SUCCESSION

Article 774. Succession is a mode of acquisition by virtue of

which the property, rights and obligations to the extent of
the value of the inheritance, of a person are transmitted
through his death to another or others either by his will or by
operation of the law.

Terminologies
Decedent
Testator/Testatrix
Administrator/Administratrix
Executor/Executrix
Inheritance – property or right acquired
Succession – a mode of acquisition
Legatees
Devisees
Compulsory heir
Voluntary heir

TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION
WILLS

Acticle. 783. A will is an act whereby a person is permitted,

with the formalities prescribed by law, to control to a certain
degree the disposition of his estate, to take effect after his
death.
The making of a will is a statutory right.
Allows the testator “to control to a certain degree the
disposition of his estate after his death.”

Article 777. The rights to the succession are transmitted

from the moment of death of the decedent.
Requisites for Succession Mortis Causa:
1. ​death (actual or presumed)
2. ​rights or properties that are ​transmissible
3. ​transferee (must be living, i.e.no predecease; no
repudiation; no ​incapacity)
Presumption of death
Ordinary presumption of death (no probability of death)
– 10 years
- absentee disappears under normal conditions – 10
years; 5 years if the person aged 75 disappears
Extraordinary presumption of death or Qualified
absence (with probability of death) – 4 years (missing
 airplane, lost ​vessel, military missing because of
war, etc.)
Reappearance
In case the person reappears, he recovers his
property/properties but not the fruits or rent thereof.
Inchoate right
Prior to a person’s death, his heirs merely have an
inchoate right to his property. Therefore, during his
lifetime, the heirs have no right of disposition or
alienation over said properties. Tordilla v. Tordilla, 60
Phil 162
Q: Can an heir dispose of his share in the estate
pending liquidation?
A: ​Yes. The property is no longer “future
property.”
NOTE: FUTURE INHERITANCE CANNOT BE
SOLD.
Q: Is the donation of property after the decedent’s
death but before a judicial declaration of heirship valid?

A: Yes, it is not a donation of future inheritance.

Osorio vs. Osorio and Ynchausti, 41 Phil 531
Accrual of Estate Tax
When does estate tax accrue?
Q: ​Is it at the moment of decedent’s death or at the
time the heirs ​ possess the property/ies?
A: ​At the time of decedent’s death.
NOTE: The date the inheritance tax (now referred to
as estate tax) is distinct from the date on which it must
be paid. (Lorenzo vs. Posadas, 64 Phil. 353)
Q: ​Wife and children survive the decedent. Wife
sells conjugal property. Valid?
A: ​Yes, but only insofar as her share is concerned.
As to the shares of her children, sale is invalid.
Reason: children acquired the properties at the
moment of decedent’s death (and not at the time of the
judicial declaration of heirship). Ibarie vs. Po. L-5046,
Feb. 27, 1953

Kinds of Succession
Article 778. Succession may be:
​1. ​Testamentary;
​2. ​Legal or intestate; or
​3. ​Mixed ​
NOTE: 2 more kinds of succession:
​4. Compulsory or forced succession – where the
decedent is compelled to give the heirs their legitimes;
heirs, however, are free to refuse
​5. Contractual succession
 Article 783. A will is an act whereby a person is
permitted, with the formalities prescribed by law, to
control to a certain degree the disposition of his estate, to
take effect after his death.
Elements of Succession
1. Making a will is a statutory right.
​ ​- Testator is allowed “to control to a certain
degree the disposition of is estate after his death.”
​2. ​It is a unilateral act.
​3. ​It is a solemn or formal act.
​4. There must be animus testandi.
5. ​Testator must be capacitated.
6. ​It is a personal act.
7. ​It is effective mortis causa.
8. ​It is revocable or ambulatory. ​
9. ​It disposes of the estate partially or totally.
Rabadilla v. CA, 113725, June 29, 2000
A will cannot be subject of a compromise agreement as
it defeats the purpose of making a will.
Testator’s wishes must be strictly followed.
AMBIGUITY
LATENT OR INTRINSIC AMBIGUITY
Does not appear on the will;
Discovered using extrinsic evidence
Ex. I hereby give this property to my sister. It
turns our there are two sisters.
Ambiguity is not seen on the will.
PATENT OR EXTRINSIC AMBIGUITY
Appears on the will;
No need for extrinsic evidence;
Ex: I institute some of my relatives. Here, it is
obvious that the institution is unclear.
Ambiguity is seen on the will.
How to cure latent and patent ambiguity? ​ By:
EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE
TESTACY IS PREFERRED OVER INTESTACY ONLY
WHEN THE WILL IS VALID.

