CODICIL GR: since the provision said “witnesses”, it can be
deduced that this incorporation by reference applies
Art 825 – CODICIL “little code” “little will” codex
- supplement or addition to a will
- made AFTER the execution of a will and annexed to
be taken as a part thereof
In case of CONFLICT, “codicil” prevails because it
represents the later expression of the testator’s
wishes.
Art 826 – CODICIL formalities for it to be effective
- Same formalities as a will, thus void in not.
“may be notarial or holographic din”
TANDAAN: A notarial or holographic will MAY BE
REVOKED BY A HOLOG OR NOTA CODICIL! Unless said
CODICIL is INVALID. Amaze
Art 827 – If a will incorporates into itself a document
or any paper by REFERENCE, said dox or paper shall
form part of the wil ONLY IF:
1. Said dox or paper referred to must EXIST
AT THE TIME OF THE EXSITENCE OF THE
WILL
(thus, reference to future papers void. That
part only is void, not whole will)
(must refer that said dox have already been
made)
2. Will must clearly describe and identify
said dox or paper, stating among other
things # of pages thereof
(other description, locations, general
appearance)
(# of pages need! Kahit voluminous chena)
3. Must be identified by CLEAR &
SATISFACTORY PROOF as the dox or paper
referred to therein
(parole evidence, extrinsic yata, or
evidence aliunde)
4. SIGNED BY THE TESTATOR AND
WITNESSES on each and every page,
except in case of voluminous books of
account or inventories
(witnesses refer to the same
INSTRUMENTAL WITS)
Said dox do not need attestation clause, the
attestation clause of the will is sufficient.
to NOTARIAL WILLS. (since no wits need sa HOLOG)
XPN: If a HOLOG happen to have # credible wits.
Pwede incorporation by reference.
Note: if a holographic will (with NO witnesses)
refers to a document entirely written, dated, and
signed in the handwriting of the testator, there can
also be a proper incorporation by reference.
R E V O C A T I O N
Art 828 – Kuya Will may be revoked by the
Testator at ANY TIME BEFORE HIS DEATH. Any
waiver or restriction of this right is VOID!
Why? Still no vested right to the disposition.
Effective after death kasi. And of course, desire of
the owner must prevail.
Note: Those provisions which are ordered to be
effected immediately (even during testator’s
lifetime) are valid, basta with proper formalities.
Buth those provision are actually not
testamentary disposition, but donation right?
Yata.
Note:
May case na ung will presented for
probate, and judgment became final and
executory. Then, a codicil, was then presented for
probate.
The codicil may still be probated, bec it
may still revoke the will ( since a will is revocable).
But of course only if proven that said codicil is
valid (formalities and executed after execution of
the will). And other party may challenge validity if
said codicil. NOT ESSENTIAL THAT BOTH THE WILL
AND CODICIL BE PRESENTED FOR PORBATE AT
THE SAME TIME.
Art 829 –
IF NOT DOMICILED IN PH, revocation may be
made outside the PH in accordance with the law:
 A. Of the Place where the will was made or
B. Law of the Domicile
IF DOMICILED here, or revocation takes place
here
A. Of course follow PH laws
B. Or where will mas made (lex loci
celebrationis general rule to actually)
Revocation may take place in the PH and follow
PH laws, whether domiciled here or not.
Art 830 – Revocation of will (no other cases IN
THE PH)
1. By implication of law
- operation of law totally or partially
- certain acts or events take place after
a will has been made rendering void or
useless a part or the whole will
- tandaan, revocation of a legacy or
devisee does not render the whole will
revoked, thus may still be probated.
- rationale: there may be changes in the
family or domestic relations, or in the
status of his property which could,
presumptively, change the mind of the
testator.
-NOTE HERE, PRESUMED NA THERE IS
CHANGE OF MIND. TESTATOR MUST
MANIFEST HIS UNCHANGED MIND
PARA DI MAREVOKE.
Ex.
testator sells or donates the object of
the legacy or devise,
if there is a provision in favor of the
spouse who has given cause for legal
separation, it shall be revoke by
operation of law at THE MOMENT A
DECREE OF LEGAL SEPARATION IS
GRANTED
legatee devisee commit acts of
unworthiness, shame. (art 1032)
Credit given as legacy is judicially
demanded by the testator
When 1, some or all of the compulsory
heirs have been
PRETERITED/OMMITED, institution of
heir is VOID. (ART 854)
2. By will, codicil, or other writing
(virtue of a VALID REVOKING will of
Codicil totally or partially, I F NOT
VALID, no revocation)
-pwedeng may condition
Problem:
If A made a will. Then later on,
wanted to revoke that, thus he made a
second will. He then tears the 1st will.
On his death, it was discovered that
second will had not been validly
executed, WHAT NOW.
Answer: (di din sure) May case na, 1 st
will was revoked because there is an
overt act and animus revocandi. Thus
deemed revoke. So intestate??? Ewan.
May case din na, no revocation of first
dahil, said revocation was prompted by
a false belief that the second was valid.
DOCTRIN OF RELATIVE REVOCATION,
provides that revocation by destruction
was good only if a condition that the
revoking will was valid. Condition not
fulfilled, thus not revoked. (See 833,
mas okz to na answer, feel ko)
3. Burning, tearing, cancelling or
obliterating the will WITH THE
INTENTION OF REVOKING IT, by the
testator HIMSELF or by some other
person IN HIS PRESENCE and by HIS
EXPRESS DIRECTION.
(overt act totally or partially din)
Req:
 - Overt act (must happen)
- Intent to revoke (animus revocandi)
- Sound mind at the time of revocation
(capacitated)
- By testator himself, or some other in his
presence and express direction.
Burning, kahit small part lang na burn, basta
intended to revoke.
Tearing. same rule kahit slight tear. Sufficient.
Crumpling, hindi daw kahit may animus
revocandi, vecasue not provided by
law.CUTTING OF TESTATORS SIGNATURE,
