General Provisions on Succession (Articles 774-791)
SECTION 1 - General Provisions
Article 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.
Article 775. The inheritance includes all the property, rights, and obligations of a person which are not extinguished by his death.
​
Intestate succession: death benefits are not part of the estate, its distribution follows the proportions based on law
​
Macalinao, et al. v. Macalinao, et al.
G.R. No. 250613, April 3, 2024
​
The case concerns a dispute over the estate of the late Antonio Macalinao. The heirs of Antonio Macalinao, including his children, siblings, and extended family members, filed a petition for the settlement of his estate before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila.
The petitioners, who are the children of Antonio Macalinao, sought to claim their share of the estate. However, the respondents, including other extended family members, contested the claim, arguing that a will left by the decedent had already designated specific beneficiaries and that the decedent had also made an oral declaration regarding the division of his property.
The petitioners disputed the validity of the will, claiming that it was improperly executed and that the decedent was mentally incapacitated at the time of its creation. They also raised issues concerning the legitimacy of the oral statements made by the decedent regarding the distribution of his estate.
The issue revolved around the probate of the alleged will, the mental capacity of the decedent, and the validity of the decedent’s oral declarations.
Issue:
Whether the will left by Antonio Macalinao is valid and whether the oral declarations made by the decedent regarding the division of his estate can be considered in determining the distribution of his property.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of upholding the validity of the will, but emphasized that the probate court must strictly adhere to the formalities prescribed by law for the will’s validity. The Court also found that while oral declarations of a decedent are not generally considered legally binding, they can be used to supplement or clarify the terms of a will in cases where the validity of the written will is confirmed.
On the validity of the will:
The Court ruled that the will was executed in accordance with the formalities required by law. It was signed by the decedent and witnessed by the required number of credible witnesses, all in the presence of each other. The will also contained an attestation clause which was valid and sufficient under Article 805 of the Civil Code of the Philippines.
Article 805 states:
“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.”
On the mental capacity of the decedent:
The Court found that there was no conclusive evidence to support the claim that the decedent lacked mental capacity at the time the will was executed. Medical certificates or other pieces of evidence showing mental incapacity were not presented during the probate proceedings. Thus, the Court ruled that the decedent was presumed to have the mental capacity to execute the will.
On oral declarations:
The Supreme Court clarified that oral declarations of a decedent, while not constituting a will, may provide insight into the decedent’s intentions. However, such declarations cannot replace or override the terms of a validly executed written will. The Court explained that these oral statements could only be used to clarify the meaning of the will if the written document was unclear, but they could not be considered independently for succession purposes.
Legal Principles:
Formalities of Will Execution: Under Article 805 of the Civil Code, a valid will must be signed by the testator, attested by at least three credible witnesses, and include a proper attestation clause. The Court affirmed that the will in this case met these formalities.
Mental Capacity of the Decedent: The Court reaffirmed the presumption of mental capacity unless there is evidence to the contrary, and the burden of proving incapacity lies with the party challenging the will.
Oral Declarations: Oral declarations of a decedent cannot serve as a substitute for a formal will but can be used to clarify ambiguous provisions in a will.
Disposition:
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, which upheld the probate of the will. The case was remanded to the lower court for further proceedings in line with the Court’s ruling.
------
Article 776. The inheritance of a person includes not only the property and rights which are transmitted to his heirs at the time of his death but also those which have accrued thereto since the opening of the succession.
Article 777. The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent.
Article 778. Succession may be:
1. Testamentary;
2. Legal or intestate; or
3. Mixed.
Article 779. Testamentary succession is that which results from the designation of an heir, made in a will executed in the form prescribed by law.
Article 780. Mixed succession is that effected partly by will and partly by operation of law.
Article 781. Intestate succession is that which takes place by operation of law in the absence of a will.
Article 782. The decedent is the person whose property is transmitted through succession, whether or not he left a will.
Article 783. A will is an act whereby a person is permitted, with the formalities prescribed by law, to control to a certain degree the disposition of his estate, to take effect after his death.
Article 784. The making of a will is a strictly personal act; it cannot be left in whole or in part to the discretion of a third person, or accomplished through the instrumentality of an agent or attorney.
Article 785. The validity of a will as to its form depends upon the observance of the law in force at the time it is made.
Article 786. A will made by a person of either sex under eighteen years of age is invalid.
Article 787. A person who is not of sound mind cannot make a will.
Article 788. In order to make a will it is essential that the testator be of sound mind at the time of its execution.
Article 789. 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 unshattered by disease, injury, or other cause. It shall be sufficient if the testator knows, at the time of making his will, the nature of the estate to be disposed of, the proper objects of his bounty, and the character of the testamentary act.
Article 790. In the absence of fraud, error, or undue influence, every person is presumed to be of sound mind at the time of the execution of his will until the contrary is proved.
Article 791. Persons of either sex under eighteen years of age cannot witness a will.
Testamentary Succession (Articles 792-839)
1. Wills
2. Nature of Wills (Formal and holographic)
3. Formalities and Validity of Wills
4. Capacity to Make a Will
5. Witnesses to a Will
6. Revocation and Revalidation of Wills
7. Revocation of Wills (Causes and Methods)
8. Revalidation of Wills (When a will can be revived)
9. Codicils and Other Testamentary Dispositions
10. Dispositions by Will (Legacies, Devises, Conditions)
​
------------
​
​
1. Wills
A will is a declaration made by a person (the testator) on how their property will be distributed after their death. Philippine law allows testators to control the distribution of their estate, provided that legitimes (reserved shares for compulsory heirs) are respected.
Article 783, Civil Code: “A will is an act whereby a person is permitted, with the formalities prescribed by law, to control to a certain degree the disposition of his estate, to take effect after his death.”
​
2. Nature of Wills (Formal and Holographic)
Formal (Notarial) Wills must adhere to formalities involving witnesses and notaries. Holographic Wills are entirely handwritten, dated, and signed by the testator and require no witnesses.
Articles 804–808, Civil Code: Formal wills must be signed by the testator in the presence of at least three credible witnesses.
Article 810, Civil Code : A holographic will must be entirely written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator.
​
Formal Will
​
G.R. No. L-12287 (1918)
​
In this case, a dispute arose among the heirs of the decedent concerning the execution of the decedent’s will and the inclusion of certain properties in the estate. The petitioner, Madrigal, contested the validity of the will, claiming that certain properties included in the decedent’s estate were not part of the testator’s assets and should not be subject to distribution under the will.
The conflict revolved around the proper interpretation of the decedent’s last will and testament and whether all the properties listed were rightfully part of the estate subject to inheritance.
Issue:
1. Was the execution of the decedent’s will valid and binding?
2. Should certain properties be included in the distribution of the estate as per the will’s provisions?
Ruling:
The Supreme Court ruled that the will of the decedent, as properly executed, must be respected. The Court emphasized that the testator’s intent is paramount, and the validly executed will serves as the basis for the distribution of the decedent’s estate. The Court found that the properties in question were rightfully part of the estate, and the heirs must adhere to the will’s provisions.