After acquired property

Article 793. Property acquired after the making of a will
shall only pass thereby, as if the testator had possessed it
at the time of making the will, should it expressly appear
by the will that such was his intention.
Ex. In 2010 T made a will disposing of all his five (5)
beach resorts and giving the same to his mentor. From
2010 to 2014, T acquired four (4) more beach resorts.
T died in January of 2015. How many beach resorts
will the mentor get?
Answer: Only 5. The other 4 are after acquired
 properties. These properties will go to the compulsory
heirs by intestate succession.
Interest conveyed
Article 794. Every devise or legacy shall convey all
the interest which the testator could devise or bequeath
in the property disposed of, unless it clearly appears
from the will that he intended to convey a less interest.
Note: The entire interest of the Testator in the property is
conveyed.
Ex. T bequeaths to A his car. A conveys ownership of the car
and not mere usufruct.
Validity of the Will
EXTRINSIC VALIDITY
▪ Refers to the form
▪ Ex. Need for a valid attestation clause
▪ NB: Law at the time of the Execution of the Will
INTRINSIC VALIDITY
• Refers to the legality of the terms/provisions
• Ex. Provisions must not impair legitimes
• NB: Law at the time of the Testator’s Death

AS TO FORMALITIES- EXTRINSIC VALIDITY

1. ​T is a FILIPINO PME
a) Philippine Laws- [Arts. 804- ​814]
b) Country where he may be- [Art. 815]
c) Country where he executes the will -[Art. 17 lex
loci celebrationis]
2. ​T is an ALIEN ABROAD DNPL
a) ​Law of his domicile
b) ​national law
c) ​Philippine law [Art. 816]
d) ​Law of the place of execution (Art. 17, par
1)/Lex loci celebrationis
Mnemonic: ​Di Na Po Love
Do Not Leave Please
3. ​T is an ALIEN IN THE
​ ​ ​PHILIPPINES AP-NP ​ ​
​a) ​Law of his nationality
​b) ​Philippine law
Remember: MVP Stephen Curry, Katy Perry, or George
Clooney

Example – Alien Abroad

An Australian, domiciled in France, is en route to
Switzerland. He has a 5 hour lay over in Spain. While in
the airport (Spain), he makes a will. What
country’s/countries’ formalities should he observe to make
sure that the will is valid as to its form?
This is a case of an ALIEN ABROAD. He can apply the
formalities prescribed in the following places. Hence, apply
Di Na Po Love. :
1. ​France (Domicile)
​2. ​Australia (Nationality)
​3. ​Philippines
​4. ​Spain (Lex loci celebrationis)

Example – Alien in the Philippines

A Korean who has a Korean Restaurant in Manila has
been residing in the Philippines for 15 years now. She
intends to make a will. What country’s/countries’
formalities must she observe?
1. Korea (nationality) [Art. 817
– lex nationalii
​2. ​Philippines [Art. 17 – lex loci]

AS TO LEGALITY OF PROVISIONS- INTRINSIC

VALIDITY
NATIONAL LAW of the Testator governs [regardless
or
of the place of execution of the law of the place of
death of the Testator].
Bellis vs. Bellis, L-23678, June 6, 1967
Facts: T was a citizen and resident of Texas who had
illegitimate children in the Philippines. He had two
wills one disposing of his properties in Texas and the
other disposing of his properties in the Philippines. He
had recognized illegitimate children in the Philippines
but were not given anything in the will. Texas had no
conflict of law rules. Also, Texan law did not have
compulsory heirs. His will stated that the Philippine
properties be distributed in accordance with Philippine
laws and not with his own national law.
Issue: W/N said provision is valid.
Held: Not valid. It is void. Said provision
contravenes Art/ 16, par.2 of the NCC.
Christensen Case (Renvoi)
Testate Estate of Christensen,
L-6759, January 31, 1963
Facts: Edward Christensen was born in NY but
acquired citizenship in CA when he resided there from
1904-1913. He came to the Philippines and resided here
despite frequent visits to CA. He executed a will in
Manila on March 5, 1951. He had a lone acknowledged
natural child named Maria Lucy Christensen who was
deprived of legitime per Christensen’s will.
Issue: What law should govern the intrinsic validity of
the will in the light of the renvoi doctrine, CA law or
Philippine law?
Held: “Reason demands that We should enforce the
 California internal law for prescribed for its citizens
residing therein, and enforce the conflict of law rules
law for the citizens domiciled abroad. If we must
enforce the law of California as in comity we are bound
to do so, as so declared in Art. 16 of our Civil Code,
then we must enforce the law of California in
accordance with the express mandate thereof and as
above explained, i.e., apply the internal law for
residents therein, and its conflict of laws rule for those
domiciled abroad.
• The conflict of law rule in California, Article 946,
Civil Code, precisely refers back the case, when a
decedent is not domiciled in California, to the law of
his domicile, the Philippines in the case at bar. The
Renvoi court of the domicile cannot and should not refer the
doctrine
case back to California; such action will leave the
issue incapable of determination because the case
will then be like football, tossed back and forth
between the two states, between the country of which
the decedent was a citizen and the country of his
domicile.

