SUCCESSION I.Successional system under Phil.

Law partial reservation Kinds of Succession: 1)compulsory 2)testamentary 3)intestate Compulsory 1)legitime def. 886 2)legitime inviolate 904 3)no contract, agreement, renunciation or compromise on legitime or inheritance 905 & 1347, Par. 2.Taedo v. CA, 252 SCRA 80 [1996] 4)kinds of compulsory heirs: primary / secondary /concurring 5) Combinations: 1) Legitimate children alone: of the estate divided equally (Art. 888) 2) Legitimate children and surviving spouse: legitimate children - of the estate; surviving spouse a share equal to that of one child (Art. 892, par. 2) 3) One legitimate child and surviving spouse: legitimate child of the estate; surviving spouse of the estate (Art. 892, par. 1) 4) Legitimate children and illegitimate children: legitimate children of the estate; illegitimate children each will get of share of one legitimate child (Art. 176,Family Code) 5) Legitimate children, illegitimate children, and surviving spouse: legitimate children of the estate; illegitimate children each will get of share of one legitimate child; surviving spouse a share equal to that of one legitimate child. The surviving spouses share is preferred over those of the illegitimate children which shall be reduced if necessary. (Art. 895) 6) One legitimate child, illegitimate children, and surviving spouse: legitimate child of the estate; illegitimate children each will get of share of the legitimate child; surviving spouse - of the estate. The surviving spouses share is preferred over those of the illegitimate children, which shall be reduced if necessary. (Art. 895) 7) Legitimate parents alone: of the estate (Art. 889) 8) Legitimate parents and illegitimate children: legitimate parents of the estate; illegitimate children of the estate (Art. 896) 9) Legitimate parents and surviving spouse: legitimate parents surviving spouse of Legitimate parents, surviving spouse: Legitimate parents illegitimate children surviving spouse 1/8 Surviving spouse alone: of the estate; the estate (Art. 893) illegitimate of the estate; of the estate; of the estate (Art. 899)

10) children, and

11)

 of the estate, (or 1/3 articulo mortis, falls (Art. 900, par. 1) 12)

If the marriage, being in under Article 900, par. 2) illegitimate children; of the estate; 1/3 of the estate illegitimate parents: the estate; of the estate (Art. 903)

14)

Surviving spouse and surviving spouse 1/3 illegitimate children (Art. 894) 13) Surviving spouse and surviving spouse of illegitimate parents Illegitimate children alone: of the estate (Art. 901) 15) Illegitimate parents alone:

of the estate (Art. 903) basic legitime: exceptions a) 894 b) 900, Par. 2 c) 903 7) legitimate children & descendants(representation) 8) adopted children 8.a SEC. 18. Succession. In legal and intestate succession, the adopter(s) and the adoptee shall have reciprocal rights of succession without distinction from legitimate filiation. However, if the adoptee and his/her biological parent(s) had left a will, the law on testamentary succession shall govern. 8.b no representation Teotico v. Del Val, 13 SCRA 406 [1965]; Sayson v. CA, 205 SCRA 321 [1992] 8.c Can an adopted child inherit ab intestato from his biological parents In Re Adoption of Stephanie Garcia (454 SCRA 541 [2005]). Obiter: Under Art. 189(3) of FC & Sec. 18 of RA 8552, the adoptee remains an intestate heir of the biological parent. 9) surviving spouse when concurring with legitimate children 6) legitimate parents & ascendants 3 rules [Arts. 889-890] The nearer exclude the more remote. Division by line. Equal division within the line. 11) illegitimate children 2:1 11.a Representation Art. Art. 992) 12) preterition 12.a meaning of preterition 508 SCRA 177 [2006] 12.b who can be preterited 12.c Effect of preterition Nuguid v. Nuguid, 17 SCRA 449 [1966] Acain v. IAC, 155

(Art. 176, FC) 902 (compare with

Seangio v. Reyes,

SCRA 100 [1987]

12.d when preterition can Only upon testators JLT Agro v.Balasag, [2005] 13) reserva troncal 13.a Purpose 13.b Requisites 13.c Process 13.d Parties 13.d.1 Sibling as mediate source 13.d.2 Should Origin and Reservista belong to related to mediate source? 13.e Nature 13.f Rights and 13.g. Extinguishment 13.d How to detect a RT a) Is an ascendant descendant? (Be if a minor or infant

be determined death 453 SCRA 211

different lines? 13.d.3. Should Reservatario be

Obligations

inheriting from a particularly careful dies).

b) Is it by compulsory/ intestate succession? c) Did the descendant acquire it by gratuitous title from another ascendant or brother/sister? 14) disinheritance & unworthiness: grounds & effect 15) representation Testamentary 1) can never impair legitime 2) two kinds of wills & requirements (common & special) Cases: Noble v. Abaja, 450 SCRA 265 [2005] Attestation clause need not state compliance with language requirement.