The Court stressed that, in matters of estate distribution, the last will and testament of the deceased should govern, provided that it was executed in accordance with legal requirements and reflects the testator’s true intent.
Ratio Decidendi:
The Supreme Court reiterated that a valid will, as executed by the testator, must be respected in determining the distribution of the estate. The heirs must follow the terms set forth in the will, and disputes concerning the inclusion of certain properties must be resolved based on the testator’s intent as expressed in the will. The Court reaffirmed the principle that the will of the deceased, once properly executed, takes precedence in estate matters.
Disposition:
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the decedent’s will and ruled in favor of its proper execution, affirming the inclusion of the contested properties in the estate. The estate should be distributed according to the testator’s wishes as outlined in the will.
​
Probate of a holographic will
​
Tubera-Balintec v. Heirs of Tubera
G.R. No. 235701, February 15, 2023
​
This case centers on a petition for the probate of a holographic will filed by the petitioner, Tubera-Balintec, claiming she is the sole heir of the deceased, Tubera. The deceased had executed a holographic will that the petitioner sought to probate. However, the Court of Appeals affirmed the Regional Trial Court’s decision, which declared the marriage of the deceased to the petitioner void, and recognized the child as the sole heir. While the petitioner raised concerns over the validity of the recognition of the child, the primary issue for the Supreme Court’s review was the validity of the holographic will.
The petitioner questioned whether the holographic will, which was executed by the deceased, should be considered valid. The trial courts ruled on the validity of the will, and the petitioner sought to challenge these findings.
Issue:
Whether the holographic will of the deceased is valid for probate.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, rejecting the petitioner’s argument challenging the validity of the holographic will. The Court held that there was no reason to overturn the findings of the lower courts that had already adjudicated the matter in accordance with the requirements for the probate of a holographic will.
The Court underscored the requirements for the validity of a holographic will under Philippine law. Specifically, the will must be entirely written, dated, and signed by the testator. The trial courts had already determined that these elements were met and had granted the probate of the will. No reversible error was found in the lower courts’ conclusions regarding the will’s authenticity and compliance with the legal requirements.
Legal Principles:
Holographic Will: A holographic will is a will that is written, signed, and dated entirely by the hand of the testator. According to Article 810 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, for a holographic will to be valid, it must meet these essential requirements, and the handwriting of the testator must be duly proven.
Probate of Holographic Wills: The probate court’s role is to establish the validity of the will by ensuring that all legal formalities are observed. In this case, the courts found that the deceased’s holographic will met the legal requirements for probate.
Judicial Review of Holographic Wills: The Supreme Court generally respects the factual findings of lower courts unless there is a clear error or abuse in judgment. The probate of a holographic will is subject to the lower courts’ factual determination of its authenticity and compliance with the required formalities.
Disposition:
The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Court of Appeals and the Regional Trial Court, affirming the validity of the holographic will. The decision reinforced the principle that a properly executed holographic will, which meets the requirements under the Civil Code, is valid for probate, and the Court does not overturn factual findings made by the lower courts unless a clear error is demonstrated.
3. Formalities and Validity of Wills
To be valid, wills must comply with statutory formalities, depending on whether they are notarial or holographic wills. Failure to meet these formalities can render the will invalid.
Article 805, Civil Code: Requires at least three credible witnesses for notarial wills.
Article 810, Civil Code: Requires that a holographic will be entirely handwritten, dated, and signed by the testator.
​
Substantial compliance doctrine
​
Mitra v. Sablan-Guevarra, et al
G.R. No. 213994, April 18, 2018
​
Margie Santos Mitra filed a petition for the probate of the notarial will of Remedios Legaspi y Reyes. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) admitted the will to probate, finding that it complied with the necessary legal formalities for a notarial will. However, the respondents, led by Sablan-Guevarra, contested the will’s validity, arguing that it had formal defects and that the decedent was not of sound mind when the will was executed. The Court of Appeals reversed the RTC’s decision, ruling that the will had several defects, including an alleged failure to comply with formalities under Article 805 of the Civil Code, leading to its disallowance for probate.
Issue:
Whether the notarial will of Remedios Legaspi y Reyes is valid for probate despite the alleged formal defects.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals and reinstated the RTC’s ruling admitting the will to probate. The Court held that the will substantially complied with the formalities required by law and that minor defects in the execution of the will did not invalidate it.
The Court found that the essential elements of a notarial will were present, specifically:
1. The will was subscribed by the testator at the end thereof, in compliance with Article 805 of the Civil Code.
2. The will was attested to by three credible witnesses who signed it in the presence of the testator and of one another.
3. The attestation clause stated the required facts, including the number of pages used in the will, and the fact that the testator and the witnesses signed each page.
While the respondents argued that the attestation clause was defective, the Court held that substantial compliance with the formal requirements of the law is sufficient as long as the essential safeguards provided by the formalities are not violated. The Court emphasized that the purpose of the formalities is to protect the authenticity and voluntariness of the will, and minor technical defects should not frustrate the testator’s intent.
Legal Principles:
Article 805 of the Civil Code: This provision requires that a notarial will be subscribed by the testator and attested and subscribed by at least three credible witnesses. The will must also contain an attestation clause stating certain facts, such as the number of pages, that the testator and witnesses signed every page, and that the signing was done in each other’s presence.
Substantial Compliance Doctrine: The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that substantial compliance with the formalities required by law is sufficient, provided that the purpose of the formalities is upheld, which is to ensure the authenticity and voluntariness of the will.
Probate of Wills: The primary function of the probate court is to determine whether the will was executed in compliance with the legal formalities and whether the testator was of sound mind. Issues regarding the distribution of the estate should be addressed in a separate proceeding after the probate of the will.
Disposition:
The Supreme Court reinstated the RTC’s decision admitting the will to probate, ruling that the notarial will substantially complied with the formalities required by law. The case was remanded to the RTC for further proceedings. The Court’s decision reaffirmed the principle that minor defects in the formalities of a will should not defeat the testator’s intent if substantial compliance with the law is shown.
​​
Substantial compliance doctrine
​
Garcia-Tanchanco, et al. v. Garcia Santos
G.R. No. 204793, June 8, 2020
​
This case involves the probate of the last will and testament of Consuelo Santiago Garcia. The petitioners, Catalino and Ronaldo Tanchanco, contested the probate of the will, which favored Natividad Garcia Santos as the primary beneficiary and executrix. The petitioners alleged that the will was a fabrication, pointing out the decedent’s alleged physical incapacity at the time of its execution, as well as the supposed forgery of her signature. They also argued that the will did not conform to the formalities required by law.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) and the Court of Appeals (CA) both found that the will was executed in compliance with the formalities under the law. The courts ruled that the will was not a fabrication and dismissed the petitioners’ claims of forgery, fraud, or improper influence in the execution of the will. The CA affirmed the RTC’s decision to probate the will and respect Natividad Garcia Santos’ appointment as executrix.