• The Philippine Court must apply its own law as

directed in the conflict of law rule of the state of the
decedent, if the question has to be decided, especially
as the application of the internal law of California
provides no legitime for children while the Philippine
law, Arts. 887 (4) and 894, Civil Code of the
Philippines, makes natural children legally
acknowledged forced heirs of the parent recognizing
them.” (Christensen Case)

JOINT WILLS
Art. 818. Two or more persons cannot make a will jointly,
or in the same instrument, either for their reciprocal benefit
or for the benefit of a third person.
❖ Joint wills are VOID whether they are reciprocal or
not.
❖ If the will is executed by Filipinos,
regardless ​where they execute the same,
the will is ​VOID due to public policy.
❖ If foreigners execute a joint will abroad and
it ​is valid in the place of execution in
accordance with Art. 816, the same shall be
considered valid here. Art. 816 - law of the place where he resides,
formalities in his country, or Phil. laws
❖ If foreigners execute a joint will in the
Philippines, the will is VOID.

Testamentary Capacity and Intent

Requisites of Testamentary Capacity:
1. T not prohibited by law to make a will [Art. 796];
2. T is at least 18 years of age [Art. 797]; ​and

3. T is of sound mind at the time of the execution of

the will [Art. 798]

Soundness of Mind
Article 799. To be of sound mind, it is not necessary that the
testator be in full possession of all his reasoning faculties, or
that his mind be wholly unbroken, unimpaired, or
unshattered by disease, injury or other cause.
It shall be sufficient if the testator was able at the time of
making the will to know the nature of estate, proper
objects of his bounty, and character of the testamentary
act.
1) ​nature of the estate – what the T is giving
2) ​proper objects of his bounty – recipients of
T’s bounty; persons to whom T is giving
3) ​character of the testamentary act –
ambulatory and revocable
“Between the highest degree of soundness of mind and
memory which unquestionably carries with it full
testamentary capacity, and that degrees of mental aberration
generally known as insanity or idiocy, there are numberless
degrees of mental capacity or incapacity and while on one
hand it has been held that mere weakness of mind, or partial
imbecility from disease of body, or from age, will not render
a person incapable of making a will; a weak or feebleminded
person may make a valid will, provided he has
understanding and memory sufficient to enable him to know
what he is about to do and how or to whom he is disposing;
it is not necessary that the mind be unbroken or unimpaired
or unshattered by disease or otherwise. It has been held that
testamentary capacity does not necessarily require that a
person shall actually be insane or of unsound mind.” Ortega
vs. Valmonte, G.R. No. 157451, December 16, 2005 citing
Alsua Betts vs. CA , 92 SCRA 332 (1979)
Presumption of Soundness of Mind
Article 800. The law presumes that every person is of
sound mind, in the absence of proof to the contrary.
The burden of proof that the testator was not of sound
mind at the time of the making of the dispositions is on the
person who opposes the probate of the will, but if the
testator, one month or less, before making the will was
publicly known to be insane, the person who maintains the
validity of the will must prove that the testator made it
during a lucid interval.

Supervening incapacity and Supervening capacity

 Article. 801. Supervening incapacity does not
invalidate an effective will, nor is the will of an
incapable validated by the supervening of capacity.
Forms of Will
1. Ordinary or Notarial Will – with an attestation clause
and acknowledgment before a notary public
2. Holographic Will – entirely handwritten, dated, and
signed by the T
ART. 805 on Notarial Wills
Requirements of a Notarial Will W-L-S-A-M-N-AC-Acknowledgment
1. In Writing;
2. In a Language known to the testator;
• This need not be indicated on the face of the will.
3. Subscribed by the testator himself or by the
testator’s name written by another person in his
presence, and by his express direction.
• T must sign at the logical end
❖ First name only – valid (Yap Tua vs. Yap Ka Kuan,
27 Phil. 579)
❖ Thumbmark, cross, initials – Valid provided the T
intends this to be his signature
❖ If T cannot write his name, another person may do
so provided: 1) it is done in the presence of T; and 2)
it is by T’s express direction.
-person should not be one of the three instrumental
witnesses; person does not have to sign his/her own
name; cannot put his/her name instead of the T’s
4. Attested and subscribed by three or more witnesses
in the presence of the testator and of each other
❖ Attest – to affirm to be true or genuine; to
authenticate officially
❖ Subscribe – to write one’s name underneath
❖ In the presence – not physical presence but
POSSIBILITY OF SEEING WITHOUT
PHYSICAL OBSTRUCTION
- different scenarios (curtain, hallway, looking at a passing
celebrity) requested
5. Marginal Signatures. The testator or the person asked
by him to write his name AND the instrumental
witnesses shall sign each and every page of the will
except the last, on the left margin.
❖ Signatures appear on the last page already.
❖ Failure to comply with this is a FATAL DEFECT
and renders the will VOID. (See In re; Will of
Prieto, 46 Phil 700)
❖ The purpose of this requirement is to PREVENT
FRAUD.
T signs second page but fails to sign the first page. Will is
VOID. (Estate of Tampoy vs. Albertine, Feb. 25, 1960)
 ❖ If the whole will is only on one page, no need for
marginal signatures (See Abangan vs. Abangan,
40 Phil. 476)
❖ If the signatures appear on the right, upper, or

