documents on Studocu are Premium. Upgrade to Premium to unlock it.

Ruben Balane Succession Reviewer

Course: Self Testing Activities 2 (PESELF1)

11 Documents
Students shared 11 documents in this course

University: University of Baguio

Was this document helpful?

This is a preview

Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 73 pages

  • Access to all documents

  • Get Unlimited Downloads

  • Improve your grades

Upload

Share your documents to unlock

Already Premium?
!
!
!
!
!
!
Succession Reviewer
Inside: Illustrative Problems by Mr. Patrick, Sample
Exam Questions, Answer Key and more!!!1
“Solvitur Ambulando”
I. General Provisions
!
Art.!774.!Succession)is)a)mode)of)acquisition)by)virtue)of)
which)the)property,)rights)and)obligations)to)the)extent)of)
the) value) of) the) inheritance,) of) a) person) are) transmitted)
through)his)death)to)another)or)others)either)by)his)will)or)
by)operation)of)law.)(n))2)
!
Class!Notes:!
Kinds!of!Succession!
• according)to)moment)of)transmission:)
1) mortis)causa)
2) inter)vivos)(none)in)PH)law,)only)donations))
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1!Disclaimer:)All)photos)lifted)from)Google)images.)No)copyright)
infringement)intended.)
2!)provisions)recited!
• accdg)to)extent)of)rights)and)obligations)
transmitted:)
1) universal)–)entire)patrimony)or)an))aliquot)part)
2) particular)–)devise,)legacy)
• accdg)to)importance:)
1) compulsory)
2) testamentary)
3) intestate)
!
Parties:!
• Decedent)
o Testator)
o Decedent)(intestate))
• Successor)
o Heir)
o Devisee)or)Legatee)
)
Balane:)
• Only)transmissible)rights)and)obligations)pass)by)
succession)
o Criterion:)if)the)rights)or)obligation)is)
strictly)personal)(intuitu)personae),)it)is)
intransmissible;)otherwise,)it)is)
transmissible.)
• Pecuniary)obligations)must)be)paid)first)before)
distributing)the)residue)of)the)estate)to)the)heirs.)
)
Union!Bank!vs.!Santibañez!(2005)!
!
F:!Decedent)contracted)loans)during)his)lifetime.)After)
decedent)died,)creditor)filed)an)action)for)collection)
against)the)heirs.)
)
H:!The)bank)should)have)filed)its)claim)in)the)probate)
court)pursuant)to)Sec.)5,)Rule)86)of)the)Rules)of)Court.)The)
filing)of)a)money)claim)against)the)decedent’s)estate)in)the)
probate)court)is)mandatory.)
)
Estate!of!K.H.!Hemady!vs.!Luzon!Surety!(1956)!
!
F:!Lower)court)ruled)that)claims)filed)by)Luzon)Surety)
against)decedent’s)estate)based)on)contracts)of)suretyship)
entered)into)by)the)decedent)were)not)chargeable)because)
death)extinguished)liability)as)surety/guarantor.)
)
H:)Obligations)of)a)guarantor)are)transmissible.)Contracts)
take)effect)only)between)parties,)their)assigns)and)heirs,)
unless)they)are)intransmissible)by)their)nature,)by)
stipulation)or)by)operation)of)law.)
)
Alvarez!vs.!Intermediate!Appellate!Court!(1990)!
!
F:)A)judgment)ordering)decedent)to)return)the)lots)was)
entered)during)his)lifetime)but)was)not)executed)because)
he)sold)the)lots)to)a)3rd)person.)A)suit)for)recovery)of)the)
lots)was)filed)against)the)heirs)of)seller.)
)
H:)Liability)that)arose)from)the)sale)of)decedent)in)bad)
faith)was)not)extinguished)by)his)death)and)was)passed)on)
to)his)heirs.)However,)the)heirs)are)only)liable)to)the)
extent)of)the)value)of)their)inheritance.)
)
Art.! 775.) In) this) Title,) "decedent") is) the) general) term)
applied) to) the) 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.)(n)))
)
!
!
!
Rea Bautista
Patrick Manalo
Loraine Saguinsin
Naomi Quimpo

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.

Why is this page out of focus?

This is a Premium document. Become Premium to read the whole document.