pwede din daw, pg 152 paras
OBLITERATING. Renders the word illegible
CANCELLATION. Drawing lines across the
texts, even though still legible. Revoked.
Uncles what was cancelled was mere non-
pivotal part of the will. In holog, cancellation
of signature of witnesses, still valid bec in
holog di need wits dba.
Case: testator threw the will in fire, pero hndi
pa sinindihan, pero with intention of buring it.
Another person got the will before the stove
was chena. In this case, wala pang revocation.
Because there never was the overt act of
burning.
If unauthorized, he may RATIFY said act
and must be proven (pg 139 paras)
PROBATE OF LOST OR DESTROYED NOTARIAL
WILL (w/o intent to revoke)
May still be proved by oral or parol evidence,
carbon copies signed by all still good as original
(duplicate original)
IF lost HOLOG or destroyed w/o intent to revoke
(cannot be probated kasi ung will mismo best
evidence of hanwriting) but may be proven by a
photocopy if meron.
Art 831. Subsequent WILLS, which do not
expressly revoke previous ones, shall annul only
ANNUL such dispositions which are inconsistent
or contrary to its provisions.
“implied revocation, partial or total”
NOTE: Law does not FAVOR revocation, thus
EFFORTS TO RECONCILE MUST FIRST BE MADE”
Art 832 – A revocation made in a subsequent will
shall take effect, EVEN IF THE NEW WILL SHOULD
BECOME INOPERATIVE BY REASON OF THE
INCAPACITY OF THE HEIRS, DEVISEES OR
LEGATEES DESGNATED therein, or by their
renunciation.
“article speaks of a VALID but INNEFECTIVE will,
still takes effect and still revokes the old will”
ex.
A made a will making B his heir. Later, A revoked
said will, made a second one and made C as the
new heir.
A dedz. But C renounced. Said renunciation does
not affect the revocation of the first will. Effectvie
pa din Second will. Thus, A considered to have
died intestate.
Art 833 – if Revocation is based on a FALSE
CAUSE OR ILLEGAL, revocation is void.
“DEPENDENT RELATIVE DOCTRINE” revocation
conditioned on the validity of subsequent
revoking will.
Ex.
A made a will making B his heir. A learned
that B is already dead, So he made another will
making C his heir. But, it turns out B is still alive.
Thus, this article applies.
B still inherits, because the revocation was
void since it was based on a false cause.
BUT, if a said “I am not sure whether B is dead or
alive. However, I revoke the legacy to him” in this
case, yes revoked here, kasi walang error,
nirerevoke niya unequivocally.
Note: if revocation is thru a will or codicil, fact
that the revocation was a false belief or mistake
must be found on the face of the will itself or
codicil.
Art 834 – the RECOGNITION of an illeg child does
not lose its legal effect, even though the will
wherein it was made should be revoke (ano daw)
“here: Art 278 kasi, provides that voluntary
recognition of an illegitimate child may be done in
a record of birth, WILL, statement before a court
of record or any authentic writing.”
So, if the illeg child is recognized in a will. But such
will is subsequently revoked, THE RECOGNITION
STILL REMAINS VALID <3 (syempre dapat valid din
ang will)
Why?
1. Will is revocable, BUT RECOGNITION IS
IRREVOCABLE (unless of course vitiated
consent)
2. Recognition is actually not a testamentary
disposition
3. Effective agad, unlike disposition na
effective only after death of testator.
REPUBLICATION & REVIVAL OF
WILLS
(148) Art 835. Testator cannot republish, without
reproducing in a subsequent will, the
dispositions contained in a previous one which is
void as to its form.
Define muna: “republication” process of
re-establishing a will, which had become
void or has already been revoked.
How?
1. Re-execution of the original will
(copy original provision)
2. Execution of a codicil (implied
republication)
“Constructive Notice” IDK wtf this is and how it is
related to 835. Pg 149 paras.
Art 836. Execution of a codicil referring to a
previous will HAS THE EFFECT OF REPUBLISHING
said will as modified by the codicil.
“TO republish a will which is VOID as to its form,
all the dispositions must be reproduced or copied
in the new subsequent will”
Ex. A made a will in 2002 pero 2 wits lang. thus
void. To republish, he must copy the provision
and this time with 3 wits. The effect is, said will is
revived but the will is considered made at the
time of the republication.
Ex 2, A made a will, sabi niya B will inherit all my
vehicles, at that time he had 5 vehicles. A few
years later, he has 10 vehicles, thus he need to
republish said will to transfer all ten by virtue of
the will.
(^in this case, republication not because void,
but to affect all present properties)
 “To republish a REVOKED WILL, A CODICIL
MUST make reference to the revoked will”
no need to reproduce the provisions like in
republication of a void will.
Note:
If will, invalid because of FRUAD, UNDUE
INF, OR INCAPACIATATED, pano dapat irepublish?
Codicil lang or reproduction?
Codicil is enough. Because art 835 pertains
to VOID will as to its FORM (like defect in wits, no
attestation or error therein, or no ack). In this
case, void because of CONSENT not because of
FORM.
Art 837. If after making a will, the testator makes
a second will expressly revoking the first, THE
REVOCATION OF THE 2ND WILL DOES NOT!!
REVIVE THE 1ST WILL. 1st will may only be revived
by another will or codicil.
Note: “republication vs revival”
Repub – positive act of testator
*** Revival – operation of law
ex. testator makes a will which
“IMPLIEDLY” revokes the first (inconsistent
ganun), revocation of 2nd REVIVES the first will.
Ex2. Article 856 -
Sa 837 kasi, “EXPRESS” revocation, kapag
express does not revive. Oki.
ALLOWANCE & DISALLOWANCE OF
WILLS
Art 838 – No will shall pass property unless it is
proved and allowed in accordance with the RoC.
Testator himself may, DURING HIS
LIFETIME, petition the court having juris for the
allowance of his will. (pwede pala kala ko kapag
patay lang siya)
Subject to the right of appeal, THE