lower margin – VALID; purpose is nonetheless

served – FRAUD is prevented. (See Nayue vs.
Mojal, 47 Phil. 152)
6. Numbered correlatively in letters on the upper
part of each page
- Prescribed: One, Two, Three, etc.
- Substantial Compliance: ​ Page1, Page 2, Page
3, etc. ​1, 2, 3, etc.
7. Attestation Clause must include the ff. info:
i. Number of pages (know substantial compliance)
ii. That the testator signed the will in the presence of the
instrumental witnesses
iii. That the witnesses signed the will in the presence of
the testator and of one another
❖ Absence of the Attestation Clause FATAL DEFECT
--- Will is VOID.
❖ Attestation clause not signed by the witness at the
bottom --- FATAL DEFECT --- Will is VOID
❖ Failure to state number of pages --- FATAL
DEFECT- VOID
Substantial Compliance re: Attestation Clause
Gen: Rule : No. of pages not stated – VOID
Exception: When there is substantial compliance.
There is substantial compliance ​when the number of
pages can be found somewhere else in the will ​itself.
There should be no need for evidence aliunde.
Purposes of the Attestation Clause
1) To preserve in permanent form a record of the facts
attending to the execution of the will….(Leynes vs.
Leynes, 40 O.G. No. 7, p. 51)
2) Proof of compliance with the statutory requisites for
the execution of the will.
3) To minimize commission of FRAUD.

1) Q: Attestation clause fails to state that the T signed in the

presence of the three witnesses. Is the will valid? No.
2) Q: Attestation clause states that the witnesses signed in
the presence of the T but is quiet as to whether or not the
witnesses signed in the presence of each other. Is the will
valid? No.

Requisites of a Notarial Will

COMMIT TO MEMORY ARTS. 804-809 NCC FOR
REQUISITES OF A NOTARIAL WLL.
Donation Mortis Causa
– partakes of the nature of testamentary provisions (Art.
728). Thus, requisites of a notarial will must be complied
with. (See Maglasang, et al. vs. Heirs of Cabatingan, June
5, 2002)

Holographic Will
Article 810. A person may execute a holographic will
which must be entirely written, dated, and signed by the
hand of testator himself. It is subject to no other form, and
may be made in or out of the Philippines, and need not be
witnessed.
Illustrative Case on Holographic Will
Vda. De Enriquez vs. Abadia, et al., L-7188, August 9,
1954
- 1923 Sancho Abadia executed a holographic will.
Holographic will were not allowed in 1923.
- In 1946, the will was presented for probate.
- On August 30, 1950, the NCC was adopted, thereby
allowing execution of holographic wills.
- In 1952 the trial court allowed probate.
Q: ​Should the court have allowed probate of the
holographic will?
A: ​No, the holographic will should not have been
allowed probate.
Under Article 795 “The validity of a will as to its form
depends upon observance of the law in force at the time it is
made.” Here, the holographic will was made in 1923 when
there was no law allowing holographic wills. Applying Art.
795, as there was yet no law at the time the holographic will
was made, the will then is extrinsically VOID. Hence, it
should not be allowed probate.

Probate – allowance of a will after proof of its due

execution
In the probate of a holographic will
◦ uncontested ​– 1 witness who knows the
​handwriting of the Testator ​(not
necessarily the ​subscribing witnesses)
◦ contested- at least 3 identifying witnesses
Lost or Destroyed Holographic Will
Re: Lost or destroyed holographic will without intent
to revoke CANNOT be probated as there is no
comparison as to T’s handwriting.
Re: ​Photostatic copy of the holographic will may
be allowed as there can now be comparison as to T’s
handwriting.
 NOTE:
FUTURE
INHERITANC
E CANNOT
BE SOLD.