Succession Reviewer - baixardoc

WILLS AND SUCCESSIONWILLS AND SUCCESSION

I.I. COCONCNCEPEPT OT OF SF SUCUCCECESSSSIOIONN

Art. 774. Succession is aArt. 774. Succession is a mode of mode of acquiacquisitionsition by virtue of whichby virtue of which the property,the property,

rights and obligations to the extent of the value of the inheritancerights and obligations to the extent of the value of the inheritance, of a, of aperson areperson are transmitted through his deathtransmitted through his death to another or others eitherto another or others either by his willby his will

or by operation of lawor by operation of law. (n). (n)

IIII.. KIKINDNDS OF SS OF SUCUCCECESSSSIOION:N:

A.A. TETESTSTAMAMENENTATARYRY

Art. 779. Testamentary succession is that whichArt. 779. Testamentary succession is that which results from the designation of results from the designation of an heir, made in a will executed in the form prean heir, made in a will executed in the form prescribed by lawscribed by law. (n). (n)

B.B. LEGLEGAL OAL OR INR INTETESTSTATATEE

Art. 960. Legal or intestate succession takes place:Art. 960. Legal or intestate succession takes place:

11.. IIf a pf a peerrssoonn dies without a willdies without a will, or with, or with a void willa void will, or one which has, or one which hassubsequently lostsubsequently lost its validityits validity;;

22. . WWhhen en ththe we wiillll does not institute an heirdoes not institute an heir to, orto, or dispose of all thedispose of all thepropertyproperty belonging to the testator. In such case, legal succession shallbelonging to the testator. In such case, legal succession shalltake place only with respect to the property of which the testator has nottake place only with respect to the property of which the testator has notdisposed;disposed;

33. . IIf f tthhee suspensive condition attached to the institution of heirsuspensive condition attached to the institution of heirdoedoes s not not haphappenpen or is not fulfilled, or if theor is not fulfilled, or if the heir dies before theheir dies before thetestatortestator, , oror repudiates the inheritancerepudiates the inheritance, there being no substitution,, there being no substitution,and no right of accretion takes place;and no right of accretion takes place;

4. 4. WhWhen ten the hhe heir eir insinstittituteuted isd is incapable of succeedingincapable of succeeding, except in cases, except in casesprovided in this Code. (912a)provided in this Code. (912a)

CC.. MMIIXXEEDD

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

D.D. CONTRCONTRACTUACTUAL (supeAL (superseded by Arrseded by Art. 84 of the Famit. 84 of the Family Code)ly Code)

III.III. TESTATESTAMENTAMENTARY SRY SUCCESUCCESSIONSION

A.A. WILLSWILLS

1.1. DDEFEFININITITIOIONN

11

Art. 783. A will is an act whereby a person is permitted, with theArt. 783. A will is an act whereby a person is permitted, with the formalitiesformalitiesprescribed by lawprescribed by law,, to control to a certain degreeto control to a certain degree the disposition of this estate,the disposition of this estate,toto take effect after his deathtake effect after his death. (667a). (667a)

B.B. CHARACTERISTICHARACTERISTICS OF CS OF WILLSWILLS

1.1. PurPurely stely statuatutortory, fory, formalmal

Art. 783Art. 783

2.2. FreFree ae and nd volvoluntuntaryary

Art. 839. The will shall be disallowed in any of the following cases:Art. 839. The will shall be disallowed in any of the following cases:

1. 1. If the foIf the formalirmalities reqties required buired by law havy law have not been ce not been compliomplied withed with;;

2. 2. If the tesIf the testator was itator was insanensane, or otherw, or otherwise mentise mentally inally incapacapable of makible of making a willng a will,,at the time of its at the time of its execution;execution;

3.3. If it was execIf it was executed thruted through foough force or underce or under duressr duress, or the infl, or the influence of uence of fear, or threats;fear, or threats;

4. 4. If it was If it was proprocurcured by ed by undundue and imprue and impropeoper pressr pressure and influre and influenuence,ce,on the part of the beneficiary or of on the part of the beneficiary or of some other person;some other person;

5. 5. If the sIf the signaignature of tture of the testhe testator waator was procus procured by frred by fraud;aud;

