SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS

(QUESTIONS)
1. Can a will executed by a foreigner abroad be probated in the
Philippines although it has not been previously probated and
allowed in the country where it was executed?
Section 1, Rule 73 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
provides that if the decedent is an inhabitant of a foreign
country, the RTC of the province where he has an estate may take
cognizance of the settlement of such estate. Sections 1 and 2 of Rule 76
further state that the executor, devisee, or legatee named in the
will,or any other person interested in the estate, may, at any time after
the death of the testator, petition the court having jurisdiction to have the
will allowed, whether the same be in his possession or not, or is lost or
destroyed. The rules do not require proof that the foreign will has
already been allowed and probated in the country of its execution.

2.

Sometime in 1964, Pino died leaving behind a parcel of

land in Northern Samar to his wife, Nina and three children,
namely, Cesar, Ester and Rudy. On 1972, Cesar died leaving
behind his wife and son, Nardo. Subsequently, Nina, and Ester
sold the said land to Spouses Floralde. It was provided in the
deed of sale that the shares of Nardo and Rudy, being minors
at the time of the sale, will be held in trust by the vendee and
will paid upon them reaching the age of 21. In 1986, Rudy
received the sum of 1,143 pesos from the Spouses Floralde
representing his share from the proceeds of the sale of the
property. It was only in 1988, that Nelson learned of the sale
from his uncle, Rudy. He signified his intention to redeem the
property and filed a complaint for redemption against the
Spouses Floralde.

Was the sale made by a legal guardian (Nina) in behalf of the minors
(Nardo and Rudy) binding upon them?
With regard to the share of Rudy, the contract of sale was valid, U n d e r
Section 1, Rule 96 A guardian shall have the care and custody of the
person of his ward, and the management of his estate, or the
management of the estate only. x xx Indeed, the legal guardian only
has the plenary power of administration of the minors property.
It does not include the power of alienation which needs
judiciala u t h o r i t y. T h u s , w h e n
N i n a , a s l e g a l g u a r d i a n o f p e t i t i o n e r R u d y, s o l d t h e latters
pro indiviso share in subject land, she did not have the legal authority to
do so. Accordingly, the contract as to the share of Rudy was
unenforceable. However, w h e n h e r e c e i v e d t h e p r o c e e d s o f
t h e s a l e , h e e ff e c t i v e l y r a t i fi e d i t . T h i s a c t o f ratification
rendered the sale valid and binding as to him.

With respect to petitioner Nardo, the contract of sale was void.

He was aminor at the time of the sale. Nina or any and all the other coowners were not his legal guardians; rather it was his mother who if
duly authorized by the courts, could validly sell his share in the
property. Consequently, Nardo retained ownership over their undivided
share in the said property. However, Nardo can no longer redeem the
property since the thirty day redemption period has expired and thus he
remains as co-owner of the property with the Spouses Floralde.
3. Who is an incompetent person?
Under Section 2, Rule 92 of the Rules of Court, persons who,
though of sound mind but by reason of age, disease, weak mind
or other similar causes are incapable of taking care of themselves
and their property without outside aid, are considered as
incompetents who may properly be placed under guardianship.

4. What are the issues that may be resolved by the probate

court?
-Approve the sale of properties of a deceased person by his
prospective heirs before final adjudication;
-To determine who are the heirs of the decedent;
-The recognition of a natural child;
-The status of a woman claiming to be the legal wife of the
decedent; the legality
of disinheritance of an heir by the testator; and
-To pass upon the validity of a waiver of hereditary rights.

5. Can a special proceeding be joined with ordinary civil actions?

No, by express provision of Sec. 5, Rule 2 which requires that the joinder
of causes of action must not involve special civil actions or actions
governed by special rules, (which includes special proceedings)

6. Is a person convicted by final judgment and/or out on a bail

entitled to the writ of habeas corpus?
No. The high prerogative writ of habeas corpus was devised and exists
as a speedy and effectual remedy to relieve persons from unlawful
restraint. Its object is to inquire into the legality of ones detention, and if
found illegal, to order release of the detainee.
It is a well-settled rule that the writ will not issue where the person in
whose behalf the writ is sought is out on bail, or is in the custody of an
officer under process issued by a court or judge or by virtue of a judgment
or order of a court of record, and that the court or judge had jurisdiction to
issue the process, render judgment, or make the order.