ALLOWANCE OF THE WILL shall be CONCLUSIVE
AS TO ITS DUE EXECUTION.
 “Probate” or legalization, protocolization,
authentication– the act of proving the due
execution of a will by a capacitated testator
before a competent court, as well as
approval of said will by the said court.
(extrinsic validity)
 Kahit 1 heir lang instituted, need probate.
 Deals with execution and testamentary
capacity or compliance with requisites or
solemnities (not issue of descent and
distribution?)
- Di ko gets, but a probate court may:
determine who the heirs are, proof of
filiation, shares due to them, certain props
whether excluded or included in the
inventory, claims (should be brought up,
pero GR, ung sa taas lang)
 Final judgment on probated will, although
erroneous, still binding on the whole
world. (Dorotheo v CA, paras 155)
Also, erroneous decision which distributed the
estate erroneously din, decision not appealed.
Remains final! Can no longer be attacked.
Except FOR lack of JURIS or extrinsic fraud ofc.
 May be Probated:
– during testator’s lifetime (does not
prevent him from revoking, altering or making
a new one though)
- After his death.
Testattor himself petitions, but follows
procedure for post mortem probate.
WHY allowed? (advantages) Minimize fraud,
intimidation, UI, enable testator to correct at once
any legal requirements not followed.
Disadvantages? – away away, share
(“there must be a judicial order of adjudication”
same phrase sa “need to be probated” para
kunwari magaling)
**in probate proceeding, the court –
1. Orders the probate of the will
2. Grant letters testamentary or letters with a
will annexed
3. Hears and approves claims against estate
4. Orders payment of the lawful debts
5. Authorizes the sale, mortgage, or other
encumbrance
6. Directs delivery of the estate or properties
to those who aree entitle thereto.
. Heirs may execute extra judicial partition, even
not in accordance with the will. Ngek.
Remedy of aggrieved heir, shall be ask for
the probate of the will.
. [NOTE, however, that no judicial approval can
be given to an extrajudicial partition based
 on a will unless the will is first probated.
Neither may an unprobated will be
presented as evidence of an act of partition
among the co-heirs.
. pg 157 read yellow highlight.
 Never probated, may still be transmitted if may
partition agreement and the provision of said
agreement is based on the will.
 Nevertheless, a void will, or refused probate
will, may give rise to a natural obli.1430, if
declare void, but one of the intestate heirs
(fully known the defect) pays a legacy pursuant
to the void will, payment is EFFECTIVE and
IRREVOCABLE. (if not defect, not known,
solutio indebitii ofc)
**dapat merong decree of partition allocating
property to each heir bago distribution.
**Estate tax pay muna, before distribution!
 What if the will said? “will shall not be
presented before the courts” VOID! Cannot
deprive competent court of its jurisdiction.
(Jurisprudence)
**POST MORTEM probate –
A. probate proper, then (extrinsic)
B. inquiry into intrinsic validity and Distribution
(Distribution after resolving questions on
intrinsic vald)
INTRINSIC, thus not in Probate ORDER! Pg 169 170)
brought in different or later proceedings not in
probate. Even if passed, not res judicata.
 Ownership, outside juris of PC.
Xpn: all party voluntary submit the matter to PC., or to
determine WON the prop belongs to the estate.
Judgment on ownership, not conclusive/final.
(provisional determination)
 Proof of filiation problem (pg176 last par)
 Estoppel – not applies in probate proceedings
(vested w public interest kasi) pg 179
 Who may present?
Executor, devisee, legatee, interested person? Daw.
Khit wala sakanya (petitioner) ung will.
*petition for probate must state:
1. fact that testator is dead, place and time of death
(proof of death)
2. deceased left a will. Attach copy
3. executed in accordance with form prescribed by law
4. name, age, address of executor, all interested party
5. value, and character of properties
6. name of the person who wants to be appointed
executor
7. name of person who have the custody of the will
INerlocutry, immediately appealbale.
What court?
Competent , RTC where he has RP (if non-resident)
or resided.
In sum, probate mandatory, otherwise, no right could
be claimed under it.
Ambulatory, Cañiza v CA (merely an inchoate right)
(189) ART 839. Will shall be DISALLOWEED if:
1. formalities not complied with
2. no testamentary capacity at the time will mas
made (unsound mind)
3. executed through force, under duress or with
fear, threats (coercion) VOID
4. procured by undue influence or pressure on
the part of the beneficiary or other
(takes improper advantage of his power
depriving testator reasonable freedom of
choice)
(one who allege must prove though)
 (mere affection not undue influence, ex. he
made his mistress his sole heir)
-may be ratified??
5. signature procured by fraud (there must be
intent to defraud)
6. acted by mistake, or did not intend that the
dox he signed should be his will at the time of
affixing his signature
“exclusive grounds”
“Insanity” – time of execution of will, lucid
interval pwedz. (testimonial evidence)
case, maayos pagkakasulat pero testator is 82
year old cripple with half body paralyzed. Chances
are forged or fraudulent.
ALLOWANCE OF WILL PROVED OUTSIDE PH. Yes
may be allowed here basta in accordance with
laws there, must be recorded by the proper RTC
court in PH.
Samewith a foregin will probated aboraid.b prove
na lang ung fact na there has been a valid foreign
probate proceedings.
Cases:
Balmonte placido case
Tolentino vs francisco case
 No VOIDABLE will -
INSTITUTION of Heir
(196) Art. 840. An act of the testator by which
he designates in his will person or persons
who are to succeed him in his properties,
transmissible rights and oblis.
“not allowed to affect the legitime”
“voluntary act of testator”
“provisions in this section applies to devises