6.6. If the If the teteststatator or acacteted d by mistby mistakake e or or didid d nonot t inintetend thand that t ththe e ininststrurumement nt hehesigned should be his will at the time of affixing his signature thereto. (n)signed should be his will at the time of affixing his signature thereto. (n)

3.3. EssEssententialially rly revoevocabcablele

Art. 828. A will may beArt. 828. A will may be revoked by the testator at any time before his deathrevoked by the testator at any time before his death..Any waiver or restriction of this right is Any waiver or restriction of this right is void. (737a)void. (737a)

4.4. TestaTestator mutor must havst have testae testamentamentary capary capacitycity

a.a. NoNot prt prohohibibitited bed by lay laww

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

b.b. 18 18 yeyearars os old ld or or ovoverer

Art. 797. Persons of Art. 797. Persons of either sex under eighteen years of age cannoteither sex under eighteen years of age cannot make amake awill. (n)will. (n)

c.c. Of sOf sounound ad and nd disdispoposinsing mg mindind

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

22

5.5. DispoDispositiosition mun must bst be me mortis ortis causacausa

Art. 777. The rights to the succession areArt. 777. The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of thetransmitted from the moment of thedeathdeath of the decedent. (657a)of the decedent. (657a)VITUG VS CA 183 SCRA 755VITUG VS CA 183 SCRA 755

Facts:Facts: This case is a chapter in an earlier suit decided by this Court This case is a chapter in an earlier suit decided by this Court 1 involving the probate1 involving the probateof the two wills of the late Dolores Luchangco Vitug, who died in New York, U.of the two wills of the late Dolores Luchangco Vitug, who died in New York, U.S.AS.A.na.naminming g priprivatvate e resresponpondendent t RowRowena ena FauFaustistino-no-CorCorona ona exeexecucutritrix. x. In In our our saisaidddecision, we upheld the appointment of Nenita Alonte as co-special administrator of decision, we upheld the appointment of Nenita Alonte as co-special administrator of Mrs. Vitug's estate with her (Mrs. Vitug's) widower, petitioner Romarico G. Vitug,Mrs. Vitug's estate with her (Mrs. Vitug's) widower, petitioner Romarico G. Vitug,pending probate.On January 13, 1985, Romarico G. Vitug filed a motion asking forpending probate.On January 13, 1985, Romarico G. Vitug filed a motion asking forauthority from the probate court to sell certain shares of stock and real propertiesauthority from the probate court to sell certain shares of stock and real propertiesbelonging to the estate to cover allegedly his advances to the estate in the sum of belonging to the estate to cover allegedly his advances to the estate in the sum of P667,731.66, plus interests, which he claimed were personal funds.Rowena CoronaP667,731.66, plus interests, which he claimed were personal funds.Rowena Coronaopposed the motion to sell on the ground that the same funds withdrawn fromopposed the motion to sell on the ground that the same funds withdrawn fromsavings account No. 35342-038 were conjugal partnership properties and part of savings account No. 35342-038 were conjugal partnership properties and part of the estate, and hence, there was allegedly no ground for reimbursement. She alsothe estate, and hence, there was allegedly no ground for reimbursement. She alsosought his ouster for failure to include the sums in question for inventory and forsought his ouster for failure to include the sums in question for inventory and for"concealment of funds belonging to the estate."Vitug insists that the said funds are"concealment of funds belonging to the estate."Vitug insists that the said funds arehis exclusive property having acquired the same through a survivorship agreementhis exclusive property having acquired the same through a survivorship agreementexecuted with his late wife and the bank on June 19, 1970. The agreement provides:executed with his late wife and the bank on June 19, 1970. The agreement provides:

We hereby agree with each other and with the BANK OF AMERICAN NATIONALWe hereby agree with each other and with the BANK OF AMERICAN NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS ASSOCIATION (hereinafter referred to as the BANK), that all TRUST AND SAVINGS ASSOCIATION (hereinafter referred to as the BANK), that allmoney now or hereafter deposited by us or any or either of us with the BANK in ourmoney now or hereafter deposited by us or any or either of us with the BANK in our

join joint t savinsavings current accoungs current account t shalshall be l be the propertthe property y of all of all or both of or both of us and us and shalshall l bebepayable to and collectible or withdrawable by either or any of us during our payable to and collectible or withdrawable by either or any of us during our lifetime,lifetime,and after the death of either or any of us shall belong to and be the sole property of and after the death of either or any of us shall belong to and be the sole property of the survivor or survivors, and shall be payable to and collectible or withdrawable bythe survivor or survivors, and shall be payable to and collectible or withdrawable bysuch survivor or survivors.such survivor or survivors.