7. May a wife secure a writ of habeas corpus to compel her

husband to live with her in their conjugal home?

No. Marital rights including coverture and living in conjugal dwelling

may not be enforced by the extra-ordinary writ of habeas corpus.
A writ of habeas corpus extends to all cases of illegal confinement or
detention, or by which the rightful custody of a person is withheld from
the one entitled thereto. It is available where a person continuous
unlawfully denied of one or more of his constitutional freedom. It is
devised as a speedy and effectual remedy to relieve persons from
unlawful restrainment, as the best and only sufficient defense of personal
freedom.

8. John died leaving property in Cebu City. At the time of his

death he was a resident living in Cebu although he is a citizen
of Canada. After his death his wife moved to Northern Samar.
Where would you file the case for Settlement of estate of
Deceased Person?
The case would then be filed in the RTC of Cebu, as a CFI to the exclusion
of all other courts.

9. Daisy is a resident of Canada. At the time of her death in

Cataman N. Samar during a vacation, where she left some real
estate property woth Php100,000 her two children filed in the
MTC for settlement of the estate. If you were the judge, how
would you rule? If the two children filed in separate RTCs.
Which case should prevail?
The case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The case should be filed
in the RTC having jurisdiction over the property of the decedent whose
estate is subject of the case, coupled with the fact that probate, testate
and intestate proceedings are under the jurisdiction of the RTC as
provided in Rule 73 Section 1 of the Rules of Court.
Where the proceedings were instituted in two courts and the question
of venue is seasonably raised, the court in which the proceeding was first
filed has exclusive jurisdiction to resolve the issue.

10.
Spouses Ermac and Mariquit both died leaving a parcel
of land as the only property to be inherited by heirs. MEDELO:
grandson filed petition for summary settlement of the estate.
ERMAC: (one of the sons of the deceased) moved for
reconsideration of the order of settlement claiming the land as
belonging to him and his wife.
Is the approval of the project of partition valid despite
the claim of ERMAC in a separate civil action?
The policy of the law is to terminate proceedings for the settlement
of the estate of the deceased persons with the least loss of time.
Not proper to delay the summary settlement of a deceased person just
because an heir or a third person claims that certain properties do not
belong to the estate; properly ventilated in an independent action and
probate court should proceed to the distribution of the estate (subject to
the results of suit). Appropriate step: proper annotation of lis pendens.

11.
Carlos Gurrea left a will naming Pijuan as executor. Mrs.
Gurrea opposed the probate proceedings, saying that as
widow, she claims a right of preference under Sec. 6, Rule 78
of the Revised Rules of Court. Mrs. Gurrea also moved that in
light of the suspension of the support and annulment case by
reason of Carloss death, support previously awarded to her
should be continued pending the final determination of the
case.
a. Should Mrs. Gurrea be appointed as administratrix of the
estate?
NO. None of the conditions stated in the Rules obtains in the case at
bar. Carlos Gurrea has left a will, so it cannot be said that he has died
intestate. Said document names Pijuan as executor thereof, and it is not
claimed that he is incompetent therefor. It may not be amiss to note that
the preference accorded by the aforementioned provision of the Rules of
Court to the surviving spouse refers to the appointment of a regular
administrator or administratrix, not to that of a special administrator, and
that order appointing the latter lies within the discretion of the probate
court, and is not appealable.

12.
What are the contents of petition for letters of
administration?
13.
Umipig was appointed special administrator of the
estate of Placida Mina. DEGALA is complaining claiming the
UMIPIG should be removed as special administrator for:
Adverse interest; stranger to the estate, not being a
beneficiary in the will; failed to include some property in the
inventory; failed to pay taxes due from the estate; failed to
render accounting
Should Umipig be removed as special administrator
based on the claims?
No. the removal of an administrator lies with the appointing courts
discretion. Sufficiency of any ground for removal should be determined by
the appointing court. Adverse interest: any interest of the previous
administrator is exclusively personal, Umipig can have nothing to do with
it; Not beneficiary: can represent his father as trustee under the will;
Other grounds: not willful omissions