NAVARRO CIVIL LAW REVIEW TRANSCRIPT

I. SUCCESSION
a. Define
i. Is a mode of acquisition by virtue of which the estate of a person is transmitted to
his heirs or others in accordance with this code
b. BASIC PRINCIPLE
i. PRIMACY of the WILL
ii. Mitigated by the provisions on the law of LEGITIME
iii. LIGITIME – must be respected (the law provides certain part of the estate to the
compulsory heirs)
iv. Testacy is preferred over intestacy
c. THEORY
i. SUCCESSION is the extension of the right of ownership
ii. It is based on the right of the family (basis is family co-ownership)
iii. Death is essential either to have intestate or intestate succession
d. DEATH (777)
i. What is death
ii. When is a person considered dead?
1. A person is considered death when there is a total irreversible cessation of
bodily function
2. The most permanent thing – death
3. No TEMPORARY DEATH
4. It is from this moment that there is a transmission of successional right
5. Lorenzo v. posadas
a. I give all my properties to my nephews 10 years after my death
b. Basis of determining the value of the taxes due.
Only from the time of death.
6. Locsin v. CA
a. During the lifetime – almost all properties were disposed of
b. Nephews and nieces said – konti na lng natira
i. They are only entitled to properties available at the time of
death
ii. But as to compulsory heirs – there must be collation of all
properties disposed of
e. PRESUMPTIVE DEATH
i. Ordinary
1. After an absence of 10 years/5 years (75 years old) – a person is
considered dead for purposes of succession – pwede na paghati hatian
ang estate
2. Deemed to have occurred at the end of the period – wait for the period to
expire
3. Ex. 10 years
Once you reach the 10th year – he is presumed dead? At the end of the
period
ii. Extraordinary
1. Absence of 4 years – if there is great danger
a. On board of ships or airplane which sank or disappear
 b. Those who took part in WAR
c. Those in danger of death under other circumstances
i. Such as a MINER
2. Deemed to have occurred at the start of the period
a. 4 years – wait at the end of the period of 4 th year
b. He is presumed dead – at the start of the 4 year
i. January 1, 2020 – boarded a plane then missing na ang
plane – on January 1, 2024 – he is presumed dead but he
died on January 1, 2020 not on 2024
f. ELEMENTS
i. Subjective – heirs (compulsory, voluntary, legal)
ii. Objective – inheritance
g. KINDS OF SUCCESSION
i. Intestate
ii. Testate
iii. Mixed (Partly by will and by operation of law)
1. No more contractual succession- because it allows the parties to give to
each other properties during lifetime

h. HEIRS, LEGATEE, DEVISEE

i. Difference
1. HEIRS – preterition (854)
a. The omission of one or some compulsory heirs in the direct line will
result to the annulment of heirs
2. Legatee or Devisee – in case of preterition (properties given are respected
unless in officious) but if in officious only the excess will be returned
3. Example:
a. Mr. X has one Legitimate child S. He died with a will with only 2
provisions. 1. I give my friend F 10 thou pesos; 2. I give the rest of
my estate to my Friend G. X dies leaving an estate of 120 thou
pesos.

S his son was not mentioned in the will. Also, he gave nothing to S
by way of donation during his lifetime.

This is a classic case of PRETERITION.

Apply Art. 854.

In the case of F – he is a legatee – hence, his share will be

respected. As long as not in officious. If it exceeds the free portion.

120K – (Legitime of X is 60K – 60K is the free portion)

The 10K given to F – can be accommodated from the free portion

May excess pang 50K. Kanino ibibigay ang 50K? kay G o kay S?
 It should be given to S. because if there is preterition the institution
of heir is annulled. As if he was not instituted.

4. When is a person considered HEIR?

a. When a person is given a fractional or aliquot part of the estate
i. I give my friend ½ of my estate
ii. I give him the rest of my estate
b. LEGATEE
i. When he is given a determinate personal property
1. A give my friend my car
c. DEVISEE
i. Determinate real property

5. When it is better to be an HEIR?

a. In the case of after acquired properties

b. These are the properties in 793 – property acquired after the
execution of the will and before the death of the testator
c. RULE:
i. As if the testator posses them at the time of the making of
the will
ii. They do not go to the testamentary heir
iii. Except if it is expressly appears in the face of the will the
intention that he want to give them to the testamentary
beneficiary
d. EX.
i. Mr. X. during the making of his will he has 5 CARS. He said
in his will that “I gave all my cars to my friend F”. later on he
dies. Mr. F is entitled to 5 CARS.

Supposing after making of the will, Mr. X acquired 4, 995

more cars. How many cars F will be entitled to? 5 cars.
Applying the general rule.

But if the testator says, I gave F my 5 cars as well as all of

my other cars I may have acquired.