We further agree with each other and the BANK that the receipt or check of either,We further agree with each other and the BANK that the receipt or check of either,any or all of us during our lifetime, or the receipt or check of the survivor orany or all of us during our lifetime, or the receipt or check of the survivor orsurvivors, for any payment or withdrawal made for our above-mentioned accountsurvivors, for any payment or withdrawal made for our above-mentioned accountshall be valid and sufficient release and discharge of the BANK for such payment orshall be valid and sufficient release and discharge of the BANK for such payment orwithdrawal.withdrawal.

The trial courts upheld the validity of this agreement and granted "theThe trial courts upheld the validity of this agreement and granted "themotion to sell some of the estate of Dolores L. Vitug, the proceeds of motion to sell some of the estate of Dolores L. Vitug, the proceeds of which shall be used to pay the personal funds of Romarico Vitugwhich shall be used to pay the personal funds of Romarico Vitug in the totalin the totalsum of P667,731.66 ... ."sum of P667,731.66 ... ."

On the other hand, the Court of Appeals, in the petition for certiorari filed by theOn the other hand, the Court of Appeals, in the petition for certiorari filed by thehehererein in prprivivatate e rerespsponondedentnt,, heheld ld ththat at ththe e ababovove-e-ququototed ed susurvrvivivororshshipipagreement constitutes a conveyance mortis causa which "did not complyagreement constitutes a conveyance mortis causa which "did not complywith the formalities of a valid will as prescribed by Article 805 of the Civilwith the formalities of a valid will as prescribed by Article 805 of the Civil

33

Code," and secondly, assuming that it is a mere donation inter vivos, it isa prohibited donation under the provisions of Article 133 of the Civil Code.

In his petition, Vitug, the surviving spouse, assails the appellate court's ruling on thestrength of our decisions in Rivera v. People's Bank and Trust Co.and Macam v.Gatmaitan in which we sustained the validity of "survivorship agreements" andconsidering them as aleatory contracts.

The petition is meritorious.

The conveyance in question is not, first of all, one of mortis causa, whichshould be embodied in a will. A will has been defined as "a personal, solemn,revocable and free act by which a capacitated person disposes of hisproperty and rights and declares or complies with duties to take effect after hisdeath."

In other words, the bequest or device must pertain to the testator.

In this case, the monies subject of savings account No. 35342-038 were inthe nature of conjugal funds In the case relied on, Rivera v. People's Bank and Trust Co., we rejected claims that a survivorship agreement purportsto deliver one party's separate properties in favor of the other, but simply,their joint holdings:

... Such conclusion is evidently predicated on the assumption that Stephenson wasthe exclusive owner of the funds-deposited in the bank, which assumption was inturn based on the facts (1) that the account was originally opened in thename of Stephenson alone and (2) that Ana Rivera "served only ashousemaid of the deceased." But it not infrequently happens that a persondeposits money in the bank in the name of another; and in the instant case it alsoappears that Ana Rivera served her master for about nineteen yearswithout actually receiving her salary from him. The fact that subsequentlyStephenson transferred the account to the name of himself and/or AnaRivera and executed with the latter the survivorship agreement inquestion although there was no relation of kinship between them but onlythat of master and servant, nullifies the assumption that Stephenson was theexclusive owner of the bank account. In the absence, then, of clear proof to thecontrary, we must give full faith and credit to the certificate of deposit which recitesin effect that the funds in question belonged to Edgar Stephenson and Ana Rivera;that they were joint (and several) owners thereof; and that either of them couldwithdraw any part or the whole of said account during the lifetime of both, and thebalance, if any, upon the death of either, belonged to the survivor.