and legacies”
“instituted heir only in testamentary succ”
“A conceived child may be instituted, in accord
with 40 41, (art 1025)”
“institution must be VALID, cannot impair the
legitime, heir must bee certain or
ascertainable, there should be no preterition”
“Must be effective, (No predecease, no
repudiation by the heir, capacitated) ”
“there can be institution in a marriage
settlement daw (art 130)”
If sole heir, adjudication by means of affidavit
allowed” pg 197 paras
(197) Art 841. Kuya WILL is valid even if:
1. it does not contain an institution of an
heir (kahit executor lang nakalagay, or
disinheritance of a comp heir)
2. or institution does not comprise the entire
estate (mixed)
3. or the person instituted did not accept
inheritance or incapacitated to succeed.
IN such case, intestate.
Ex. A died, made a will, instituted C as heir.
And nothing for his brother B. If C refuses
or incapacitated to inherit, B as sole heir
gets the estate, legal heir kasi. Not good
example to
(198) Art 842. If no comp heir? May dispose in
favor of any person having capacity to succeed.
If meron, cannot impair legitime of
comp heirs.
 What if a comp heir, did not receive any
legitimes by virtue of the will?
Proportional Reduction to other instituted
heirs.
 Ex. pg 199 paras.
Subject to restrictions provided by law ex.
issuance of patent to homestead, may only
be given to surviving spouse.
Even if only 1 heir, there must still be a
judicial order of adjudication. It is
recognition that the deceased did not
contravene the law and that heir is not disq
to inherit.
If no comp heirs, omission of blood
relatives, does not mean UI had been
present.
Art 843. How is designation made?
1. By his name and surname
2. If may kapareho name, indicate some
circumstance by which the instituted
heir may be known
3. Or as long as ascertainable (no doubt
as to who has been instituted)
If doubt? If unresolved doubt. NO ONE
INHERITS  cannot give to all, because it
would be considered as giving to someone
who the testator intended to give nothing.
Unless it can be inferred that all should be
given.
Art. 844. Error in the name, surname, or circ shall
not vitiate the institution as long as possible to
know with certainty the identity of the
instituted.
None shall inherit if cannot. Dito pala un.
As long as “CLEAR” and there is “POSITIVE
IDENTIFICATION”
“misdescription may be corrected by extrinsic
evidence” NOT oral decs
Art 845. Disposition in favor of unknown person
= VOID, unless by some event or circumstance his
identity becomes certain.
Disposition in favor of definite class, VALID. (ex.
2012 batch law school tsu)
Ex. “a student who tops the bar” ascertainable.
Pwede.
“unknown” cannot be identified from the will, not
a literal stranger to the testator.
“determining event or circ may occur before or
after the testator’s death. (law did not distinguish)
(203) Some cases na VOID even if it occurred:
“first child of my sister” pwede. Unless not
conceived at testator’s death.
“na identify, pero incapacitated”
Art. 846. Heirs instituted w/o designation as to
their shares SHALL INHERIT EQUAL PARTS.
Problem:
A’s will says, “legacy to B or his legitimate
descendants” Now, B has 2 children, C and D. C
has no children, D has a child.
B also died.
IN this case, what does legitimate descendant
mean? Only C and D? or C, D and D’s child?
Answer:
The latter, C,D, D’s child.thus, equal parts. Note
applies to legacy only, NOT relatives pursuant to
959 (nearest degree rule)
846 Does not apply, in comp heir. I mean di
kasama sa paghahatian ung legitim syempre.
What if share of some are disgnated, others are
not?
A b c d. kay A daw 1/10 lang. then ung 9/10
paghahatian ni b c d.
What if may specific prop?
A, b c . estate valued as 300k, A daw sakanya
piano, B singsing. Still, each of them shall get
100k.
Art. 847. Testator institute some heir individually
and some collectively. Like:
“A and B” “Children of C” those collectively
designated shall be considered as individually
institutued, unless the contrary intention can be
inferred.
Why relevant?
Ewan. Haha basta tandann legitime,1/2 of estate.
Tignan ung ½ ng estate, then divide equally sa
comp heirs. The rest ung “freee portion ata”
Then hati pa din ung comp heirs dun sa free
portion, unless sabi specifically na hindi.
Pg. 208 examples para, kung sakaling nakalimutan
ko
Art 848. If testator instituted his bro os sis, and
he has some of full blood and others of half
blood, the inheritance shall be distributed
equally, unless diff intention appears.
Wtf. Ex! pg. 208 209
Inistitute full bro and half bro to estate of 100k. ,
each gets equal share. 50-50
Dati kasi, old civil code. Full bro gets double share
of half bro. affection presumed dati.
Today, not presumed, if there is affection
consideration, sana exressly nilagay daw ni
testator.
Note this is for testatamentary. Not legal. Sa legal
kasi. Un din, full blood gets double share of half
bro.
Art. 849. Instituted: “a person and his children”,
all deemed to have been instituted
simultaneously not succesivley.
“C and his children” so lahat daw, magiinherit,
hindi kapag namatay lang si C. oki. (simult no
succesv)
Art 850. Statement of a false cause for the
institution shall be considered not written, unless
it appears that had the testator knew the falsity,
he would not have instituted the heir
Ex. X as my heir for topping the bar. But X did not
top the bar. X still inherit because considered as
unwritten.
Why? Merely incidental lang ung cause na
namention. But it is the real intended heir.
Xpn, the institution relies on the truthfulness of
the cause of institution. Pg. 211 example paras.
Outside proof not admissible, dapat from will
machechena na ang intent.
Estrangement, not legal ground. (no longer in
good terms, or friendly terms)
If illegal cause or condition, void. 873?
Pg. 213
Art 851 – if testator instutued only 1 heir and is
limited to an aliquot part of the inheritance, legal