F will be entitled to 5000 cars because it appears in the face

of the will his intention is to give even the after acquired car.
This pertains, however to legacies and devises. Not to
instituted heirs.
II. WILL
a. Is a declaration whereby a person is permitted, with formalities prescribed by law, to
control to a certain extent the disposition of his properties after his death.
i. It is strictly PERSONAL ACT
ii. Cannot be delegated – even with SPA
iii. Testator is permitted to give part of his property to specific class or a cause
iv. Allowed to delegate the disposition to a person (786)
 1. I leave the distribution to my executor
2. But cannot give a blanket authority to his executor
3. However, if he refers to by name (785)
a. Determination of the portion when referred to by name cannot be
delegated to other person
b. It must be specific.
v. AMBIGUITY in the will
1. Patent
a. Obvious. Apparent from reading the disposition
b. I give my house in pasay to my 2 brothers. Who? Vague.
c. Extrinsic – may found in other found in the will itself (jis
d. Intrinsic – excluding oral declaration of the testator (mga sabi sabi
or hearsay)
2. Latent
a. Not obvious

III. TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY AND INTENT

a. REQUIREMENTS
i. AGE – 18 years old (no maximum age)
ii. SOUND MIND – soundness of mind PRESUMPTION IS A PERSON IS OF
SOUND MIND
1. The testator is publicly known to be insane one month or less before the
making of the will
2. SUPERVENING INCAPACITY does not invalidate an effective will
3. Art 799 par 2
a. Testator at the time of making of his will must:
i. KNOW THE NATURE OF THE ESTATE TO BE DISPOSED
OF;
1. He remember he owns valuable painting
2. He knows he has bank account (not necessarily the
exact amount)
ii. THE PROPER OBJECT OF HIS BOUNTY; and
iii. THE CHARACTER OF THE TESTAMENTARY ACT.
b. Its is not required that the MIND OF THE TESTATOR be in full
possession of all his reasoning faculties, or that his mind be wholly
unbroken, unimpaired, or unshattered by disease or injury or other
causes.
i. Believing in angel or dwarf – is not a sign of unsoundness of
mind
ii. Mere beliefs of these unseen being does not render a
person incapacitated to make a will
iii. ALCOHOLIC/DRUG ADDICT – does not incapacitate the
testator to make a will as long as they meet the basic
requirements at the time of the making of the will
c. CAPACITY – must be possessed at the time of execution of the will
IV. FORMS OF WILLS 804
a. REQUIREMENTS FOR A WILL
i. ALL WILLS must be in writing
 1. No specific materials to be used. (holographic will)
a. Paper, wall, leaves, balak ng pakwan
2. VIDEO RECORDING – not valid (NO ORAL WILLS)
ii. In a LANGUAGE known to the testator
1. If written in English – but testator do not know how to speak English, but
the lawyer translates and explain everything the content of the will to the
testator fully – STILL is an INVALID WILL
a. The law is not satisfied to Mere interpretation as no matter how
good the interpreter is, it is subject to certain nuisances of language
is always lost in the process of interpretation
b. Not necessary the will shall contain a statement that the testator
does not know how to speak English.
iii. SUBSCRIBED (805)
1. Every will (except holographic will) must:
a. be subscribed at the end thereof
b. by the TESTATOR HIMSELF or
c. the TESTATOR’s NAME written by some other person,
d. in his PRESENCE, and
e. by his EXPRESS DIRECTION and
f. ATTESTED and SUBSCRIBED
g. By THREE CREDIBLE witnesses
h. In the presence of the testator and of one another.

If the testator signed all 4 pages of 5 pages will and forget to sign the last
page – it is an INVALID WILL

2. WHERE IS THE END OF THE WILL?

a. It refers not to the physical end but to the LOGICAL END –
meaning after the LAST TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITION.

Ex. 10 dispositions – after no. 10th disposition is the end of the will

3. SIGNATURE
a. Testator himself or testators name written by some other person in
his presence and by his express direction – must concur BOTH
b. EX. If the testator is JUAN SANTOS and the person requested to
write his name is PEDRO SANTIAGO – PEDRO should right the
TESTATOR’s NAME

JUAN SANTOS by Pedro Santiago – valid

By Pedro Santiago only – not valid (must be TESTATOR’s name)

JUAN SANTOS only – valid – as long as the reqs above is stated in

the attestation clause..