In Macam v. Gatmaitan, 18 it was held:

xxx xxx xxx

This Court is of the opinion that Exhibit C is an aleatory contract whereby,according to article 1790 of the Civil Code, one of the parties or bothreciprocally bind themselves to give or do something as an equivalent for

4

that which the other party is to give or do in case of the occurrence of anevent which is uncertain or will happen at an indeterminate time. Asalready stated, Leonarda was the owner of the house and Juana of the Buickautomobile and most of the furniture. By virtue of Exhibit C, Juana would becomethe owner of the house in case Leonarda died first, and Leonarda would become theowner of the automobile and the furniture if Juana were to die first. In this mannerLeonarda and Juana reciprocally assigned their respective property to one anotherconditioned upon who might die first, the time of death determining the event uponwhich the acquisition of such right by the one or the other depended. This contract,as any other contract, is binding upon the parties thereto. Inasmuch as Leonardahad died before Juana, the latter thereupon acquired the ownership of the house, inthe same manner as Leonarda would have acquired the ownership of theautomobile and of the furniture if Juana had died first.

Neither is the survivorship agreement a donation inter vivos, for obviousreasons, because it was to take effect after the death of one party.Secondly, it is not a donation between the spouses because it involved noconveyance of a spouse's own properties to the other.

The validity of the contract seems debatable by reason of its "survivor-take-all" feature, but in reality, that contract imposed a mere obligationwith a term, the term being death. Such agreements are permitted by theCivil Code.

Under Article 2010 of the Code:

ART. 2010. By an aleatory contract, one of the parties or both reciprocallybind themselves to give or to do something in consideration of what theother shall give or do upon the happening of an event which is uncertain, orwhich is to occur at an indeterminate time.

nder the aforequoted provision, the fulfillment of an aleatory contractdepends on either the happening of an event which is (1) "uncertain," (2)"which is to occur at an indeterminate time." A survivorship agreement,the sale of a sweepstake ticket, a transaction stipulating on the value of currency, and insurance have been held to fall under the first category, while acontract for life annuity or pension under Article 2021, et sequentia, hasbeen categorized under the second. In either case, the element of risk ispresent. In the case at bar, the risk was the death of one party and survivorship of the other.

The conclusion is accordingly unavoidable that Mrs. Vitug havingpredeceased her husband, the latter has acquired upon her death a vestedright over the amounts under savings account No. 35342-038 of the Bank of America. Insofar as the respondent court ordered their inclusion in the inventoryof assets left by Mrs. Vitug, we hold that the court was in error. Being the separateproperty of petitioner, it forms no more part of the estate of the deceased.

5

6. Testator must have animus testandi – purpose is to transfer title via atestamentary disposition in contemplation of death, to take effectupon testator’s death.

C. INTERPRETATION OF WILLS

1. In favor of validity

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

2. In case of ambiguities

Art. 789. When there is an imperfect description, or when no person or propertyexactly 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 anuncertainty arises upon the face of the will, as to the application of any of itsprovisions, 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)

a. Latent or intrinsic ambiguity – that which does not appear on the face of thewill and is discovered only by extrinsic evidence;

1. When there is an imperfect description of the heir, legatee, or devisee;2. When there is an imperfect description of the gift being given;3. When only one recipient is designated but it turns out, there are two or more

who fit the description;

b. Patent or extrinsic ambiguity – that which appears on the face of the willitself; by examining the provisions itself, it is evident that it is not clear;

How to cure ambiguities:

a. By examining the will itself;b. Extrinsic evidence such as written declarations of the testator (oral

declarations not allowed since contrary to the dead mans statute)

3. Interpretation of words

Art. 790. The words of a will are to be taken in their ordinary and grammaticalsense, unless a clear intention to use them in another sense can be gathered, andthat other can be ascertained.

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

4. Interpretation as a whole

6

Art. 791. The words of a will are to receive an interpretation which will give toevery expression some effect, rather than one which will render any of theexpressions inoperative; and of two modes of interpreting a will, that is to bepreferred which will prevent intestacy. (n)

5. Separability of invalid provisions

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

6. After-acquired property

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

7. Extent of interest covered

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

The entire interest of the testator in the property is given, not more not less;

D. LAW GOVERNING FORMa. As to the time of execution

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. (n)

Kinds of validity

A. Extrinsic validity – refers to the forms and solemnities neededa. What must be observed is the law in force at the time the will is

executed;b. What law of the land must be observed depends:

i. If the testator is a Filipino, he can observe Philippine laws; or thelaws of the country where he may be; laws of the country wherehe executes the will;

ii. If the testator is an alien who is abroad, he can follow the law of his domicile; or his nationality; or Philippine laws; or where heexecutes the will;

iii. If the testator is an alien in the Philippines, he can follow the lawof his nationality or the laws of the Philippines, since heexecutes the will here;