Issues:
1. Whether the last will and testament of Consuelo Santiago Garcia complied with the formalities required under the law.
2. Whether there was forgery, fraud, or undue influence in the execution of the will.
3. Whether the findings of the probate court should have been given more weight by the CA.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court denied the petition and upheld the decision of the Court of Appeals, affirming the validity of the will and allowing its probate.
1. Substantial Compliance with Formalities:
The Court found that the will complied with the formalities required by Article 805 of the Civil Code, which governs the execution of notarial wills. The will was duly signed by the testatrix and attested by three credible witnesses. The attestation clause and the numbering of the pages substantially complied with legal requirements, and any minor defects did not invalidate the will. The Court reiterated that Article 809 of the Civil Code allows for substantial compliance, as long as the intent and voluntariness of the testator are clear.
2. No Evidence of Forgery or Undue Influence:
The Supreme Court held that the allegations of forgery, fraud, and undue influence were unsupported by credible evidence. The lower courts thoroughly examined the will and found no signs of fraud or improper pressure. The testatrix was found to have been of sound mind and physically capable at the time of execution. The Court emphasized that allegations of forgery require clear and convincing evidence, which the petitioners failed to provide.
3. Findings of the Probate Court:
The Court noted that while factual findings of the trial court are generally respected, they are not immune from review. In this case, the appellate court found no reason to overturn the RTC’s decision based on its independent assessment of the evidence. The probate court’s findings were properly considered, and the CA’s decision to uphold the probate of the will was consistent with the law.
Legal Citations:
Article 805 of the Civil Code: Requires that a notarial will must be signed by the testator and attested by three or more credible witnesses, and that all pages must be numbered correlatively and signed on the margins.
Article 809 of the Civil Code: Allows for substantial compliance with formalities in the execution of wills, provided that the testamentary intent is clear.
Disposition:
The petition was denied, and the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals to allow the probate of Consuelo Santiago Garcia’s last will and testament. The will was found to be valid, and Natividad Garcia Santos was recognized as the appointed executrix, with the case remanded to the trial court for the issuance of letters testamentary.
The extrinsic validity (the formalities of execution) can be governed by either Philippine law or the law of the decedent’s nationality.
​
G.R. No. 229010, November 23, 2020
​
Maria Pacis-Trinidad, an American citizen, executed her last will and testament in the Philippines. After her death, her nephew, Ernesto Gaspi, filed a petition for the probate of her will before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iriga City. The RTC dismissed the petition, stating that the law governing the probate of a will for an alien citizen should be her national law, in this case, American law. Gaspi appealed the decision, arguing that the will should be probated in the Philippines as it complied with local formalities.
Issue:
Whether a will executed by a foreign national in the Philippines can be admitted to probate under Philippine law.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court reversed the RTC’s decision and ruled in favor of Gaspi. The Court held that under Article 16, par. 2 of the Civil Code, the national law of the decedent governs the substantive validity of a will, but the extrinsic validity (the formalities of execution) can be governed by either Philippine law or the law of the decedent’s nationality.
The Court emphasized that a will executed by a foreign national in the Philippines may be probated in the country as long as it complies with the formalities required by Philippine law or by the law of the decedent’s nationality. The Court remanded the case to the RTC to determine the extrinsic validity of the will—whether it complied with the formalities prescribed by law, whether Pacis-Trinidad had testamentary capacity, and whether the will was voluntarily executed.
The decision clarified that the law of the place where the will was executed (lex loci celebrationis) can be applied to determine compliance with formal requirements, as long as this does not contradict public policy or essential formalities for testamentary acts.
Legal Principles:
1. Article 16, par. 2 of the Civil Code: Provides that testamentary successions shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration. However, the formalities for executing wills may be governed either by the law of the country where the will was made or by the national law of the testator.
2. Article 17, par. 3 of the Civil Code: Prohibitive laws concerning public order and public policy, such as those governing formalities of wills, shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or judgments promulgated in a foreign country. In this case, the formalities of the will should follow Philippine law if the will was executed in the country.
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court granted the petition and remanded the case to the RTC for further proceedings to determine if the will was validly executed under Philippine law and to verify the testamentary capacity of the testatrix. The decision affirms that a will of a foreign national executed in the Philippines may be admitted to probate in the country if it complies with the formalities required by law, either under Philippine law or the law of the testator’s nationality.
​
4. Capacity to Make a Will
The testator must possess testamentary capacity at the time of executing the will, meaning they must be at least 18 years old and of sound mind.
Article 797, Civil Code: “Persons of either sex under eighteen years of age cannot make a will.”
Article 798, Civil Code: Provides that a person must have testamentary capacity to make a will.
5. Witnesses to a Will
In a notarial will, at least three credible witnesses must attest to the will. These witnesses must meet certain qualifications, such as being of legal age and not being blind or deaf.
Articles 805–806, Civil Code: Lists the qualifications of witnesses to a will, and states that the testator must sign the will in their presence.
6. Revocation and Revalidation of Wills
Wills can be revoked at any time by the testator, either explicitly or implicitly. Revocation can happen through the destruction of the will, by creating a new will, or through certain life events.
Articles 828–829, Civil Code: The testator may revoke the will at any time by executing a new will or codicil.
Article 830, Civil Code: Lists other ways by which a will may be revoked, including destruction with intent to revoke.
7. Revocation of Wills (Causes and Methods)
Revocation can occur in several ways:
Express Revocation: A new will expressly revokes the previous will.
Implied Revocation: A new will contains provisions inconsistent with the previous will.
Destruction: Physically destroying the will with the intent to revoke.
Articles 828–831, Civil Code: Discusses revocation through express acts or implied by making a subsequent will.
8. Revalidation of Wills (When a Will Can Be Revived)
A previously revoked will can be revived if the testator executes a new will reinstating the revoked will or if circumstances show the testator’s intention to revive the will.
Article 837, Civil Code: A revoked will may be revived by re-execution or by a codicil indicating its revival.
9. Codicils and Other Testamentary Dispositions
A codicil is a supplement to a will, altering some parts without revoking the entire will.
Other testamentary dispositions, such as legacies and devises, are additional instructions in the will concerning specific gifts to particular individuals.
Article 825, Civil Code: Defines codicils and their effect on a will.
Articles 930–931, Civil Code: Discusses the nature of legacies and devises and how they operate within a will.
10. Dispositions by Will (Legacies, Devises, Conditions)
Legacy: A gift of personal property in a will.
Devise: A gift of real property in a will.
Conditions: The testator may impose conditions upon the beneficiaries for receiving the inheritance. These conditions must be legal, possible, and not contrary to good customs or public policy.
Articles 912, 929, and 930, Civil Code: Discusses legacies and devises.
Articles 874–879, Civil Code: Describes the conditions under which dispositions by will can be made, including rules for conditional legacies.
----------
​
SECTION 2 - Testamentary Succession
Article 792.
A will made by a person who was in such a state of mind as to be incapable of making it, shall be null and void.
Article 793.
A will made through force or intimidation, or under the influence of fear, or through undue or improper pressure, or through fraudulent representation, shall be void.
Article 794.