succ takes place with respect to the remainder.
AND NO INTENTION TO GIVE WHOLE!
Same rule applies. If instituted several heirs.
Art pertains to a situation when there is a
remainder and ther is no intent to give all to
institutued heirs.
Legal succ sa remainder.
Art 852 – If intention of the testator that the
instituted heir should become sole heir to the
whole estate, but the institution do not cover the
whole? Each part shall be increased
proportionately.
Pg214 ex “I institute as my only heirs, A,B,C, each
getting ¼ of the estate” HATI HATI SA ¼ remaining
Art 853 – if instituted heirs were given an aliquot
part, however all parts together exceed the
whole inheritance, same, each part shall be
reduced PROPORTIONALLY.
P 215 Art 854 – PRETERITION or OMISSION
(intentional or not) of one, some, or all
compulsory heirs in the direct line (whether living
at the time of exec or born after death),
institution of heirs shall be annulled. NOT affect
legacies and devisees as long as not inofficious.
(if legitime impaired merely reducible! Not
voided)
 Preterition – gives rise to intestate sux
 -- requisites: omission, compulsory heir in
the direct line, omitted not predecease
testator.
Direct line – asc and desc
“automatically” no need of court action the
annulment.
Note: spouse, not a “direct line” construe literally,
thus would not anull institution of heirs.
Note: even if omitted, pero he received
something, like in a donation intervivos, here, NO
preterition. (donation adavance of legitime) or if
meron pang left of the inheritance, which he may
get by intestacy, no preterition. OR the omitted
heir, DIES ahead of the testator, institution is
revived.
Art 855 – share of child or descendant omitted
must first be taken form the part of the estate
not disposed of by the will If any, if not sufficient,
proportionally take form the shares of the “other
compulsory heirs”. Should be read as “given to
such heirs by the provisons of the will” (com or
volun) pg 225
Ex pg.224.
“child or descendant” applies as long as
compulsory heir omitted.
( pg 225) Art 856 – Voluntary heirs who
predeceases the testator transmits nothing to his
heirs. (applies to legatees and devisees and )
But a comp heirs who predecease or
incapacitated to succeed, or renounces the
iheritance, shall transmit NO RIGHTS to his own
heirs except in cases provided by this code. Wut
“voluntary heir cannot be represented”
“heirs of comp heirs shall only get legitime of the
latter(not get the part in the inheritance or free
portion)” ex in pg 225
same effect if predecease, and incapacitated.
(972, 698, 1030)
But if renounce? Heirs of comp heir gets
NOTHING. Because person who renounces an
inheirtacne cannot be represented. (997 968)
“in testate, right of representation covers only
the legitime” on intestate, entire share of the
person represented.
Paki intindi ang page 226 (4)
SUBSTITUTION OF HEIRS
(PG. 227) Art. 857 – it is the APPOINTMENT of
another heir so that he may enter into the
inheritance in default of orginally instituted.
“also called CONDITIONAL INSTITUTION OF HEIR”
“designation made by the testator of a person/s to
take the place of the heir/s first instituted.”
Ex. 1. testator may designate another in
case the original heir should die before the testator,
renounce his share or become incapacitated (simple
substitution) (859)
2. Or 863 (leave property to one
person then subsequently transmit
to another din. (fideicommissary
substitutiton)
Why? Prevent from transferring property to person
not desired, prevent intestate, greater freedom of
testator to dispose to those person whom he thinks is
worthy.
**Defect in codal definition – “default” not actually,
because in FIDECOM both heirs inherit. Better DAW to
“disposition by virtue of which a third person is
called to receive hereditary property in lieu of
or after another person”
Note: pwede ding subs of Legats and dvis
Heirss, substituted for the deceased? Yes, , without
requiring appointment of an administrator or
executor.
Art 858 – Subs of air may be:
1. Simple / common (vulgar)
2. Brief / compendious (brevilocua or
compendosia)
3. Reciprocal (reciporca)
4. Fideicommissary (fideicomisoria) usufruct
here?
Other: (old CC) pgs 229
a. Sustitucion pupilar – parents and other
ascendants appointed as subs for their desc pg
229
b. Substitutcion ejemplar – ascendant appointed
as subs of his desc over 18 declared to be
uncapacitated having unsound mind (btoh are
abolished, out of use and impracticable, no
knonw record daw in this country who made
use of said provision)
Ejectment case – ex. 230 “ejectment real action,
thus not exting by death, thus decsision may be
enforced not just against the deceased”
(231) Art 859 – The testator may designate 1 or
more to subs the heir/s instituted (in case
predecease, incapacitated, renounce) Simple
Substitution
kahit walang sinabing “if predecease, if renounce
etc”, deemed comprise of all, (unless otherwise
provided by the testator”
ex. sabi lang niya, “A shall substitute B”. meaning
substitution shall occur in any case “predec,
inacap, or renounce”
“designation always, EXPRESS”
“supplemented by chapters on conditional
institutions” kasi simple is indeed conditional din!
Condition na orig heirs shall not inherit.
ex.s pg 232
“when subs” is exting?
1. Subs predeceases testator (bec considered
as volunt heir) thus 856 applies
2. Subs is incap
3. Subs himself renounces
4. Insti is annulled (preterition)
5. Insti revoked by testator
6. Will void / disallowed
More exs at pg 233
Art 860 – 2 or more may be subs for 1; 1 for 2 or
more (brief / compendious)
Brief – when 2 or more subs for 1 heir
Comp – when 1 sub for 2 or more heir
(234)
Art 861 – Reciprocal Subs – “instituted heirs are
also made the substitute of each other”, other
shall acquire the share on case of non-inheritance
of one, UNLESS it appears that the intention
otherwise prohibits to do so.(unequal share?)
(eventually receives)
“same proportionate share if many” -
ex. pg 235