4. KINDS of signature
a. Initial
 b. Thumbmark
i. Big toe
ii. Kiss mark
1. As long as he intended to use such mark
c. PEN NAME
d. Screen name
e. Putol ang Daliri – nickname (putol) valid
SIGNATURE – rootword “SIGN” signum – mark
5. WITNESSES
a. 3 credible witnesses
i. No need to prove the credibility – probity, competent and
honesty
ii. It only means qualified and competent
iii. There can be more than 3 witnesses basta not less than 3
b. The person requested to sign by the testator shall sign also all the
pages except the LAST on the left margin
i. If signed on the right margin, bottom, top? – no problem
ii. As long as the marginal signature is there and the 3
witnesses
iii. EX. A 5 pages will perfectly be executed – however,
signature of the testator or one of the witnesses cannot be
found?
1. ECASIANO v. ECASIANO
2. There was a missing signature in the page 3 of the
original of the 5 pages will.one of the witnesses
3. Presented the duplicate original - perfect
4. Forgery/fraud and Undue influence – SC not
convinced – mutually exclusive – they cannot exist
together
5. It was only due to inadvertence of simultaneous lifting
of the pages
6. But the ruling must be applied on a case to case
basis.
6. NUMBERING
a. Wherever it is placed – its ok provided that all the pages
b. Numerical, Arabic – correlatively numbered (1,2,3)
c. What if page 1 is not numbered? – allowed, no doubt that is the
page 1.
7. Can the WITNESSES sign ahead of the testator? YES! If there is no
interruption – if all of them signed in one single an interrupted continuous
occasion – VALID
8. The testator invited the witnesses to his resident and ask the witnesses to
sign – then after he told the witnesses to meet again on another date
because he will decide if he will continue with the will – NOT VALID
9. Mere silence or failure to object of the testator in the signing – not the
express direction within the meaning contemplated by law
10. However – it is not necessary to be ORAL – lung tumango – OKAY na xa.
 11. LAWYER AND THE WITNESSES signed in the other room – not valid
12. Lawyer pinaencode ung will – however pagbalik patay na ung testator –
not allowed – signing requires CONSCIOUSNESS
13. BUT, if they sign within the close proximity so long as they can see each
other signing the will
b. NOTARY PUBLIC – not required to be present during the signing
c. 805 – MATTERS TO BE STATED in the ATTESTATION CLAUSE
i. Number of pages used
ii. The fact the testator signed in the presence xxxx
iii. Signed the will in all the pages thereof in the presence of one another
1. One essential requirements is not stated? – if what is missing can be
found in another part of the will – still valid
2. No need to introduce extrinsic evidence
3. NOT STATED “the witnesses signed in the presence of the testator and of
one another” – NOT VALID- presence is required – presence of one
another signing
d. WHEN IS THERE PRESENCE?
i. When there is close physical proximity and the parties are situated in relation to
each other in such a way that there is no physical obstruction which would
prevent one from seeing the other by simply turning his gaze in proper direction
1. The law does not require that they must see each other sign
2. The law only requires that they could have seen each other signed there
being no physical obstruction by simply turning his gaze towards the
direction
3. BLIND – can use other senses
a. Will shall be read TWICE to him; once by the subscribing witnesses
and again by the notary public
4. ARSUELA CASE
a. Witnesses did not sign in the attestation clause (attestation - act of
the witnesses not by the testator)
b. 5 pages will
c. 1-4 pages – signed by the testator (MARGINAL signature)
d. 5th page – no sign by the testator - only the witnesses signed–
VALID
e. Testator has nothing to do with the attestation clause – even if he
failed to sign – will is still allowed
f. But if the 3 witnesses did not sign below attestation clause – not
allowed – because– absence of the signature in the attestation
clause negates the participation of the witnesses CAGRO v.
CAGRO (EXN: Art. 809)
g. ARSUELA v. CA case – marginal signature and signature in the
attestation clause is a separate and distinct requirement – absence
of one, renders the will void. (best example of grossly defective will)
h. CIVIL CASE – liberal interpretation
5. NOTARY PUBLIC
a. A will must be acknowledged in a notary public
b. Notary public need not be present during the execution of the will
c. The notary public – authorize to act within its jurisdiction
 d. NP – not required to maintain a copy of the will – confidentiality
purposes (1 copy to the COC – to the national archived)
e. Not required to acknowledge in the presence of another
f. If one of the 3 witnesses is the NP who notarized the will – NOT
VALID – it assumes 2 separate personality – there must be 4 in this
case
g. SPECIAL RULES – PWD
i. Testator is DEAF or DEAF MUTE (art 807)
1. Personally, read the will by 2 persons
2. Testator will designate who will read
3. Communicate the contents of the will in some
practicable manner
ii. BLIND
1. 2 readings
2. Once by one of the witnesses and
3. By notary public by whom the will was acknowledged
a. PAG ONCE lng binasa – invalid – purpose is to
avoid fraud
iii. ILLITIRATE
1. No provision
2. But the provision for blind may be applicable
iv. ALVARADO v. GABIOLA
1. Testator is blind
2. Ang nagbasa ay ung lawyer na gumawa ng will
3. It was allowed by the court
4. Because while the lawyer is reading the will all the
witnesses and notary public was present and each
have a copy of the will
5. After reading – the testator said that it was his will
6. The court said the there is a substantial compliance
with the requirements
v. ART 809 – doctrine of liberal interpretation
V. HOLOGRAPHIC WILL
a. REQUIREMENTS
i. Entirely written
ii. Signed by the hand of the testator himself
iii. Dated (GR: Complete date; EXP: Month and Year is sufficient – in the absence
of bad faith, forgery, or fraud)
1. Date may be placed anywhere –
2. BLIND – can make a HW – as long as he knows how to write
b. PROBATE OF HW
i. At least one witness who knows the handwriting and signature of the testator
ii. IF CONTESTED – at least three witnesses shall be required
iii. In the absence of any competent witnesses – EXPERT WITNESSES may be
resorted to
iv. ASUALA vs SINGSON – reqs of 3 witnesses is merely directory not mandatory
1. The availability of 3 witness – not in the control of the petitioner
2. That’s why expert witnesses is resorted to
 v. HW cannot be probated unless you can present a copy or photocopy of the HW
vi. The testator may sign the HW with his nickname, pen name, screen name
vii. For insertion, alteration, cancellation – must use the FULL SIGNATURE of the
testator – usual costumary signature
viii. Additional disposition – must be signed and dated
ix. Where should the sign be place? – at the end after the last testamentary
disposition (812)