Matias v. Salud, L-10751, 62:848 (thumbmark) Garcia v. Lacuesta, 90:489 (cross) Nera v. Rimando, 18:450 (in presence of) Barut v. Cabacungan, (21:461) what agent must write

6/23/58 / Payad v.Tolentino,

Cagro v. Cagro, 92:1032; reiterated in Azuela v. CA, 487 SCRA 119 [2006] place of signing of attestation clause Ortega v. Valmonte, 478 SCRA 247 [2005] Discrepancy in date of attested will & acknowledgment date does not invalidate will. Guerrero v. Bihis, 521 SCRA 394 [2007] notarization outside place of notarys commission Cruz v. Villasor, 54 SCRA 31[1973] (one of witnesses as notary) Garcia v. Vasquez, 32 SCRA 489 [1970] Art. 808 mandatory.

Alvarado v. Gaviola (226 SCRA 348 [1993]) liberal construction of Art. 808 Caneda v. CA (222 SCRA 781 [1993]) proper application of Art. 809 Azuela v. CA, 487 SCRA 119 [1982] Failure of attestation clause to state number of pages is a fatal flaw. Labrador v. CA (184 SCRA 170 [1990]) Holographic will may be dated anywhere 3) requirement of probate 2 kinds of probate (post mortem & ante mortem) 1) Probate mandatory (Guevara v. Guevara, 74:479; Seangio v. Reyes, 508 SCRA 177 [2006], Heirs of Lasam v. Umengan, 510 SCRA 496 [2006]) 2) Probate conclusive as to due execution or formal validity: i) that testator of sound & disposing mind; ii) iii) witnesses; iv) that will genuine. Gallanosa v. Arcangel, 83 SCRA 675 [1978] (reiterated in Nufable v. [1999]; Dorotheo v. CA, 320 SCRA 12 [1999]) 3) rules for probate of holographic i) Gan v. Yap, 104:509; SCRA 16 [1982] ii) Codoy v. Calugay, 312 Azaola v. Singson,109:10 accretion 1015-1023 - requisites accretion happens in succession substitutions Palacios v. Ramirez, 111 PCIB v. Escolin, 56 SCRA 6) conditions, terms, modes (disposicin captatoria, 7) Revocations/Ways of Revoking [Arts. 828-834] Intestate 1) Four basic rules of intestacy 2) who are intestate heirs 2.a) Various combinations that his consent was that will signed with not vitiated; required number of

Nufable, 309 SCRA 692

will (Art. 811) Rodelas v. Aranza, 119 SCRA 333 [1999] / [1960] testamentary & intestate

SCRA 704 266 [1974] caucin Muciana)

[1982]

3) 4) 5)

6) 996

[Arts. 979-1014] representation in intestacy various kinds of children 992 the successional bar Corpus v. Corpus, 85 Diaz v. IAC, 150 SCRA 645 concurrence of surviving Santillon v. Miranda, 14

2 instances (the 2-step process) SCRA 567 [1978] [1987]; 182 SCRA 427[1990] spouse & 1 legitimate child SCRA 563 [1965] brothers/sisters/nephews/ SCRA 201 [2000]) sisters Manuel v. exclude uncles/aunts

7) nieces

concurrence of spouse &

(Armas v. Calisterio, 330 8) a) illegitimate brothers/ Ferrer, 247 SCRA 476; b) nephews/nieces Bacayo v. Borromeo, 145 SCRA 986. c) Full- & half-blood siblings: c.1 testamentary succession c.2 intestate succession Capacity to Succeed: Arts 1024-1028/1032

equal (Art. 848) 2:1 (Art. 1006)

Collation Money claims should be filed vs. estate. This is mandatory (Union Bank v. Santibaez, 452 SCRA 228 [2005]) Acceptance & Repudiation: Arts. 1041-1057 Definitions 1. will 783 2. holographic will 810 3. inheritance 776 4. substitution 857 5. caucin Muciana 3 instances: 879 / 882 / 885 6. accretion 1015 7. representation 970 8. legitime 886 9. codicil 825 10. devisee/legatee 782 11. heir 782 12. dependent relative revocation 832 / Molo v. Molo, 90:37 The rule is established that where the act of destruction is connected with the making of another will so as fairly to raise the inference that the testator meant the revocation of the old to depend upon the efficacy of the new disposition intended to be substituted, the revocation will be conditional and dependent upon the efficacy of the new disposition; and if for any reason, the new will intended to be made as a substitute is inoperative, the revocation fails and the original will remain in full force. (Gardner, pp. 232, 233) 13. scriptura / disposicin captatoria Art. 875 Enumerations grounds for opposing probate 839 2) grounds for disinheritance 919-921 3) ways of revoking a will - 830

4) grounds for unworthiness -

1032