note: accretion
(237) Art 862 – Substi shall be subject to the
same charges and conditions imposed upon the
insti heir, Unless the testator provides otherwise,
or if the CHARGES are personally applicable to
insti heir only.
Ex. pg237
Presumed that substitute must also fufill
conditions imposed to insti. (intention of testator
that substitute stand on the same footing as the
orginal heir)
Xpn: intention of testator, and condition
personally applicable to insti.
Exs. Condition is A must give a pinao concert for a
month, if A dies first, the sub is not required to
give concert, if he is not a pianist, thus, no
intention. See question ni paras. Pg238
(238) Art 863 – “Fideicommissary”
frst heir is entrusted w/ obli to preserve and to
transmit to a second heir the inheritance (whole or
part). As long as such substitution “does not go
beyond 1 degree from the heir originally insti”
“provided further, both are living at the time of
death of testator” pg.238
also called “INDIRECT Substitution”
Main difference form SIMPLE: in fidecom “BOTH
INHERITS”, while in SIMPLE only one, either the ORIG
or the SUB or ALTERNATIVE SUCC.
 Who:
A – testator (fideicomitente)
B – first heir, fiduciary, trustee,
X – second heir, fideicommissary,
 Purpose? – freedom to dispose while bearing
in mind the vanity and prodigality of
descendants.
 DISADVANYTAGES –
1. There is suspended ownership
2. Locked up for a long period
3. Contrary to principle that “the will is a
strictly personal act”
4. Feudalistic “contrary to modern concept of
ownership which puts the welfare of
society over and above that of a particular
fmily”
*kaya may requisite na “one degree” and both
must be living at the testator’s death. To
prevent prolonged entailment.
 REQUISITES:
1. First heir: CAPACITATED and ACCEPT the
inheritance (he enjoys use, furits thus not
actually equivalent to a “trustee”) more
like usufructuary kasi cannot alienate din.
But unlike a USUF, he is entitled to a refund
of useful improvements.
[interesting situation: if first heir somehow
managed to get a title to the land, then
sells the land. Innocent buyers should not
be prejudiced. IF no SUCH title, buyer still
subject to transmit to the second
substituted heir, he merely acquires right
of seller (first heir) pg 242
2. Obli of first heir to PRESERVE AND
TRANSMIT, must be clearly and expressly
stated by: naming the substitution as “fidei
comm” or imposing upon him the absolute
obli to deliver to the second heir.
Mere suggestion, advice, or request, not
obligating? NOT fidei! Only simple
institution of the FIRST HEIR . Second heir
gets nothing. But institution of frst heir
valid. IF CONDITIONAL? (page242 end
 paragraph), NO FIDEICOM subs din!
Ex. T devised land to X. If X has children he has auth to
sell land, if NONE she must deliver it after her DEATH
to Y. CASE ata. 242
3. SECOND HEIR, fideicommissary Upon
transmission to him, full ownership is
CONSOLIDATED in him. (MUST have
capacity to succeed not the frst heir but
the TESTATOR)
OLD CC, pwede daw JURDICAL. Or class ganun. NCC,
natural na kasi “ONE DEGREE”
OPINION _ may mean na “ONE TRANSFER” thus
pwede jrudical. 243
4. 1st and 2nd heir must be 1 degree apart.
Two school of thoughts:
a. Spanish SC –“one transfer” regardless of
relationship
b. Manresa, Sanchez Roman – “one degree” “one
generation” “from the frst heir”
2nd view daw, kasi purpose is to maintain prosperity
and prestige of one family.
Ex. page 245
If kapatid, 2 degrees daw un, thus invalid fiecom.
5. Both must be alive at testator’s death.
At least conceived. Kasi di naman maiinherit kappag di
pa alive.
 What if nauna namatay si 1st heir kay testator?
Will 2nd heir inherit? Liberal interpretation may
give the impression that second heir may
inherit.kasi may desicre on intention naman to
give the property eventually to the second. SO
nagging simple substitution nuh, testacy
favored! 246
Perez v Garchitorena pg 246 “shall pass
unimpaired” “should never pass out of the hands”
shows obli to PRESERVE and TRANSMIT.
Phil com vs ESCOLIN “247 248”
(249) ART 864 – A fidecom subs can never burden the
legitime.
-- because legitimes are expressly reserved for comp
heirs.
In fact cannot be subject to substi, legitimes.
(250) Art 865 – ditto pala ung “Fidei comm subs must
be EXPRESSLY MADE in order that it may be valid.
OBLIGED to deliver inheritance to second heir
without DEDUCTIONS other than those arising from
legitimate expenses, credits and improvements, (or
when testator provided other deductions)
“sufficient that here absolute obli to preserve and
deliver to second heir” need not na sabihin fidei
comm subs.
“thus, kahit used ung term na “fidei comm”, not
necessarily un agad” hehe basta un.
Note: -- when to be delivered? (kala ko death lang)
ahm either: “fixed period by the testator, if none,
must be delivered at death of first heir”
251 Moralejo vs. Maquiniano, (when 1st heir
alienated sold the subject inheritance) Acquired
merely the right of the 1st heir, thus subject pa din sa
will, notwithstanding buyer’s GF. “caveat emptor – let
the buyer beware” “sale subject to reservation” if may
title na “get compensation from the Assurance Fund
of the torrens Systme, or reimbursement form their
father’s estate”
 Deductions –
- Legitimate expenses – necessary repairs,
preservation, useful iprovements imporving
value like house fense, Luxury of course not be
reimbursed.
- Legit credits
- Legit improve
(252) Art 866 – SECOND HEIR shall acquire a right to
the succession “FROM THE TIME OF THE TESTATOR’S
DEATH”, even though he should die before the
fiduciary, in this case, the right o second heir passes to
his own heirs.
-Okay so dito pala un. Kapag nauna namatay 2nd heir.
(253) Art 867 – FF shall not take effect:
1. FID SUB, not expressly made. (name or not
imposing the absolute obli to deliver)
2. Provision containing Perpetual Prohibition to
alienate, (even a temporary one) beyond the limit
fixed in 863.
3. imposes upon HEIR the charge of paying to