Date: October 1, 2020

I gave everything to JOSE SANTOS

Signed Pedro Santos

Addl
I gave 10K to Maria santos
Addl
I gave my house to Juan Espolin
Additional is not valid – the law requires that they should be dated and signed
However, it does not affect the validity of the first disposition and the will.

Suppose the first disposition is signed, and the 2nd is signed and dated, both are
valid – it is deemed that they are executed at the same time.
Pero kapag may kanya kanyang petsa and not signed, the law cannot assume
that they were made at the same time
x. AUTHENTICATION
1. Must be authenticated by full signature
xi. INSERTION
1. If a 3rd person made an insertion without the knowledge and consent of
the testator- simply ignore the insertion – HW is still valid
2. If with the K and C – the will is valid, but the insertion is invalid
3. Insertion by 3rd person with K and C and authenticated by the testator with
date and sign – the WHOLE WILL is invalid – violates the principle that a
will must be entirely written, dated and signed by the testator itself
4. Insertion is made simultaneously in the making of the will – entire will is
void – it must be entirely written by the testator

Intent of the testator is the primordial consideration – change of heart

VI. APPLICABLE LAW

a. FILIPINOS
i. As long as they are in the PH, they can only follow one LAW – the CC
b. FILIPINOS ABROAD
i. Law of the place of the execution – lex loci celebrationis – art 15 and 17
ii. In accordance to the formalities required by the civil code
c. ALIEN in the PH
i. PH LAW
ii. Laws of his own country
d. ALIEN ABROAD
i. Law of his nationality
ii. Law of his domicile
iii. Lex loci celebrationis
iv. Law of the PH
1. If X is a citizen of Germany, domiciled in France, who is in JAPAN as a
tourist, living in the ph – can make a will in accordance to the 4 laws.
e. JOINT WILL
i. KAPAG FILIPINO KA KAHIT SAANG LUPALOP KA NG MUNDO you can never
make a valid JOINT WILL – even valid in the country of execution
1. H and W are husband and wife. Executed a joint will in brazil. Brazil
allowed joint will – the will is void in PH.
2. If W is a Brazilian – H is a Filipino – while in brazil made a joint will – valid
for W – void for H
3. If both Brazilians, make a joint will in brazil – can we recognize? VALID
(wala taung pake)
4. If H and W both Brazilians, make a JW in the PH – supposing brazil allows
JW – there are 2 views:
a. VOID – contrary to public policy because it was made in ph
b. VALID – allowed in PH for foreigners to make a will in accordance
to their law
f. INTRINSIC VALIDITY
i. Provisions of the will – always national law of the decedent (art 1039)
1. Art 16 – order of succession
2. Amount of successional rights
3. Intrinsic validity of testamentary provision
4. Art 1039 – capacity to succeed
ii. No matter what the testator said in his will – it will always be the national law of
the decedent – hapon always hapon
g. WITNESSES TO WILL
i. Sound mind
ii. 18 yrs of age or more
iii. Able to read and write
iv. Not deaf, mute, or numb
v. Domiciled in ph
vi. Not convicted of falsification, perjury, or false testimony
1. Article 823
a. If there is a legatee or devise in the will
b. Given to one of the witnesses to that will
c. Or to his parents, spouse or child
d. That is L or D is VOID as far as the above is concerned
e. If A, B and C, are witnesses and testator give 50M to A, the will is
VALID – but the legacee is VOID
f. Reason – remove any temptation on the part of the witnesses to
testify falsely
 g. Unless there are 3 other competent witnesses present in the
making of the will
h. Same if one is instituted as heir – temptation to testify falsely
i. Exclusive enumerations
j. Grandfather – not included
2. CODICILE and INCORPORATION by REFERENCE
a. CODICILE – supplement or addition whereby provisions in an
earlier will is added to, alter or explained – there must be an
existing will
b. Same formalities – notarial or HW codicile
c. HW codicil can be alter by Notarial codicil and vise versa
3. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
a. For convenience of testator
b. No need to list long list of properties
i. Requisites
1. Must be already in existence
2. Clearly describe the doc
3. Must be establish by clear and convincing evidence
4. The paper or doc must be signed by testator and
witnesses each page
ii. Is there an incorporation by reference in HW?
1. Yes – d the law does not prohibit
4. Art 827 – should never be used in incorporation testamentary provisions in
the will itself
VII. REVOCATION OF WILL
a. Basic prerogative of the testator
b. WILL is essentially revocable – for whatever reason of the testator
i. WAYs of revoking
1. By implication of LAW – by operation of law
a. Legal separation
b. Preterition
c. Creditor
d. Transformation – loss of the thing
e. Unworthiness
f. Bad faith marriage
g. void marriage
2. By codicil or another will expressly revoking previous will
a. Inconsistencies
3. Physical act of destruction coupled with intend to revoke
a. Burning – ok lng kahit edges lng nasunog (sufficient to revoke)
b. Tearing – slightest tear is ok
c. Cancelling – crossing out
d. Obliterating - erasing
i. Exclusive
ii. Cramping and throwing it
4. It is possible that the testator retained several copies – however he does
not have to retrieve all the copies
 5. If the testator changes his mind after cancelling his will – cannot restore
validity by simply putting the piece together – subjectively complete by
throwing in the floor
6. But if the testator in the process of tearing the will not thrown yet thrown –
can be restored because it is not subjectively complete
ii. DOCTRINE OF DEPENDENT RELATIVE REVOCATION
1. If the T revokes a will with the present intention of making a new one
immediately and as a substitute – but unable to make a new will – it is
presumed that the T prefer that his old will to intestacy.
a. Revocation based on false or illegal cause however is VOID
b. Art 833 – cause of revocation must be stated in the will however
iii. REPUBLICATION AND REVIVAL
1. Republication – act of testator
a. By simply executing a codicil to that will
b. By reproducing those provisions in a subsequent will
c. If forms that are void – republication – simply copy to a new will
i. Effects of republication – it is as if the will was made at the
time of the first execution
2. Revival – Law
a. Art 837
i. IF THE FIRST WILL EXPRESSLY REVOKED BY 2ND WILL
– FORGET REVIVAL
ii. IF 1ST WILL IMPLIEDLY REVOKED BY 2ND WILL- REVIVAL
IS POSSIBLE BY A 3RD WILL REVOKING 2ND WILL – 1ST
WILL IS REVIVED BY THE 3RD WILL
VIII. ALLOWANCE AND DISALLOWANCE
a. Probate is mandatory – if a person dies leaving a will
i. By reason of public policy
ii. To protect the interest of the testator and the heir
iii. Probate is imprescriptible – no time limit
1. 3 matters than can be inquired into by the probate court
a. PROBATE PROPER – validity of the will
i. Capacity
ii. Identity
iii. Due execution
1. XPN: when a testamentary provision is clearly void –
and probate would be a waste of time
2. Nuguid vs Nuguid -provisions is not effective because
of Preterition
3. Nepomuceno vs CA
a. Provisions in favor of the mistress –
b. During probate proper – the will is VALID but
the provisions in favor of the mistress is VOID
c. CA – is correct – the provision in favor of the
mistress is not subject of probate
4. PROBATE is postmortem or ante mortem
5. Probate during lifetime and after the death of testator
b. NOT proper for the probate court to inquire on the intrinsic validity
 b. UNPROBATED will – has no effect
c. Once a will has been allowed – finality – conclusive as to its due execution –
i. Mercado v. Santos
1. Wife died – husband presented the will – the court allowed – 16 mos later
the relatives of the wife instituted a criminal proceeding against the
husband – there was a falsification – the court said it is not anymore
allowed – due execution
ii. Ravadilla v CA
1. Provisions not subject to compromised agreement
2. It is the intention of the testator
IX. GROUNDS FOR DISALLOWANCE – 839