The will of an unemancipated minor cannot be admitted to probate, even though he may have attained his majority before his death.
Article 795.
The testator must designate his heirs, legatees, and devisees with such certainty that it can be known at the time of the testator’s death who are the persons called to his succession.
Article 796.
If the testator erroneously names a person or describes the object bequeathed, but it can be clearly shown what or who the testator intended, the disposition shall take effect.
Article 797.
A general or universal legacy or devise includes all the property of the testator at the time of his death.
Article 798.
A legacy or devise shall be void if it refers to indeterminate property or objects not specified by the testator, unless it be clearly ascertainable by a provision of the will, or unless it consists of all of the testator’s property at the time of his death.
Article 799.
If the testator by mistake of fact or law, believed that a person predeceased him, when in reality such person survives, the institution shall not take effect. If the institution depends upon the fulfillment of a condition, and the testator was mistaken with regard to the existence or non-existence of such condition, the disposition shall not take effect. However, if the testator had not been mistaken as to the predecease or survival of the person, or as to the existence of the condition, he would have preferred the person to survive or to have the condition fulfilled, the disposition shall take effect.
Article 800.
A general legacy of money shall be satisfied only out of the value of the property left by the testator at the time of his death, unless otherwise specified in the will.
Article 801.
If the will provides for the payment of legacies or devises by heirs other than the executor, the heir charged shall be subject to the liabilities of an executor, and shall have the same rights.
Article 802.
If the testator bequeaths to an heir part of the inheritance under the designation of a legacy, the latter shall be subject to the same rights and obligations as an ordinary legacy, unless the testator clearly intended otherwise.
Article 803.
If the legacy consists of money, the payment shall be made in the currency designated in the will, or its equivalent in Philippine currency.
Article 804.
Every will must be in writing and executed in a language or dialect known to the testator.
Article 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.
Article 806.
Every will must be acknowledged before a notary public by the testator and the witnesses.
Article 807.
Persons who know how to read and write, and who are not blind or deaf-mute, can be witnesses to a will.
Article 808.
The notary public before whom the will was acknowledged cannot be a witness thereto.
Article 809.
In case of emergency or death of the notary public, any person interested may present a petition for probate before the court.
Article 810.
A person who is blind, deaf-mute, or who is insane cannot make a will.
Article 811.
If a person of either sex over seventy-five years of age makes a will, the court may require that the will be accompanied by a physician’s certification of the testator’s mental fitness.
Institution of Heirs (Articles 840-858)
The Institution of Heirs in the Civil Code refers to the formal process by which a decedent designates who will inherit their estate through a will.
The institution is governed by specific legal rules that ensure the orderly transfer of property from a deceased individual to their heirs. The relevant provisions are found under Articles 840 to 858 of the Civil Code, and these rules govern the rights of heirs, the formalities of instituting heirs, and how the inheritance is to be distributed.
1. Designation of Heirs and Legatees (Article 840)
The designation of heirs refers to the formal naming of individuals who will succeed to the property of the decedent upon their death. A decedent may designate their heirs freely in a will, as long as the will complies with the formalities required by law.
Article 840 of the Civil Code provides that “the institution of heirs is made in the will. By it, the testator designates the person or persons who shall succeed to his property.” The institution of heirs is a direct means through which the decedent determines who will receive their estate.
Legatees, in contrast, are individuals who receive a specific item or sum of money under the terms of a will. A legacy refers to the bequeathal of personal property, while a devise refers to the bequeathal of real property.
Article 774 of the Civil Code defines a legacy as “a bequest of personal property,” while Article 776 distinguishes devise as “a disposition of real property.”
​
In the absence of descendants and ascendants, the siblings are the compulsory heirs
​
Amelia P. Arellano et al. v. Pascual et al.
G.R. No. 189776, December 15, 2010
Angel N. Pascual Jr. died intestate (without a will) on January 2, 1999, leaving behind several heirs. His siblings included Amelia P. Arellano, who was represented by her daughters, Agnes P. Arellano and Nona P. Arellano, as well as Francisco Pascual and Miguel N. Pascual. The case involves a dispute over the distribution of Angel Pascual’s estate among his surviving heirs. Amelia, being represented by her guardians, claimed her share as a compulsory heir under Philippine succession law.
Issue:
Who are the compulsory heirs in intestate succession, and is Amelia P. Arellano, through her representatives, entitled to claim a share of the estate of Angel N. Pascual Jr.?
Ruling:
The Supreme Court addressed the principles of intestate succession and the rights of compulsory heirs under Philippine law. In cases of intestate succession, the law provides for specific individuals who are considered compulsory heirs, meaning that they are entitled by law to a fixed portion of the deceased’s estate.
The Court highlighted that in the absence of descendants or ascendants, the siblings of the decedent become compulsory heirs. Since Angel N. Pascual Jr. did not have any surviving descendants (children) or ascendants (parents or grandparents), his siblings, including Amelia P. Arellano, Francisco Pascual, and Miguel N. Pascual, were entitled to inherit from his estate in equal shares.
The Court reiterated the principle of equal sharing among siblings under Article 1003 of the Civil Code, which provides that in the absence of legitimate descendants and ascendants, the estate is inherited by the legitimate brothers and sisters of the deceased.
Given that Amelia was legally represented by her daughters due to incapacity, her rights as a compulsory heir were not diminished. The Court emphasized that a compulsory heir’s right to inherit is protected by law, and guardianship only allows another individual to act on behalf of the incapacitated heir.
Disposition:
The Supreme Court ruled that Amelia P. Arellano, represented by her duly appointed guardians, is a compulsory heir of Angel N. Pascual Jr., along with her siblings Francisco Pascual and Miguel Pascual. The estate of Angel N. Pascual Jr. must be divided equally among the three surviving siblings.
Key Takeaway:
In intestate succession, when there are no descendants or ascendants, siblings of the deceased become compulsory heirs, and the estate must be divided equally among them. The law guarantees these heirs a share of the estate, regardless of any incapacity, as long as they are duly represented.
2. Conditions in Institution of Heirs (Articles 841-842)
In the institution of heirs, a testator may impose certain conditions on the inheritance. These conditions can include age requirements, certain behaviors (such as being a certain profession or meeting certain criteria), or other specific requirements for the heir to inherit.
​
Article 841 states, “The institution of heirs may be conditional or subject to a time.” This means the inheritance may be delayed or subject to a future event or condition that the heir must fulfill.
The compulsory heirs (i.e., children, spouse, and parents) are entitled to a share of the estate even if the testator imposed a condition on their inheritance. However, the testator can still make dispositions for non-compulsory heirs and legatees with conditions.
​
Article 842 provides, “Compulsory heirs are entitled to a portion of the estate of the decedent, which is the legitime.”
3. Substitution of Heirs (Simple, Fideicommissary, etc.)
The substitution of heirs refers to the appointment of one heir in place of another, in the event that the original heir cannot or will not inherit. There are different types of substitutions recognized by law.