various person successively, beyond the limit
prescribed in 863, a certain income or pension.
4. those which leave to aperson whole or part of
hereditary property in order that he may apply or
invest the same according to secret instruction
communicated to him by the testator
notes:
perpetual prohibition to alienate – “stipulation to
never alienate”? in this case 870 applies. Valid only for
20 years. Thus, may alienate AFTER 20 years. XPN
fidecom, kahit more than 20.
Example sa 254. T testator, A 1st heir, B 2nd heir. T said
not to sell prop for 30 years. After said period deliver
prop to B. VALID stip. Pwede nga lifetime eh. SO valid
kapag fidecom nuh.
Still bound to respect not to alinate for 20 years.
(kapag naman na ng heirs ng heir. Exs in 255.
In fideicom, prohibition not to alinate afor a certain
period binding only to the 1st and second heir.
Payment of income or pensions – ex. T testator, Sole
heir A with obli to pay B 20k income a month and after
B’s death to C. in this case, B and C must be one
degree apart, and living at the time testator died.
(kaya sabi limit prescribed in 863) and kaya
“successively”
Note: if “simultaneously”? in this case, pwedeng
maraming tao. Coz’ not fidecom.
Secret instructions – ex. T in will gave A 1m to be
disposed of in accordance with secret intructions T
gave A. if A, acts only as agent or middleman to follow
the instructions, BOTH THE SECRET INSTRUCTIONS
AND THE GIVING OF 1M SHOULD BE DISREGARDED,
VOID. “UNCERTAINTY that the instructions shall be
faithfully followed, since no one could verify”
Why? To prevent the property to be subject to illegal
purposes.
(257) Art 869 – Provision whereby by testator leaves
to a person whole or part of inheritance, and to
another the usufruct, VALID. If usufruct to various
people successively? 863 applies.
Ex. A in will gave B naked ownership, and C usufruct.
This is allowed.
Pwede din kapag: A disposed prop to B; then usufruct
to C and D succesivley. Valid, as long as (863) C and D
first degree relative. Both C and D alive at the time A
died.
So, kapag namatay na is usufructuary, mapuputa na
kay naked owner. Thus naked owner gains full
ownership, bec usuf extinguished upon death.
Ex pa sa 259, kapag naked owner then may second
heir na kasunod.
(259) Art 870 – 20 years., more than void.
Notes:
not applies to legitimes.
Also applies to legacy devise
Kapag sabi “forever”? walang forever syempre. 20
years lang.
If sabi as long as he lives? 20 lang din. Also heirs
pwede din ichena, if fsrst heir died for let say 10 years,
kahit di tapusin un 20. Since sabi din “as leng as he
lives”.
Not apply to Fideecom.
“non-division/ or keep propert intact during lifetime”
870 applies = only for 2o years.
 What if heirs defaulted? State will inherit.
Ano meaning ng “default”? idfk. Adlawan v Adlawan
pls read. Tnx bruh
CONDTNL TESTAMENTARY
DISPOSITIONS & DISPO WITH A
TERM
Insitutions may be made WITH A CONDITION, WITH
A TERM, or FOR CERTAIN PURPOSE OR CAUSE
(261) ART 871 – institution of an heir may be made
conditionally, or fo a certain purpose
“condition” – future or uncertain event, o a past
event unknown to the parties, upon which the
performance of an obligation or testamentary
provision depends. “may or may not come”
“term” – day or time when an obli becomes
demandable or terminates. “sure to come”
“Modal institution” – made for a certain purpose or
cause., ex. A gives a legacy of 1m to be spent for the
educational needs of his son B. ? pg262
note: conditions can be imposed only on the free
portion. Ofc not on legitime.
Natividad v. Gabino (262)
Morente v. De la santa (263) “not mary, not have kids
etc) mere orders lang daw, not meant as a condition.
Except dun sa sabi na “should he have children with
anyone, he would lose 2/3 of the devise”
 “nearest male relative” – should be nereast
male relative living at the time of death.
 CONDITIONS CANNOT BE PRESUMED –must
appear on the face and language of the will,
extrinsic evidence to prove such cannot be
allowed.
 Unless! The will makes reference to another
document in which such condition appears,
then extrinsic evidence may be considered.
(264) Art 872 – Testator cannot impose, any
charge, condition or substitution upon legitimes.
Should he do so, same shall be considered as NOT
IMPOSED.
The only prohibition that is valid is “PROHIBITION
AGAINST PARTITION OF THE LEGITIME, for a
period of at most 20 years” see 1083, co-heir may
demand the division of estate, unless testator
expressly prohibited its partition for a period of
not exceeding 20 years. See 494 din. Page (265
look)
(265) Art 873 – impossible conditions, Contrary to
law, good customs shall be CONSIDERED AS NOT
IMPOSED and shall not prejudice the heir, even if
the Testator should provide otherwise.
Yeah, void and unwritten. But institution
considered valid. Presumed na may whimsical
error.
Ex. “make a dead man live” take note in ordinary
obli, both condition and obli are void since
condition can nevr become effective.
“kill muna” “disposition of property of alien must
be in accord with PH laws” against public policy”
“If condition VAGUELY worder?” be regarded as
impossible.
“time to be considered to determine whtehr the
condition os illegal or not is when the TIME COND
IS TO BE FULFIILLED”
(267) ART 874 – CONDITION not to contract a frist
or subsequent marriage? Consider as NOT
 written! Unless said CONDITION was imposed by
the deceased on the widow or widower. Or by
the Deceased’s desc or asc.
Kapag right of USUFRUCT, or an allowance or
personal prestation may be devised kahit condition is
not to marry PWEDE.
Notes:
Absolutely void. Why? Contrary to good moral and
public policy.
“condition na finance education of C, para makuha
ung legacy” VOID.
Disposition VOID! Not merely the condition!
 But what if the condition is not be made in a
WILL? VALID!
(272) Art 876 – purely potestative condition imposed
upon heir must be fulfilled by himm= as sson as he
kearns of the test’s death.

