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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 64 views

    Bonilla V Barcena

    Uploaded by

    Clyde Tan
    The Supreme Court ruled that while a deceased person cannot sue in court, their heirs can substitute them in ongoing legal cases to pursue claims until completion. In this case, Fortunata Barcena filed a land title case before dying. The court erred in dismissing the case instead of allowing her minor children and husband to substitute for her, as Article 777 of the Civil Code states inheritance rights are immediately transmitted to heirs upon death. The heirs had a legitimate interest in the property and should have been permitted to continue the case on behalf of their deceased mother/wife.

    Copyright:

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

    Bonilla V Barcena

    Uploaded by

    Clyde Tan
    64 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that while a deceased person cannot sue in court, their heirs can substitute them in ongoing legal cases to pursue claims until completion. In this case, Fortunata Barcena filed a land title case before dying. The court erred in dismissing the case instead of allowing her minor children and husband to substitute for her, as Article 777 of the Civil Code states inheritance rights are immediately transmitted to heirs upon death. The heirs had a legitimate interest in the property and should have been permitted to continue the case on behalf of their deceased mother/wife.

    Original Title

    Bonilla-v-Barcena.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that while a deceased person cannot sue in court, their heirs can substitute them in ongoing legal cases to pursue claims until completion. In this case, Fortunata Barcena filed a land title case before dying. The court erred in dismissing the case instead of allowing her minor children and husband to substitute for her, as Article 777 of the Civil Code states inheritance rights are immediately transmitted to heirs upon death. The heirs had a legitimate interest in the property and should have been permitted to continue the case on behalf of their deceased mother/wife.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    64 views1 page

    Bonilla V Barcena

    Uploaded by

    Clyde Tan
    The Supreme Court ruled that while a deceased person cannot sue in court, their heirs can substitute them in ongoing legal cases to pursue claims until completion. In this case, Fortunata Barcena filed a land title case before dying. The court erred in dismissing the case instead of allowing her minor children and husband to substitute for her, as Article 777 of the Civil Code states inheritance rights are immediately transmitted to heirs upon death. The heirs had a legitimate interest in the property and should have been permitted to continue the case on behalf of their deceased mother/wife.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    BONILLA v BARCENA

    June 18, 1976 | Martin, J. | Vesting of Succession Rights

    PETITIONER: ROSALIO BONILLA (a minor) SALVACION BONILLA (a minor) and PONCIANO BONILLA (their father) who represents
    the minors
    RESPONDENTS: LEON BARCENA, MAXIMA ARIAS BALLENA, ESPERANZA BARCENA, MANUEL BARCENA, AGUSTINA NERI, widow of
    JULIAN TAMAYO and HON. LEOPOLDO GIRONELLA of the Court of First Instance of Abra
    SUMMARY: Fortunata Barcena instituted an action for quieting of title over a parcel of land in Abra. A few months after instituting
    the suit, Fortunata dies. The opposing party moves for the case to be dismissed on grounds that a dead person has no legal
    capacity to sue. The counsel for plaintiff asks that Fortunata be substituted by her minor children and her husband but the court
    dismissed the case on the ground that a dead person cannot be a real party in interest and has no legal capacity to sue. The SC
    disagrees saying that while it is true that a person who is dead cannot sue in court, he can be substituted by his heirs in pursuing
    the case up to its completion. The SC also invokes Art. 777 of the CC which provides "that the rights to the succession are
    transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent." The right of the heirs to the property of the deceased vests in them
    even before judicial declaration of their being heirs in the testate or intestate proceedings. When Fortunata Barcena, therefore,
    died her claim or right to the parcels of land in litigation was not extinguished by her death but was transmitted to her heirs upon
    her death. Her heirs have thus acquired interest in the properties in litigation and became parties in interest in the case.
    DOCTRINE: Art. 777 of the CC provides that the rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the
    decedent. From the moment of the death of the decedent, the heirs become the absolute owners of his property, subject to the
    rights & obligations of the decedent, & they cannot be deprived of their rights thereto except by the methods provided for by law

    FACTS: 2. Under Section 16, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court "whenever


    1. March 31, 1975: Fortunata Barcena instituted an action a party to a pending case dies ... it shall be the duty of his
    to quiet title over certain parcels of land in Abra. attorney to inform the court promptly of such death ...
    2. May 9, 1975: defendants filed a written motion to and to give the name and residence of his executor,
    dismiss the complaint, but before the hearing of the MTD, administrator, guardian or other legal representatives."
    the counsel for the plaintiff moved to amend the Complied with by the Atty. When he applied for the
    complaint to include certain allegations therein. The deceased substitution in the case but he was denie by
    motion to amend the complaint was granted. the court. (this was a grave error on the part of the court)
    3. August 4, 1975: the defendants filed another MTD the 3. Article 777 of the Civil Code provides "that the rights to
    complaint on the ground that Fortunata Barcena is dead the succession are transmitted from the moment of the
    and, therefore, has no legal capacity to sue. death of the decedent."
    4. August 14, 1975: MTD was heard. Counsel for the a. From the moment of the death of the decedent, the
    plaintiff confirmed the death of Fortunata Barcena, and heirs become the absolute owners of his property,
    asked for substitution by her minor children and her subject to the rights and obligations of the
    husband, the petitioners herein; but the court after the decedent, and they cannot be deprived of their
    hearing immediately dismissed the case on the ground rights thereto except by the methods provided for
    that a dead person cannot be a real party in interest and by law
    has no legal personality to sue. 4. The moment of death is the determining factor when
    ISSUE: W/N Fortunata can be substituted by her minor the heirs acquire a definite right to the inheritance
    children and husband? YES (see ration 1 and 2) whether such right be pure or contingent.
    W/N Fortunatas minor children and husband are real parties a. The right of the heirs to the property of the
    in interest in said case. YES (see ration 3 and 4 deceased vests in them even before judicial
    RATIO: declaration of their being heirs in the testate or
    1. While it is true that a person who is dead cannot sue in intestate proceedings.
    court, he/she can be substituted by his/her heirs in b. When Fortunata Barcena died her claim or right to
    pursuing the case up to its completion. the parcels of land in litigation was not
    a. The records of this case show that the death of extinguished by her death but was transmitted to
    Fortunata Barcena took place on July 9, 1975 while her heirs upon her death. Her heirs have thus
    the complaint was filed on March 31, 1975. This acquired interest in the properties in litigation and
    means that when the complaint was filed on March became parties in interest in the case.
    31, 1975, Fortunata Barcena was still alive, and RULING: IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the order of the respondent Court
    dismissing the complaint in Civil Case No. 856 of the Court of First Instance of
    therefore, the court had acquired jurisdiction over
    Abra and the motions for reconsideration of the order of dismissal of said
    her person. complaint are set aside and the respondent Court is hereby directed to allow
    b. If thereafter she died, the Rules of Court prescribes the substitution of the minor children, who are the petitioners therein for
    the procedure whereby a party who died during the the deceased plaintiff and to appoint a qualified person as guardian ad
    litem for them.
    pendency of the proceeding can be substituted.

    You might also like