​
Simple Substitution: This is the most straightforward form of substitution, where the testator designates a substitute heir who will inherit in place of an heir who cannot inherit (e.g., if the heir predeceases the testator).
Fideicommissary Substitution: Under this type of substitution, the testator names a second heir who will inherit only upon the death of the first heir. This kind of substitution is subject to strict limitations under the Civil Code to prevent abuse.
Article 855 provides: “A fideicommissary substitution is one in which the heir is directed to transmit the inheritance to another after his death.”
Article 856 limits the use of fideicommissary substitutions, stating that the right of substitution is subject to the requirements that the second heir must not be a stranger to the family and the substitution must comply with the testator’s original intention.
Other Forms of Substitution: In some cases, the testator may create more complex substitutions involving specific conditions that must be met for the inheritance to be passed on.
4. Prohibited Substitutions
The Civil Code imposes restrictions on certain types of substitutions, particularly when it comes to ensuring the balance between the freedom of testation and the protection of compulsory heirs.
Article 854 prohibits any substitution that aims to place a stranger to the family in the position of an heir unless the first heir is specifically disinherited or the substitution is legally permitted.
Prohibited substitutions are those that could undermine the inheritance rights of compulsory heirs or result in inappropriate use of substitutions. For example, a testator cannot make a substitution that goes against public policy or protects non-family members from the legitimate claims of compulsory heirs.
Article 854 provides: “No substitution may be made that deprives a compulsory heir of his share, or that is made contrary to public policy, or that substitutes an outsider in place of a person who should be entitled to succeed according to the order of succession.”
5. General Rules on Substitutions
Simple Substitution: When a person designated as an heir in a will predeceases the testator, the testator may appoint another heir in their place, which is known as simple substitution.
Article 855 provides that when the heir cannot inherit due to death, disqualification, or renunciation, the testator may appoint a substitute heir.
Fideicommissary Substitution: The testator’s intention is to make sure that the property goes to a designated heir after the first heir’s death. The second heir is designated to inherit only upon the passing of the first heir.
Article 856 prohibits certain types of fideicommissary substitutions where the second heir is not closely related to the decedent.
Legal Consequences of Prohibited Substitutions
If a substitution is made in violation of the restrictions imposed by law, it may be declared void. The court may decide to cancel the substitution, which can affect the validity of the will or the heirship.
The testator’s intent must always be interpreted according to the Civil Code provisions, and if the will contradicts any mandatory rules of succession, such as disinheriting compulsory heirs or allowing excessive substitutions, the courts will modify or disregard those provisions.
Article 857 provides: “Any substitution contrary to law, public policy, or morality shall be declared void.”
Legitime (Articles 887-911)
Article 887: Defines compulsory heirs.
Articles 888-891: Legitimes of descendants and illegitimate children.
Articles 892-896: Rights of legitimate ascendants and surviving spouses.
Articles 897-911: Rules on intestate succession, including the share of collateral relatives and escheat to the State.
​
Compulsory Heirs and Legitimes (Articles 887-896)
1. Compulsory Heirs (Article 887)
Article 887 lists the compulsory heirs of a decedent who cannot be deprived of their rightful share except in certain exceptional cases.
These compulsory heirs are:
• Legitimate children and descendants
• Legitimate parents and ascendants
• The widow or widower (surviving spouse)
• Illegitimate children
These heirs are entitled to their legitime, which is the portion of the estate reserved for them by law.
2. Rights of Legitimate and Illegitimate Children (Articles 888-891)
Legitimate children are entitled to receive one-half of the estate as their legitime. If the decedent leaves no legitimate descendants, but leaves legitimate ascendants, these ascendants will share the same portion.
Illegitimate children are entitled to one-half of the share of a legitimate child.
3. Legitimes of Ascendants, Spouses, and Descendants (Articles 892-896)
​
• Legitimate ascendants inherit if the decedent has no legitimate children. They are entitled to a fixed portion of the estate, and if there is a surviving spouse, the spouse shares the estate with the ascendants.
• The surviving spouse is entitled to one-fourth of the estate if there are no descendants and no ascendants.
• The legitime of illegitimate children is one-half of the share of a legitimate child.
Intestate Succession (Articles 897-911)
​
4. Intestate Succession (Articles 897-901)
​
In cases where a person dies without a valid will or with a will that does not dispose of the entire estate, intestate succession rules apply. Articles 897-911 outline how the estate should be divided among heirs.
• Article 897 states that the law governs succession when there is no valid will, or the will does not dispose of the entire estate.
• Article 899 details the order of intestate succession, starting with legitimate children and descendants, followed by legitimate parents, ascendants, and then collateral relatives like siblings.
5. Share of Collateral Relatives (Articles 900-902)
• If the deceased has no children or parents, collateral relatives (e.g., siblings, nieces, nephews) may inherit the estate.
• Article 900 provides that brothers and sisters inherit one-half of the estate, which is to be equally divided among them.
6. Escheat (Articles 903-911)
In cases where the deceased has no heirs or legal successors, Articles 903-911 provide that the estate escheats to the State. The government becomes the final successor to the estate if there are no claimants from the family or other lawful heirs.
Key Points on Compulsory Heirs and Intestate Succession
• The legitime is protected by law, and compulsory heirs cannot be disinherited without just cause (Articles 915-921).
• The order of intestate succession begins with legitimate descendants, followed by legitimate ascendants, then collateral relatives.
• If there are no legal heirs, the estate reverts to the State through escheat.
​
Intestate Succession (Articles 960-1016)
Articles 960-1016 of the Civil Code of the Philippines deal with Intestate Succession, which applies when a person dies without a valid will, or their will does not completely dispose of their estate.
​
Articles 960-962: General provisions on intestate succession.
Articles 963-975: Rights of legitimate descendants, ascendants, illegitimate children, and the surviving spouse.
Articles 976-980: Representation of predeceased heirs by their descendants.
Articles 981-989: Succession by collateral relatives.
Articles 990-995: Rights of the surviving spouse.
Articles 996-1016: Escheat of the estate to the State.
I. General Provisions (Articles 960-962)
Article 960: Intestate succession takes place when:
• There is no will;
• The will is invalid or void;
• The will does not dispose of the entire estate;
• A condition imposed in the will is not fulfilled or a legatee or devisee predeceases the testator;
• A person repudiates the inheritance without a substitute or heir by operation of law.
Article 961: Intestate succession shall be governed by the Civil Code provisions, which determine the rights of different heirs.
Article 962: The decedent’s heirs shall inherit the estate either in their own right or by representation, depending on the situation.
II. Legal Heirs (Articles 963-975)
A. Classification of Heirs
The legal heirs in intestate succession are classified as follows:
Article 963: Legitimate descendants, legitimate ascendants, illegitimate children, the surviving spouse, and collateral relatives (e.g., siblings) are entitled to inherit, in the order provided by law.
B. Succession of Legitimate Children and Descendants (Articles 964-967)
Article 964: Legitimate children and their descendants are the first to inherit, dividing the estate equally among them.
Article 965: If a legitimate child predeceases the decedent, their descendants inherit by right of representation.