B. Intrinsic validity – refers to the legality of the provisions in an instrument

7

a. Successional rights are governed by the law in force at the TIME OF THE DECEDENT’S DEATH;

b. Laws that must be observed depends: under Philippine Law:i. National law of the decedent; law of his country or nationality;

regardless of the place of execution and the place of death;ii. RENVOI DOCTRINE: referring back to the forum of the problem

1. Where the conflict rules under the decedent’s national lawrefers the matter to the law of the domicile;

iii. Intestate and testamentary succession both with respect to:1. The order of succession2. The amount of successional rights3. And the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions

Shall be regulated by the national law of the person whosesuccession is under consideration, whatever may be the natureof the property, and regardless of the country where saidproperty may be found.

b. As to the place of execution

Art. 17. The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instrumentsshall be governed by the laws of the country in which they are executed.

Art. 810. A person may execute a holographic will which must be entirelywritten, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is subjectto no other form, and may be made in or out of the Philippines, and neednot be witnessed. (678, 688a)

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

Art. 816. The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippinesif made with the formalities prescribed by the law of the place in which heresides, or according to the formalities observed in his country, or inconformity with those which this Code prescribes. (n)

Art. 817. A will made in the Philippines by a citizen or subject of anothercountry, 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 thelaw of his own country, shall have the same effect as if executed according tothe laws of the Philippines. (n)

Art. 818. Two or more persons cannot make a will jointly, or in the sameinstrument, either for their reciprocal benefit or for the benefit of a thirdperson. (669)

Art. 819. Wills, prohibited by the preceding article, executed by Filipinos ina foreign country shall not be valid in the Philippines, even thoughauthorized by the laws of the country where they may have been executed. (733a)

8

E. LAW GOVERNING CONTENT

a. As to time

Art. 2263. Rights to the inheritance of a person who died, with or without awill, before the effectivity of this Code, shall be governed by the Civil Codeof 1889, by other previous laws, and by the Rules of Court. The inheritance of those who, with or without a will, die after the beginning of the effectivity of thisCode, shall be adjudicated and distributed in accordance with this new body of lawsand by the Rules of Court; but the testamentary provisions shall be carried outinsofar as they may be permitted by this Code. Therefore, legitimes, betterments,legacies and bequests shall be respected; however, their amount shall be reduced if in no other manner can every compulsory heir be given his full share according tothis Code. (Rule 12a)

b. As to successional rights

Art. 16. Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of thecountry where it is stipulated.

CAYETANO VS LEONIDES 129 SCRA 524

On January 31, 1977, Adoracion C. Campos died, leaving her father,petitioner Hermogenes Campos and her sisters, private respondent NenitaC. Paguia, Remedios C. Lopez and Marieta C. Medina as the survivingheirs. As Hermogenes Campos was the only compulsory heir, he executed anAffidavit of Adjudication under Rule 74, Section I of the Rules of Court whereby headjudicated unto himself the ownership of the entire estate of the deceasedAdoracion Campos.

Eleven months after, on November 25, 1977, Nenita C. Paguia filed apetition for the reprobate of a will of the deceased, Adoracion Campos,which was allegedly executed in the United States and for herappointment as administratrix of the estate of the deceased testatrix.Inher petition, Nenita alleged that the testatrix was an American citizen atthe time of her death and was a permanent resident of 4633 DitmanStreet, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.;

As a general rule, the probate court's authority is limited only to theextrinsic validity of the will, the due execution thereof, the testatrix'stestamentary capacity and the compliance with the requisites orsolemnities prescribed by law. The intrinsic validity of the will normally comesonly after the court has declared that the will has been duly authenticated.However, where practical considerations demand that the intrinsic validity of thewill be passed upon, even before it is probated, the court should meet the issue.(Maninang vs. Court of Appeals, 114 SCRA 478).

the private respondents have sufficiently established that Adoracion was,at the time of her death, an American citizen and a permanent resident of

9

Succession Reviewer - baixardoc

Documents

Transcript of Succession Reviewer - baixardoc