a. EXCLUSIVE – no other grounds
i. Force and intimidation
ii. Undue influence
1. Revilla v. CA
a. Matandang binata – closest relative is nephews and nieces who are
full-blood brothers and sisters
i. Made a will – probated during his lifetime
ii. Divided fair and square
iii. 1/10 of my estate each– e 9 lng sila – saan napunta ung 1
part – for the maintenance of a chapel in Pangasinan
iv. After death – the eldest nephew with a suppose 2 nd will
v. In the 2nd will – all estate gave the eldest everything
vi. During lifetime – the eldest take control of don cayetano
vii. Undue influence – to make the old man sign the 2nd will
b. Man is a social well-being – interaction subject
c. As long as we are able to manifest our own will – no undue
influence
d. Mere inequality of distribution does not mean undue influence
iii. Calde vs.Ca
1. Kaso ng katangahan
2. Will presented for probate
3. All witness were asked an identical questions- how many pens were used
to signed the will – all of them answered only one – while it was obvious
that there are different pens used by the testator – the will was disallowed
b. INSTITUTION OF HEIRS
i. Valid – even no instituted heirs
ii. It is not essential to include the complete name and surname – it is sufficient to
determine the identity of the heir by some events or circumstance
iii. If the institution is so vague – disposition in favor of unknown person – VOID
1. It should be merge to the mass of estate and given to the legal or intestate
heirs
2. CLASS OR A CAUSE – OK yan
a. I leave 50 million to the street children of manila
3. EQUAL DIVISION- art 846
a. Heirs instituted without designation of shares will inherit EQUALLY
b. But the legitime should always be protected
c. X instituted A-b-c as an heirs, X no CH, estate is 120K, distribute
 i. 40k each – equal division
1. But A is a compulsory heir – 846 not applicable
2. A – 60K (legitime) ½ of estate
3. A, B and C – 20K each
ii. If collectively designated they are deemed individually
instituted (not merely by representation)
iii. Supposing the T says
1. I institute A, B, C and D as my heirs, but A will get ½,
B- ¼ and C will get ¼, D not mentioned
2. Rule-follow the will
3. Estate is 120K (A -60K), B 30K, C 30k, D gets 0
4. The estate is exhausted – no more remains for D
iv. T says in his will
1. I give A ½ of my estate, B ¼, ( 60K to A, 30K to B)
30K remaining – it should go to legal/intestate heirs
2. But if he says I give my entire estate to A and B but I
give A ½ and B ¼ - remaining should be given by
proportional increase
a. HOW? – 6/9 and 3/9 or 2/3 and 1//3
b. A will get 80K and B will get 40k
3. Or proportional decrease
d. Art 854 – Preterition
i. If a CH in the direct line is completely omitted in the will and
nothing has been given to him by the testator by gratuitous
title during his lifetime
ii. COMPLETE ANNULMENT OF THE INSTITUTION OF THE
HEIRS – wisdom, hindi sinadya – nakalimutan lng ng
testator
iii. Kung sinadya – VENTURA v. VENTURA – yes, it is still
preterition – sinadyang iomit
iv. Omitted must be in the direct line – spouse omitted not
preterition
v. Direct line – mama, papa, lolo, lola, apo
vi. Adopted child – preterition
vii. Illegitimate child – preterition
viii. Parents – preterition
ix. Total omission – zero
x. Pero kung nabigyan by donation – no preterition
xi. If given by way of intestate succession – no preterition
1. X said – I give my friend G 9/10 of my estate
a. No preterition – estate is not totally disposed of
b. Apply 855 of CC
2. If X said I give A 5K by way of legacy I give the rest to
G – no preterition (not total disposition)
xii. Effect of preterition
1. Annul the institution of heirs
2. Legatees and devisees will be respected – as long as
not in officious
 3. What is the effect of the predeceased of the omitted
heir?
a. X has two children A and B.
b. B has son C
c. X said I give my whole estate to my son A.
d. B is preterated.
e. B died ahead of X.
f. The institution of heir shall be effectual w/o
prejudice to the right of representation.