Article 966: The rule of equal division applies to all legitimate descendants, regardless of their degree of kinship.
Article 967: If the decedent leaves no legitimate descendants, the estate passes to the legitimate ascendants.
C. Succession of Legitimate Ascendants (Articles 968-971)
Article 968: Legitimate ascendants inherit if there are no legitimate descendants. Parents inherit equally.
Article 969: If only one parent survives, they receive the entire share.
Article 970: Grandparents inherit in the absence of parents, and they share the inheritance equally.
Article 971: If there are no surviving legitimate ascendants or descendants, collateral relatives may inherit.
D. Succession of Illegitimate Children and Surviving Spouse (Articles 972-975)
Article 972: Illegitimate children inherit in the absence of legitimate children or descendants.
Article 973: Illegitimate children are entitled to half the share of a legitimate child.
Article 974: The surviving spouse, in the absence of descendants or ascendants, inherits the estate.
Article 975: If both legitimate and illegitimate children exist, the surviving spouse shares the estate with them.
III. Representation (Articles 976-980)
Article 976: Representation takes place when a legitimate heir predeceases the decedent. Their descendants inherit the share that the predeceased would have received.
Article 977: Representation is allowed in cases involving legitimate descendants, legitimate ascendants, and collateral relatives.
Article 978: Representation does not apply to the surviving spouse.
Article 979: The representative shall inherit only the share that their parent (predeceased heir) would have received.
Article 980: If there are several representatives, the estate is divided among them equally.
IV. Succession by Collateral Relatives (Articles 981-989)
Article 981: Siblings of the decedent and their descendants inherit in the absence of legitimate descendants, ascendants, and illegitimate children.
Article 982: If the decedent has no legitimate siblings, their nephews and nieces may inherit by right of representation.
Article 983: If the decedent has neither legitimate nor illegitimate siblings, more distant relatives, such as cousins, may inherit.
Article 984: Collateral relatives up to the fifth degree may inherit, but more distant relatives are excluded.
Article 985: The estate is divided equally among collateral relatives of the same degree of kinship.
Article 986: If a sibling predeceases the decedent, their children inherit by representation.
Article 987: If the decedent has no legitimate relatives, illegitimate relatives inherit in the same order.
V. Succession of the Surviving Spouse (Articles 990-995)
Article 990: The surviving spouse inherits together with legitimate children, descendants, or ascendants.
Article 991: If the decedent leaves only legitimate children, the surviving spouse inherits one-fourth of the estate.
Article 992: Illegitimate children cannot inherit from the legitimate relatives of their parents.
Article 993: The surviving spouse inherits equally with legitimate ascendants or descendants.
Article 994: If the decedent leaves no legitimate heirs, the surviving spouse inherits the entire estate.
Article 995: In cases where both legitimate and illegitimate children exist, the surviving spouse inherits alongside them.
VI. Escheat (Articles 996-1016)
Article 996: When a person dies intestate without any legal heirs, the estate escheats to the State.
Article 997: Before the estate escheats, the State must publish notices to allow any heirs to come forward.
Article 998: The estate that escheats to the State shall be used for public benefit and to fund public services.
Articles 999-1016: These articles contain procedural guidelines for determining if the estate escheats to the State, including the requirement to verify that there are no legal heirs entitled to the estate.
Key Points on Intestate Succession
• The law prioritizes legitimate descendants (children and grandchildren), followed by legitimate ascendants (parents and grandparents), and then collateral relatives (siblings and their descendants).
• The surviving spouse shares the estate with legitimate children or ascendants.
• Illegitimate children are entitled to a smaller share but still have rights to the estate.
• If no heirs exist, the estate escheats to the State.
Provisions Common to Testate and Intestate Succession (Articles 1017-1058)
Articles 1017-1058 of the Civil Code of the Philippines cover the Provisions Common to Testate and Intestate Succession, applying to both situations when a person dies with a will (testate succession) and when a person dies without a will (intestate succession).
I. Acceptance and Repudiation of Inheritance (Articles 1017-1034)
A. Acceptance of Inheritance
Article 1017: Inheritance can be accepted expressly or tacitly.
Express acceptance occurs when the heir explicitly declares their acceptance.
Tacit acceptance occurs when the heir acts in a way that implies they intend to accept the inheritance (e.g., taking possession of estate property).
Article 1018: Acceptance must occur after the death of the decedent and cannot be conditional or for a limited time.
Article 1019: Acceptance may be made personally or through an authorized representative.
B. Repudiation of Inheritance
Article 1020: An heir may also repudiate (reject) the inheritance. This repudiation must be made expressly.
Article 1021: The repudiation of an inheritance is irrevocable once made and is effective retroactively.
Article 1022: An heir who repudiates cannot transfer or assign the right to inherit before repudiating.
Article 1023: The repudiation must be made before the probate court, and creditors can oppose repudiation if it prejudices their rights.
Article 1024: Minors or incapacitated persons must have the assistance of their legal representative to accept or repudiate an inheritance.
Article 1025: Heirs cannot inherit if they repudiate the inheritance but later change their mind.
C. Effects of Acceptance and Repudiation
Article 1026: If there are several heirs, each may accept or repudiate their share independently.
Article 1027: If an heir repudiates, the share passes to other heirs entitled by law or will, according to the rules of intestate succession.
Article 1028: A repudiating heir cannot claim rights in the inheritance at a later date.
D. Prescription of Actions
Article 1030: The right to accept or repudiate inheritance is subject to prescription, meaning that there is a time limit within which the heir must make a decision. This time limit is typically 30 years under the Code.
II. Collation (Articles 1035-1041)
Article 1035: Collation is the process by which certain gifts or advances made by the decedent during their lifetime to heirs are taken into account when dividing the estate. This ensures fairness in the distribution.
Article 1036: Collation is required in both testate and intestate succession unless the decedent explicitly states otherwise.
Article 1037: Properties that are subject to collation include those given as dowries, donations, or other forms of advance inheritance.
Article 1038: Expenses related to the support, education, or treatment of an heir are not subject to collation.
Article 1039: The collation must occur unless the decedent waived the collation requirement through a will or other legal declaration.
Article 1040: If an heir refuses collation, their right to the inheritance may be affected.
Article 1041: Collation is designed to achieve fairness by considering the gifts already given and deducting them from the share that the heir would have received.
III. Partition and Distribution of the Estate (Articles 1042-1058)
A. Partition
Article 1042: Partition refers to the division of the decedent’s estate among the heirs. The division must respect the decedent’s wishes if there is a will, or otherwise follow the rules of intestate succession.
Article 1043: The heirs may agree on how to partition the estate or request the court’s assistance if disputes arise.
Article 1044: An heir may demand partition at any time unless a contrary agreement or provision in the will prevents it.
Article 1045: Partition may be postponed if all the heirs agree or if the will specifies a postponement period.
Article 1046: If there is a disagreement among heirs, the court can authorize partition and assign portions of the estate to each heir.
B. Effects of Partition
Article 1047: Once the partition is complete, each heir becomes the exclusive owner of their assigned portion of the estate.
