RAMIREZ vs.

RAMIREZ 111 SCRA 82

Facts: Jose Ramirez, a Filipino, died in Spain leaving only his widow Marcelle Ramirez, a French. In the project partition, the property was divided into 2 parts: 1st part to the widow, and 2nd part to the grandnephews the naked ownership. Furthermore, as to the usufruct of the 2nd part, 1/3 was given to the widow and 2/3 to Wanda de Wrobleski, an Austrian. The grandnephews opposed on the ground that usufruct to Wanda is void because it violates the constitutional prohibition against the acquisition of lands by aliens.

Issue: WON the ground for the opposition is correct.

Ruling: No. It is not correct. The SC held that the Constitutional provision which enables aliens to acquire private lands does not extend to testamentary succession for otherwise the prohibition will be for naught and meaningless. The SC upheld the usufruct in favor of Wanda because although it is a real right, it does not vest title to the land in the usufructuary and it is the vesting of title to land in favor of aliens which is prescribed by the constitution.

ROBLES vs. BATACAN 154 SCRA 644

Facts: Severino Geronimo worked for 20 years in petitioners land. After his death, an ejectment suit was filed against his 2 sons. Atanacio, one of the 2 sons averred that he was entitled to succeed his father as agricultural tenant.

Issue: WON a son has the right to succeed agricultural tenancy of his deceased father.

Ruling: Anatacio had the right to take over as agricultural tenant in the petitioners land in accordance with RA 1199 and RA 3844.

EMNACE vs. CA November 23, 2001

Facts: Emilio Emnace, Vicente Tabanao and Jacinto Divinagracia were partners in a business concern known as Ma. Nelma Fishing Industry. Sometime in January of 1986, they decided to dissolve their partnership and executed an agreement of partition and distribution of the partnership properties among them. Petitioner failed to submit to Tabanaos heirs any statement of assets and liabilities of the partnership, and to render an accounting of the partnerships finances. Petitioner also reneged on his promise to turn over to Tabanaos heirs the deceaseds 1/3 share in the total assets of the partnership. Tabanaos filed against petitioner an action for accounting, payment of shares , division of assets and damages.

Issue: WON the heirs of Vicente Tabanao lacks the capacity to sue the petitioner.

Ruling: No. The surviving spouse does not need to be appointed as execrutrix or administratrix of the estate before she can file the action. She and her children are complainants in their own right as successors of Vicente Tabanao. From the moment of Vincente Tabanaos death, his rights insofar as the partnership was concerned were transmitted to his heirs, for the rights of succession are transmitted from the moment of death of the decedent. Whatever claims and rights Vincente Tabanao had against the partnership and petitioner were transmitted to respondents by operation of law, more particularly by succession, which is a mode of acquisition by virtue of which the property, rights and obligations to the extent of the value of the inheritance are transmitted. Moreover, respondents became owners of their respective hereditary shares from the moment Vicente Tabanao died.

GEVERO vs. IAC August 30, 1990