First view – no preterition

C will be entitled to legitime.

The rest will go to the instituted heir

2/3 to A, 1/3 to C by way of representation

2nd view- with preterition
At the moment of death – who are compulsory
heirs?
A and C
Annulment of will – they will get ½ each

4. X has no heirs. He said in his will “I give all my estate

to my fiend F. F has 2 children A and B. F died ahead
of X. What rights that the 2 children of F have?
a. NOTHING – because he is a voluntary heir. He
transmits nothing to his own heirs.
e. SUBSTITUITION
i. Simple substitution
1. A designated as an heir, B is the substitute
ii. Brief substitution
1. 2 or more substitutes
iii. Compendious substitution
1. 1 substitute for 2 or more heir
iv. Reciprocal
1. Reciprocally substitute each other
f. If the testator does not specify the causes of substitution – it is
understood that the sub takes place in case of RIP – repudiation,
institution, predeceases
g. 863- same proportional shares
i. X has no compulsory heirs
ii. I institute as my heirs A, B and C
iii. But A will get ½, B ¼, C ¼ and at the same time designate
them as reciprocal substitute of each other
iv. Estate is 600K –
 1. 300 to A
2. 150 to B
3. 150 to C
v. If B predeceases – substitution takes place
vi. 2;1
vii. 2/3 TO A-100
viii. 1/3 TO C-50
h. FIDEICOMMISSARY -863
i. Both living
ii. 1 degree (blood relp) (parent or child) from the heir originally
instituted
iii. Ramirez vs ramirez – one degree relp
iv. Aranas vs aranas –
1. X has no CH
2. I gave my entire estate to my friend A as my universal
heir
3. But I order A (fiduciary) to preserve all the properties
and transmit the same to his son C (fideicommissary)
who has two sons D and E
4. A’s right is a mere usufructuary (no right to dispose)
5. How long? If the testator specified it should be
followed
6. If not- depend upon mr. A
7. C died in 1995 – A in 1998 (A predeceased)
8. Rights of C would go to his son D and E as long as
both A and C are both alive when A died -866
v. It does not burden the legitime (not subject to FC
substitution)
PART 5

I. X said – I give all of my properties to A but upon the death of A whatever shall
remains will go to B – no fideicommissary because there is an implied authority
to dispose of the property on the fiduciary
II. Crisologo vs singson – no FC substitution
a. 2 means of FC
i. By expressly calling it by its name
ii. By imposing the obligation to preserve
III. X institute A as F and B as FCs – B predeceased X – F is still alive – no FC
a. F and FC must both be alive at the time of X death
b. But A will inherit – 868 – refers to the first heir
i. The nullity of the FC does not prejucdice the right of the first heir to inherit
the FC clause will be simply disregarded
IV. If F dies ahead of X? B was only alive – B cannot inherit – no provision in favor of B
a. But a better view is B will inherit – not under 868 but of simple substitution
because the basic principal guiding star is the intention of the testator and that is
to give the property to B
 b. Limitations under 863
i. One degree
ii. Both F and FC must be alive
c. Not simultaneously but Successively
i. Testator said – I give my farm in Bulacan to my friend F
ii. But I give the usufruct of that property to A for 5 yrs, B son of A another 5
yrs, to C son of B for 5 yrs after one another – A and B can only enjoy the
usufruct – C is 2 degrees already
d. 20 years prohibition to alienate
V. Article 870 – aranas vs aranas
a. Father aranas – died with a will disposing his properties in favor of his relatives
b. A certain groups of properties was disposed under the administration of my
nephew vicente – as admin of these props – vicente will be entitled of ½ of the
fruits – he was made a usufructuary
c. He further said that vicente continue to be the admin until he dies or refuses to
do so – upon his death or refusal – the next administrator or usufructuary will be
one of the children of his brother Carmelo to be chosen by Carmelo – and if C is
dead- his children will choose among themselves who will replace vicente –
d. The heirs question the validity on the grounds that it prohibits the alienation of the
property –
e. The SC said it is valid – 870 is not violated
f. Considering art 869 – naked ownership is given to one person and the
usufructuary is given to different person – successively – 863 must apply
g. Vicente – no relationship to carmelo’s children (degree of relp in the case of
ramirez) not an issue in the case of aranas
h. The court does not rule that the children of Carmelo can substitute
VI. DISPOSITIONS SUBJECT CONDITIONS AND TERM OR PERIOD
a. Condition
i. Future and uncertain fact or event
ii. Potestative – sole will of the heir (as soon as the heir learn the death of
the T)
iii. Casual – upon chance (at any time) before or after the death of the T
iv. Mix – partly upon the will of a party, a third person or upon chance
1. (passing the bar) mix
2. (at any time) before or after the death of the T
b. Term or condition
i. something that will happen but doent know when
c. T can set condition
i. BUT – it should not be impossible or illegal condition (FLYING)
ii. Such conditions have NO EFFECT- simply ignored
iii. EXAMPLES:
1. Condition of absolute prohibition to contract marriage
a. FIRST MARRIAGE – cannot be validly impose
b. May be valid in certain conditions – in the case of PRIEST
i. Not new burden – remain where he voluntary put
himself
c. Subsequent marriage – only certain individuals can impose
i. Deceased spouse
 ii. Descendants of the deceased spouse
iii. Ascendants of the deceased spouse
1. By reason of sensibility – preservation of
respect with each other
2. relative condition – maybe allowed
a. You are not allowed to get married until you reach the age of
25
b. But until the age of 75 – not allowed
c. He will not marry a bicolana
3. DISPOSITION CAPRATORIA
a. The testator gives property to an heir subject to the condition
that in his own WILL he will give his property in favor of the
testator or 3rd person is null and void
VII. ARTICLE 885
a. SUSPENSIVE OR RESOLUTORY CONDITION – 5 YR PERIOD – LEGAL
HEIRS CAN ENJOY THE PROPERTY – AFTER 5 YRS WILL BE GIVEN TO
THE INSTITUTED HEIR
VIII. Article 880
a. Instituted with suspensive condition – property must be placed under
administrarion
IX. Article 882
a. Modal institution
b. Subject to be satisfied by the heir – OCA (object, charges, application)
c. The instituted heir is immediately entitled to the properties given to him –
i. I give my bestfriend F the entire portion of my estate but he shall use 25
percent for charity
d. Upon the death of the T – F is entitled to the property – pending the creation of
the clinic – subject to a security BOND
e. Mode - obligates but does not suspend
f. Condition – suspends but does not obligate