Article 1048: Partition does not affect the rights of creditors of the decedent or the estate.
Article 1049: An heir who unduly receives more than their share must return the excess to the estate.
Article 1050: If the estate includes indivisible properties, such as a family home or a business, the heirs may agree to sell the property and divide the proceeds.
C. Warranties and Liabilities in Partition
Article 1051: If an heir receives defective property through partition, they can seek compensation from the estate or other heirs.
Article 1052: Heirs who receive the estate property must honor debts and obligations of the decedent.
Article 1053: Heirs may be held liable for any unpaid debts, but they are only responsible for debts up to the value of their share in the estate.
D. Partition by Will or Agreement
Article 1054: If the decedent left a will specifying how the estate should be partitioned, the heirs must follow the will’s instructions.
Article 1055: If the heirs agree to the terms of partition, their agreement takes precedence unless it conflicts with the law.
E. Rescission or Annulment of Partition
Article 1056: Partition can be rescinded if it is later discovered that an heir was defrauded or a significant error occurred during the partition process.
Article 1057: Partition can also be annulled if it violates the rights of any heir or creditor.
Article 1058: An action for the rescission or annulment of a partition must be brought within four years from the time the fraud, error, or violation was discovered.
Key Points in Provisions Common to Testate and Intestate Succession
Acceptance and repudiation of inheritance are crucial steps for heirs to determine their role in the succession process, and these decisions have significant legal implications.
Collation ensures fairness by considering the gifts already received by heirs, with a view to achieving equitable distribution.
Partition and distribution ensure that each heir receives their portion of the estate, either through agreement or court intervention. Partition may include warranties and protections to ensure fair dealing among heirs.
There are mechanisms to rescind or annul a partition if errors or fraudulent actions occurred.
Partition and Distribution of the Estate (Articles 1059-1105)
These articles cover the process, the rights and obligations of heirs, and the ways in which the partition can be executed and reviewed.
I. Partition of the Estate (Articles 1059-1073)
A. General Rule on Partition
Article 1059: The estate of the deceased can be divided among the heirs by partition. This division may occur through an agreement between the heirs, following the provisions of a will, or through a court order.
Partition refers to the process of dividing the estate’s assets and liabilities among the heirs entitled to inherit.
B. Time of Partition
Article 1060: Partition may be demanded by any heir once the death of the decedent occurs, unless the will explicitly provides for the postponement of partition.
Article 1061: In cases where partition is postponed, heirs are still entitled to their shares, but the actual division is delayed according to the will’s terms.
C. Partition by Agreement
Article 1062: If all heirs agree on the terms of partition, they may divide the estate by mutual consent, subject to the formalities required by law.
Article 1063: The agreement for partition must be in writing and registered with the proper registry of deeds if it involves real property.
D. Partition in Case of Disagreement
Article 1064: If the heirs cannot agree on the division of the estate, any of the heirs can petition the court for a judicial partition, which will determine the proper division of the estate.
Article 1065: In judicial partition, the court will consider the nature and value of the estate and make provisions for the just and equitable distribution among the heirs.
E. Indivisible Property
Article 1066: If the estate includes indivisible property (e.g., a family home or business), the heirs may agree to sell the property and divide the proceeds. If no agreement is reached, the court may order the sale or grant one heir exclusive ownership, with compensation to the others.
F. Right to Retain Ownership
Article 1067: The court may allow an heir who holds the majority of the shares or is in possession of a business or property to retain ownership, provided they compensate the other heirs for their shares.
Article 1068: Heirs may agree on other solutions, such as co-ownership or rental agreements, to avoid the forced sale of indivisible properties.
II. Distribution of the Estate (Articles 1074-1084)
A. Equal and Proportional Distribution
Article 1074: The estate must be divided equally among the heirs, following the rules of legitime (mandatory share for compulsory heirs) and testamentary provisions, unless specific conditions or agreements dictate otherwise.
Article 1075: Any debts, liabilities, or obligations of the estate must be settled before distribution occurs.
B. Division of Movable and Immovable Property
Article 1076: The estate is generally divided proportionally according to the value of both movable and immovable property. Heirs may receive shares in different types of property, as long as the value remains equal.
Article 1077: Heirs may agree to divide specific types of property (movable or immovable) to balance the distribution.
C. Payment of Debts
Article 1078: Before any partition or distribution, debts owed by the deceased must be paid. If the heirs proceed with partition without considering the debts, they are personally liable for their respective shares of the debts.
Article 1079: The court or the heirs themselves may establish a fund or reserve assets to cover potential liabilities that arise after partition.
III. Legal Warranties and Liabilities (Articles 1085-1090)
A. Warranties in Partition
Article 1085: An heir who receives property through partition guarantees its legitimacy and must protect the other heirs from any claims or defects.
Article 1086: If one heir receives defective property, they are entitled to compensation from the estate or other heirs.
B. Liability for Hidden Debts
​
Article 1087: If debts or liabilities are discovered after partition, all heirs are liable in proportion to their shares.
Article 1088: Heirs are also liable for any deficiencies in the estate if they took more than their rightful share, which must be corrected through compensation.
Article 1089: The law provides protection for heirs against claims or defects in the partitioned property for a period of ten years.
IV. Rescission or Annulment of Partition (Articles 1091-1105)
A. Grounds for Rescission
Article 1091: A partition may be rescinded or annulled if it is proven that fraud, mistake, coercion, or undue influence occurred during the partition process.
Article 1092: An action for rescission must be brought within four years from the time the fraud or mistake is discovered.
B. Remedies for Errors in Partition
Article 1093: If a partition is found to be unjust or erroneous, the court can correct the partition or order compensation for the aggrieved heirs.
Article 1094: The rescission or annulment of a partition does not affect the legal acts done before the rescission, as long as those acts were executed in good faith.
C. Rights of Third Parties
Article 1095: The partition does not prejudice the rights of third parties who have acquired the estate’s property in good faith.
D. Further Provisions on Partition
Article 1096: Heirs are encouraged to settle disputes and disagreements through compromise or mutual agreement rather than court action.
Article 1097: In case of judicial partition, the court’s decision must be executed according to the best interests of the estate and the heirs.
V. Key Points on Partition and Distribution of the Estate
1. Partition by Agreement: Heirs are allowed to divide the estate among themselves through mutual consent, provided that legal formalities are observed.
2. Judicial Partition: If the heirs cannot agree, the courts will step in to ensure an equitable division of the estate. Judicial partition takes into account both movable and immovable properties, as well as indivisible properties.
3. Warranties and Liabilities: Heirs are held liable for any debts, liabilities, or deficiencies in the estate, and must compensate other heirs for defective properties or errors in distribution.
4. Rescission and Annulment: Partitions can be challenged and rescinded if there is evidence of fraud, mistake, or undue influence. Heirs must bring actions within specific timeframes to protect their rights.
Disinheritance (Articles 915-921)
1. Who May Be Disinherited
Article 915 of the Civil Code provides that only compulsory heirs may be disinherited.
