B2022 REPORTS ANNOTATED Jan 28, 1985

Roxas v. De Jesus Roxas v. De Jesus

the holographic Will is not sufficient compliance with Article 810 of the Civil
I. Recit Ready Code. This objection is too technical to be entertained. 
Petitioner Simeon R. Roxas testified that after his appointment as
administrator, he found a notebook belonging to the deceased Bibiana As a general rule, the "date" in a holographic Will should include the day,
R. de Jesus and that on pages 21, 22, 23 and 24 thereof, a letter-will month, and year of its execution. However, when as in the case at bar, there is
addressed to her children and entirely written and signed in the handwriting no appearance of fraud, bad faith, undue influence and pressure and the
of the deceased Bibiana R. deJesus was found. The will is dated "FEB./61" authenticity of the Will is established and the only issue is whether or not the
and states: "This is my will which I want to be respected altho it is not date "FEB./61" appearing on the holographic Will is a valid compliance with
written by a lawyer. . . " Article 810 of the Civil Code, probate of the holographic Will should be
allowed under the principle of substantial compliance .
The testimony of Simeon R. Roxas was corroborated by the testimonies
of Pedro Roxas de Jesus and Manuel Roxas de Jesus who likewise testified II. Facts of the case
that the letter dated "FEB./61" is the holographic Will of their deceased
mother, Bibiana R. de Jesus. Both recognized the handwriting of their After the death of spouses Andres G. de Jesus and
mother and positively identified her signature. They further testified that Bibiana Roxas de Jesus, Special Proceeding No. 81503 entitled "In the
their deceased mother understood English, the language in which the Matter of the Intestate Estate of Andres G. de Jesus and
holographic Will is written, and that the date "FEB./61" was the date when Bibiana Roxas de Jesus" was filed by petitioner Simeon R. Roxas, the
said Will was executed by their mother. brother of the deceased Bibiana Roxas de Jesus.
Petitioner Simeon R. Roxas was appointed administrator. After Letters
Whether or not the date "FEB./61" appearing on the holographic Will of the of Administration had been granted to the petitioner, he delivered to the
deceased Bibiana Roxas de Jesus is a valid compliance with the Article 810 of lower court a document purporting to be the holographic Will of the
the Civil Code? YES deceased Bibiana Roxas de Jesus.
If the testator, in executing his Will, attempts to comply with all the Petitioner Simeon R. Roxas testified that after his appointment as
requisites, although compliance is not literal, it is sufficient if the objective or administrator, he found a notebook belonging to the deceased Bibiana
purpose sought to be accomplished by such requisite is actually attained by R. de Jesus and that on pages 21, 22, 23 and 24 thereof, a letter-will
the form followed by the testator. addressed to her children and entirely written and signed in the
handwriting of the deceased Bibiana R. deJesus was found. The will is
We have carefully reviewed the records of this case and found no dated "FEB./61" and states: "This is my will which I want to be respected
evidence of bad faith and fraud in its execution nor was there any substitution altho it is not written by a lawyer. . . "
of Wills and Testaments. There is no question that the holographic Will of the The testimony of Simeon R. Roxas was corroborated by the testimonies
deceased Bibiana Roxas de Jesus was entirely written, dated, and signed by of Pedro Roxas de Jesus and Manuel Roxas de Jesus who likewise
the testatrix herself and in a language known to her. There is also no question testified that the letter dated "FEB./61" is the holographic Will of their
as to its genuineness and due execution. All the children of the testatrix agree deceased mother, Bibiana R. de Jesus. Both recognized the handwriting
on the genuineness of the holographic Will of their mother and that she had of their mother and positively identified her signature. They further
the testamentary capacity at the time of the execution of said Will. The testified that their deceased mother understood English, the language in
objection interposed by the oppositor-respondent Luz Henson is that the which the holographic Will is written, and that the date "FEB./61" was
holographic Will is fatally defective because the date "FEB./61" appearing on the date when said Will was executed by their mother.

G.R. NO: 38338 PONENTE: Gutierrez Jr., J.

ARTICLE; TOPIC OF CASE: What kind of date is sufficient? DIGEST MAKER: Brod
 B2022 REPORTS ANNOTATED Jan 28, 1985

Roxas v. De Jesus Roxas v. De Jesus

Respondent Luz R. Henson, another compulsory heir filed an purpose sought to be accomplished by such requisite is actually attained by
"opposition to probate" assailing the purported holographic Will of the form followed by the testator.
Bibiana R. de Jesus because — (a) it was not executed in accordance with
law, (b) it was executed through force, intimidation and/or under duress, We have carefully reviewed the records of this case and found no
undue influence and improper pressure, and (c) the alleged testatrix acted evidence of bad faith and fraud in its execution nor was there any substitution
by mistake and or did not intend, nor could have intended the said Will to of Wills and Testaments. There is no question that the holographic Will of the
be her last Will and testament at the time of its execution. deceased Bibiana Roxas de Jesus was entirely written, dated, and signed by
the testatrix herself and in a language known to her. There is also no question
III. Issue/s
as to its genuineness and due execution. All the children of the testatrix agree
Whether or not the date "FEB./61" appearing on the holographic Will of the
on the genuineness of the holographic Will of their mother and that she had
deceased Bibiana Roxas de Jesus is a valid compliance with the Article 810 of
the testamentary capacity at the time of the execution of said Will. The
the Civil Code? YES
objection interposed by the oppositor-respondent Luz Henson is that the
holographic Will is fatally defective because the date "FEB./61" appearing on
IV. Legal Basis
the holographic Will is not sufficient compliance with Article 810 of the Civil
ART. 810. A person may execute a holographic will which must be
Code. This objection is too technical to be entertained. 
entirely written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is
subject to no other form, and may be made in or out of the Philippines, and
As a general rule, the "date" in a holographic Will should include the day,
need not be witnessed."
month, and year of its execution. However, when as in the case at bar, there is
no appearance of fraud, bad faith, undue influence and pressure and the
This will not be the first time that this Court departs from a strict and
authenticity of the Will is established and the only issue is whether or not the
literal application of the statutory requirements regarding the due execution of
date "FEB./61" appearing on the holographic Will is a valid compliance with
Wills. We should not overlook the liberal trend of the Civil Code in the
Article 810 of the Civil Code, probate of the holographic Will should be
manner of execution of Wills, the purpose of which, in case of doubt is to
prevent intestacy — allowed under the principle of substantial compliance .

"The underlying and fundamental objectives permeating the provisions of V. Dispositive Portion
the law on wills in this Project consists in the liberalization of the manner of WHEREFORE, the instant petition is GRANTED. The order appealed from is
their execution with the end in view of giving the testator more freedom in REVERSED and SET ASIDE and the order allowing the probate of the
expressing his last wishes, but with sufficient safeguards and restrictions to holographic Will of the deceased Bibiana Roxas de Jesus is reinstated.
prevent the commission of fraud and the exercise of undue and improper
pressure and influence upon the testator. SO ORDERED.

"This objective is in accord with the modern tendency with respect to the VI. Notes
formalities in the execution of wills." (Report of the Code Commission, p.
103)

If the testator, in executing his Will, attempts to comply with all the
requisites, although compliance is not literal, it is sufficient if the objective or

G.R. NO: 38338 PONENTE: Gutierrez Jr., J.

ARTICLE; TOPIC OF CASE: What kind of date is sufficient? DIGEST MAKER: Brod