LEGITIMES
I. RULE OF THUMB
a. Legitimates are always entitled to ½
b. Any class surviving alone – ½
c. SP surviving alone – ½
i. Except Articulo mortis/ dies within 3 mos following the marriage– SP 1/3 only
ii. But if they are living as HW for 5 years prior to marriage – ½
d. Presence of LIGITIMATE CHILDREN AND DESCENDANTS (APO) EXCLUDES the
LEGITMATE PARENTS AND OTHER ASCENDANTS
e. Presence of an ADOPTED CHILD is sufficient to exclude the legitimate parents and
other ascendants
f. If the survivors are legitimate parents, illegitimate children, surviving spouse – ½, ¼, 1/8
i. Something must be left for the free disposal of the testator
g. Survivors are – ILC and SP – 1/3, 1/3 (1/3 FP)
 h. Illegitimate parents and SP – ¼, ¼ (1/2 FP)
i. IGP and SP – IGP are not CH, SP – ½ (1/2 for FP)
j. In the direct ascending line -in case the descendent is an illegitimate person,
succession stops at the illegitimate parents (illegitimate -one way)
i. Only F can inherit from X
ii. GF is not entitled to any legitime
k. GF the IL grandfather of X died. Can X inherit from GF? yes
l. But if X dies survived by GF – GF cannot inherit – state will inherit
m. IL children are entiled to ½ of legitimate (or less than ½ kung makulay ang buhay ng
testator)
i. X survived by W and A and B (LC) and C, D, E, F G and H (ILC)
ii. Estate is 120K
iii. Legitims are
1. W –same share of 1 LC (1/4 or 30K each)
2. A and B – ½ (60K) or 30K each
3. C, D, E, F, G, and H (1/2 of the share of one LC) 30K (divide 6)
n. One Legitimate child concurring with spouse – ½ and ¼, ¼ FP
o. Illegitimate children surviving alone – ½ (any class surviving alone gets ½)
p. 2 LC and surviving spouse – ½ (divide 2), ¼W , ¼ FP
RESERVA TRONCAL

I. COLLATION
a. Addition
i. All gratuitous disposition made by the testator during his lifetime their values will
be added to his estate
 ii. 1061-1077 – except one situation (1067)
1. SUPPORT
2. EDUCATION
3. MEDICAL ASSISTANCE
4. COSTUMARY GIFTS
LEGAL OR INTESTATE SUCCESSION
I. Legal or intestate succession
a. Without a will
b. With a void will
c. With a will but subsequently declared void
II. Preference between lines
a. Direct descending line is preferred over the ascending
b. Direct ascending is preferred over collateral
III. Rule on proximity
a. Nearer relatives excludes the more distant one
b. In the regular order – legitimate children and descendants
c. Irregular order – the same
d. In both reg and ireg – surviving spouse
i. Other collateral within the 5th degree
e. Bro sis neps nieces
f. State
IV. Illegitimate parents are considered legal heirs if the person died is an illegitimate child
V. CONCURRING
a. Legitimate children and other descendants exclude legitimate parents and ascendants
but do not exclude IC and surviving spouse
b. SP does not excludes Bro and Sis (1/2 each)
c. SP excludes other collaterals and state
d. Bro and sis and neps and nieces exclude the state
e. Presence of IC is enough to exclude the IP
VI. RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION
a. Only in direct descending never in ascending line
b. Applies only to legitime
c. Free portion cannot be given by way of representation
d. No representation in collateral line – except when neps and nieces survived by one
uncle or aunt
e. No representation in case of repudiation
f. An heir may represent him which inheritance he has earlier repudiated
i. X dies
ii. Survived by children A and B
iii. C grandson son of B
iv. B repudiated his inheritance – C cannot represent B
v. If B predeceased X – and when B dies C repudiated inheritance from B
vi. Grandfather dies – C may represent B
g. LEG to LEG
h. ILL – either LEG or ILL may represent
i. Ratio 2 is to 1
j.