Compulsory heirs are those entitled to receive a fixed portion of the decedent’s estate, known as the legitime. These include the decedent’s legitimate children and descendants, legitimate parents and ascendants, and the surviving spouse.
The law gives these heirs a protected share of the estate, which the testator cannot deny unless there is valid legal ground for disinheritance. If a testator attempts to disinherit someone who is not a compulsory heir, the provision is unnecessary, as the testator has the freedom to exclude non-compulsory heirs from the will without any legal impediment.
Compulsory heirs:
1. Legitimate children and descendants (if there are no children, the ascendants inherit).
2. Legitimate parents or ascendants.
3. Surviving spouse.
The rule ensures the protection of the legitime, but it also permits the testator to remove a compulsory heir under strict circumstances.
2. Grounds for Disinheritance
Article 916 of the Civil Code states that disinheritance must be based on causes expressly mentioned by law.
The testator cannot disinherit a compulsory heir arbitrarily. The law enumerates specific grounds, which must be explicitly stated in the will. If the ground is not legally recognized or is not clearly established, the disinheritance is void. The law also requires that the cause must be real and proven; a false or fabricated cause for disinheritance would invalidate the provision.
Grounds for Disinheritance:
• The commission of a serious crime by the heir against the testator, the testator’s spouse, descendants, or ascendants.
• The heir’s refusal to support the testator.
• Mistreatment of the testator by the heir.
By restricting the grounds for disinheritance, the law protects the rights of compulsory heirs from being unjustly deprived of their inheritance.
3. Disinheritance of Children and Descendants
Article 919 of the Civil Code lists specific grounds for disinheriting children and descendants.
The children and descendants of the testator are among the closest relatives and therefore enjoy substantial protection under inheritance laws. However, when the relationship becomes seriously strained or when the heir’s actions are gravely offensive to the testator, the law allows the testator to disinherit them.
Grounds for disinheriting children include:
1. Physical or moral maltreatment of the testator.
2. Committing a serious crime against the testator or the testator’s spouse, ascendants, or descendants.
3. Leading a dishonorable or disgraceful life.
4. Abandoning the testator without justifiable cause.
These actions must be severe and significant, as disinheritance deprives the child or descendant of the right to inherit the legitime. The law strictly regulates the disinheritance process to avoid misuse.
4. Disinheritance of Parents
Article 920 of the Civil Code outlines the legal grounds for disinheriting parents.
Just as children may be disinherited for certain actions, parents can also be deprived of their inheritance rights by the testator. The law recognizes that in some instances, the relationship between a child and their parents may become so damaged that disinheritance is justified.
Legal grounds for disinheriting parents include:
1. Abandonment of their children or inducing them to live a corrupt or immoral life.
2. Attempting to take the life of the testator or of the testator’s spouse, descendants, or ascendants.
3. Refusal to support their child when legally required to do so.
The law reflects a moral obligation on the part of parents to care for and support their children, and failure to uphold this responsibility can result in disinheritance.
5. Disinheritance of Spouse
Article 921 of the Civil Code provides the grounds for disinheriting a spouse.
The relationship between spouses is deeply personal and legally protected. However, serious offenses by one spouse against the other can lead to disinheritance. The law allows a testator to disinherit their spouse for specific grounds that violate the duties of marriage.
Grounds for disinheriting a spouse include:
1. Adultery or concubinage.
2. Attempting against the life of the testator.
3. Maltreatment or serious insult by the spouse against the testator.
4. Unjustifiable refusal by the spouse to live with the testator.
These actions represent a breakdown of the marital bond, justifying the disinheritance of the offending spouse.
6. Effects of Disinheritance
Article 918 of the Civil Code establishes that when disinheritance is lawful, the heir loses all rights to the inheritance.
Disinheritance, when properly executed and based on legitimate grounds, results in the compulsory heir being treated as though they had predeceased the testator. This means that the disinherited heir receives no share of the estate, including the legitime. However, if the disinheritance is void—whether because the ground is not legally valid, or because it is unproven—the heir will still receive their share of the estate as though no disinheritance had been attempted.
Consequences of valid disinheritance:
• The disinherited heir is completely excluded from the estate.
• Their share of the estate passes to other heirs, such as siblings or other descendants.
• In some cases, the children of the disinherited heir may inherit in their place.
Succession & Foreign Nationals
Nationality Principle in Succession​
​
Heirs of Satramdas v. Sadhwani, et al.
G.R. No. 191447, February 4, 2013
​
The case involves a dispute over the succession of the estate of Satramdas, a decedent who was a foreign national. Satramdas died without a will while residing in the Philippines. His surviving heirs, including his spouse, children, and other relatives, sought to claim their shares of his estate in the Philippines. The issue revolved around whether Philippine law or the laws of Satramdas’ country of nationality (India) should govern the distribution of his estate.
The heirs of Satramdas, the petitioners, filed a petition for the settlement of his estate in the Philippines. They contended that under Philippine law, they should inherit from Satramdas’ estate.
The respondents, including some of Satramdas’ relatives, argued that the laws of India, the decedent’s country of nationality, should govern the distribution of his estate. They asserted that the decedent’s property rights and obligations, including his succession, should be governed by the Indian law, which they claimed did not recognize the automatic transfer of property to surviving heirs in the same manner as under Philippine laws.
Issue:
Whether the laws of the decedent’s nationality (Indian law) or Philippine law govern the succession of Satramdas’ estate.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of applying the laws of the decedent’s nationality (India) in governing the succession of his estate, following the principle of nationality as enshrined in Article 16 of the Civil Code of the Philippines.
Article 16 of the Civil Code of the Philippines states:
“The family and property relations of persons, and the forms and solemnities of marriage, shall be governed by the law of their nationality.”
The Court observed that the decedent was a national of India, and therefore, the Indian laws concerning inheritance, succession, and the distribution of property should apply to his estate.
The Court emphasized the principle of nationality in determining the applicable law for the estate of a foreign decedent, affirming that under the Philippine Civil Code, the law of the decedent’s nationality governs matters of inheritance when the decedent was not a Filipino citizen.
The Court clarified that Philippine law does not automatically apply in cases involving foreign nationals, and that Filipino courts must respect the laws of foreign nations in matters of succession. It was determined that if the decedent’s country of nationality (India) recognizes a specific rule for succession that is different from Philippine law, that rule should govern the distribution of the estate.
The Supreme Court also noted that local property laws (regarding real property situated in the Philippines) still apply, but for the succession itself, the decedent’s national law should prevail.
Legal Principle:
Nationality Principle in Succession: The laws of a decedent’s nationality govern succession, as per Article 16 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, unless local property laws provide otherwise.
Philippine courts will respect the personal laws of foreign nationals when it comes to the distribution of an estate, and the formalities and procedures of succession must be conducted in accordance with the law of the decedent’s nationality.
Disposition:
The Supreme Court upheld the application of Indian law to govern the succession of Satramdas’ estate and remanded the case to the appropriate lower court for further proceedings to determine the effect of Indian law on the distribution of his estate.