Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 101 views

    Singson Vs Lim

    Uploaded by

    Jillian Batac
    This document is a Supreme Court case from 1943 regarding the testate estate of Vicente Singson Pablo. The key details are: 1) Pablo died without descendants or ascendants, leaving a will distributing his properties. 2) Clause 8 of the will stated that any properties not otherwise disposed of should be distributed equally to all those entitled to them. 3) Pablo's brothers argued the nieces were not entitled to a share under clause 8 and the Civil Code, while the nieces argued certain properties were omitted from the partition. 4) The court affirmed the trial court's ruling that clause 8 evidenced Pablo's intent to avoid uncertainty and include all who would inherit intestate, including both brothers

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Singson Vs Lim

    Uploaded by

    Jillian Batac
    101 views2 pages
    This document is a Supreme Court case from 1943 regarding the testate estate of Vicente Singson Pablo. The key details are: 1) Pablo died without descendants or ascendants, leaving a will distributing his properties. 2) Clause 8 of the will stated that any properties not otherwise disposed of should be distributed equally to all those entitled to them. 3) Pablo's brothers argued the nieces were not entitled to a share under clause 8 and the Civil Code, while the nieces argued certain properties were omitted from the partition. 4) The court affirmed the trial court's ruling that clause 8 evidenced Pablo's intent to avoid uncertainty and include all who would inherit intestate, including both brothers

    Original Description:

    Succession

    Original Title

    Singson vs Lim

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is a Supreme Court case from 1943 regarding the testate estate of Vicente Singson Pablo. The key details are: 1) Pablo died without descendants or ascendants, leaving a will distributing his properties. 2) Clause 8 of the will stated that any properties not otherwise disposed of should be distributed equally to all those entitled to them. 3) Pablo's brothers argued the nieces were not entitled to a share under clause 8 and the Civil Code, while the nieces argued certain properties were omitted from the partition. 4) The court affirmed the trial court's ruling that clause 8 evidenced Pablo's intent to avoid uncertainty and include all who would inherit intestate, including both brothers

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    101 views2 pages

    Singson Vs Lim

    Uploaded by

    Jillian Batac
    This document is a Supreme Court case from 1943 regarding the testate estate of Vicente Singson Pablo. The key details are: 1) Pablo died without descendants or ascendants, leaving a will distributing his properties. 2) Clause 8 of the will stated that any properties not otherwise disposed of should be distributed equally to all those entitled to them. 3) Pablo's brothers argued the nieces were not entitled to a share under clause 8 and the Civil Code, while the nieces argued certain properties were omitted from the partition. 4) The court affirmed the trial court's ruling that clause 8 evidenced Pablo's intent to avoid uncertainty and include all who would inherit intestate, including both brothers

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    48627, Testate Estate of


    Singson Pablo. Vda. de Singson v.
    Vda. de Lim, 74 Phil. 109
    Republic of the Philippines
    SUPREME COURT
    Manila
    EN BANC
    February 19, 1943
    G.R. No. 48627
    TESTATE ESTATE OF VICENTE SINGSON PABLO, deceased. ROSALIA
    ROSARIO VDA. DE SINGSON, petitioner-appellee,
    vs.
    JOSEFINA F. VDA. DE LIM, oppositor-appellee,
    EMILIA FLORENTINO, ET AL., oppositors-appellees,
    EVARISTO SINGSON, ET AL., oppositors-appellants.
    M.H. de Joya and Evaristo Singson for appellants.
    Teofilo Mendoza and Vicente Paz for appellees.
    OZAETA, J .:
    Don Vicente Singson Pablo, a lawyer of Vigan, Ilocos Sur, died on April 15, 1938,
    without any descendant or ascendant, his nearest surviving relatives being his widow
    Doa Rosalia Rosario, four brothers, and four nieces, the children of a deceased sister.
    He left a will which was duly probated, clause 8 of which reads as follows:
    Octavo. Orderno y mando que todos mis bienes no dispuestos de otro modo en este
    testamento, se distribuiran en partes iguales a todos los que tienen derecho a ello.
    The widow, as administratrix, presented a project of partition in which the properties
    not disposed of in the will were adjudicated to the four brothers and the four nieces of
    the deceased "in the proportion provided in paragraph 8 of the will." The brothers,
    appellants herein, objected to the project of partition insofar as it includes the nieces
    of the deceased, on the ground that under clause 8 of the will, in relation to article 751
    of the Civil Code, they were not entitled to any share. The nieces also objected to the
    project of partition, alleging that certain other specified properties had been omitted
    therefrom, which formed part of the properties not disposed of and which under clause
    8 of the will "should be distributed in equal parts to all who are entitled thereto." The
    trial court sustained the contention of the nieces (appellees herein) and ordered the
    administratrix "to amend the project of partition so as to include therein the said
    properties and that all of those not disposed of in the will be adjudicated in equal parts
    to the brothers and nieces of the deceased."
    The only question raised in this appeal is the interpretation of clause 8 of the will
    above quoted. Said clause provides that "all of my properties not disposed of
    otherwise in this testament shall be distributed in equal parts to all who are entitled
    thereto." In this connection appellants invoke article 751 of the Civil Code, which
    provides that "a disposition made in general terms in favor of the testator's relatives
    shall be understood as made in favor of those nearest in degree."
    The trial court noted that the testator, who was a lawyer, did not use the word
    "relatives" in the clause in question. We do not need to decide here whether, had the
    testator used the word "relatives," the nieces would be excluded. The authorities differ
    on the interpretation of article 751. Some hold that under said article the nephews and
    nieces inherit by representation together with the brothers and sisters of the testator, as
    in legal succession; while others. Manresa among them, hold that said article excludes
    nephews and nieces when brothers and sisters survive. We think the testator, by
    referring to "all who are entitled thereto," instead of referring to his "relatives,"
    precisely meant to avoid the uncertainty of the interpretation of article 751 and to
    indicate his wish that the residue of his estate be distributed in equal parts to all who
    would have been entitled to inherit from him had he dies intestate.
    The order appealed from is affirmed, with costs. So ordered.
    Yulo, C.J., Moran, Paras and Bocobo, JJ., concur

    You might also like