Xpn: 1. valid kung imposed kay surviving spouse ni
deceased. 2. Imposed on surviving spouse (widow or
widower) BY the ascendants or desc of the deceased
spouse. (note of course valid insofar as the free
portion is concerened)
Not apply, if the condition already complied with and
cannot be fulfilled again.
“potestative” – depends purely on an heir, general
meaning, depends upon the sole will of one party”

Reason? Sentimental and economic reasons. gr is must be complied with after test’s death.

Villanueva vs. Juico (268) “although wife never Note: in obli, if potestative and suspensive – both obli
remarried kahit namatay, right to use mapupunta kay and condition void.
grandniece and not sa heir ni wife” “bec. Use and
possession lang nainheirt, thus, di mamamana ng heirs
ni wife?”

Relative Prohib – valid as long as not so onerous or

burdensome.

Ex. not mary a particular girl. Valid relative prhib

However if, not mary for 60 years, or don’t marry in

PH or Asia, could now be considerd an absolute
prohibition, demmed not written.

“stopping of susfruct, allowance, personal

prestation” the moment heir devisee etc marries or
remarries, valid. This is really a resolutory condition. LEGITIME
Thus no obli to balik, kahit nachena ung condition.

“marry particular person, at part place or time” Valid

by implication. Unless impossible or illegal.

(271) ART 875 – condition that the heir shall make a 296 Art 886 – that part of the testator’s property
provision in his will in favor of the testator or of any which he cannot dispose of because the LAW has
person = void. reserve it for compulsory heirs.

“disposition captatoria”  Undero OLD CC, legitime of Spouse is mere

usufruct, NOW full ownership na.
why? Makes the will contractual on nature, contrary  Old CC = illeg none? (illeg children share 4/5?
to the principle that a will is a personal act. Of that of an ack natural child
 New CC increased the free portion to ½.
  Note: Children in Void marriage, considered as
natural children by legal fiction and receive
same legitime as ack natural children.
 Disctinction between natural and spurious
children has been eliminated.
Purpose of legitime:
1. Protect children and sps from unjustified anger
or thoughtlessness of the testator
2. NOTE: if no COMP heirs, ofc, no legitime.
3. “LEGITIME”: as a right to succeed, OR the
property itself.
4. CANNOT BE IMPAIRED. (condition, burden, etc)
the only XPN: not divide, or no partition for a
period of at most 20 years. (art 494)
5. ASLO thru: DISinheritance ONLY for causes
expressly stated by law. and thru a will.
6. SALE by a surviving spouse to avert claims of
COMP heris may be set aside by the court.
(Garcia v. Orozco)
DONATIONS:
 Donations inter vivos shall be rduesd if found
to be inofficious (if it exceed the free portion)
 What If sale? Pwede. Since may makukuha
naman na pera, or consideration. Dbuh, unlike
donation.
VESTED RIGHT
 Vested right is inherent with his filiation. (even
though possession only after death)
COMP HEIRS CANNOT INSTIST THAT tHEY BE PAID
IN THE FORM OF PROPERY NOT AVAILABLE.
“COMPULSORY” – may still accept or REJECT.
Since no one can compel anyone to receive a gift.
They called “compulsory” only because the
testator cannot disregard them.
“Right of Completion of legitime” 300
300 887 – ff are COMP heirs:
1. Leg children & desc, (with respect to their
legitimate parents and ascendants)
2. IN default of #1, legitimate parents and
ascendants, (with respect to their legitimate
children and desc)
3. Surviving spouse, widow widower
4. Ack natural children, and natural children by
legal fiction
5. Other illeg children in art 287
Comp heirs in 3,4,5 are not excluded by those
in 1 and 2; neither do they exclude one another.
In all cases of illeg, their filiation must be duly
proved.
Father or mother of illeg children of the 3
classes mentioned, shjall inherit from them in the
manner and to the extent established by this code.
Illegitimate – born and conceived outside
Psych inc, legitimate pa din. Kahit void marriage.
Un lang!
 Fam code – NO more Spurious children.
Natural and spurios are now called, ILLEG.
Same righrs. (half the share of each legit child
and will be taken from the free portion after
the shre of the surviving spouse hase been
satisfied)
 PRIMARY COMP HEIRS – 1,2,4,AND 5. “GETS
their legitime even in the presence of other
primary comp heirs and even presence of
secondary comp.
 SECONDARY - #2., inherit only if #1 is absent.
Note: parents of illeg, also a secondary comp
heir. (see art 903 only if illeg child and widow
left to inherit ata)
 Rationale why asc are excluded if there are
legit? Human nature, LEGITimate childrenwill
be choosen by deceased.
Cases in 301. Evidence of recognition, “father signed
on the cert of live birth of the child as its father” Another table page305
“LEGITIMATED” – In case parents subsequently EXAMPLE:
married. (but no more distinction nga)
T = testator.

F and M = parents of T

A = legit child, W wife of A.

B = illeg

S = spouse

In this case:

1. A B S all entitled to their legitimes.

2. F and M entitled only in default of A.
“declaration of court that person are legitimate 3. If F M S B are present, all are entitled.
children, can become final” 4. If F and A only? Only A!
5. W? not comp heir of T.
“note: presumption of legitimacy of child”
Note: ack of natural child may be determind in a
“mere proof of filiation not enough, WHAT IS
IMPORTANT IS RECOGNITION OF THAT FILIATION”
separate action or spec pro for settlement of the
estate.

“spouse only a 3rd person as regards the estate of the

parent in law”

 BROTHERS AND SISTERS?- NOT com heirs. May

only be voluntary heirs.
 RABADILLA case – “307

308 888 – Legitime of LEGIT and descendants consists

of:
“what if illeg children born before NCC? YES
“½ of the hereditary estate of the father and
entitled Provided that the FATHER “DIED” after
mother”
the effectivity of the NCC.”
 latter, may freely dispose of other half, subject
to the rights of illeg and surviving spouse.
Ex.
F parent.
A and B legit.
In this case, if estate is 1m. A and B, has legitime of
250k each. Remaining 500k is free portion.
-if M and F both predecease T? maternal line gets half
and paternal line gets half. Thus:
“GM and GF hati sa 250k” and “GG and PP hati din”,
note APPLIES only when the ascendants ARE ALL
EQUAL DEGREE. Par. 2 of 890.
-if the only survivor is GM and mother of PP, legitime
shall pertain entirely to the one NEAREST IN THE
DEGREE OF EITHER LINE, GM!. Entire legitime ah oki.

But free portion is subject to dedecution of the
legitime of the Sps and legitime of illeg. Then, un lang
ung actual na bibigay sa voluntary heirs.
 Old CC “strict legitime = 1/3 for legit chilf”
“mejora/betterment = 1/3 for to legit children
din pero kahit hindi equal division, kahit sa isa
lang”
“free portion = 1/3”
314 891 – Asc who inherits from his desc any property
which the latter may have acquired by gratuitous title
from another asc, or a bro, is obliged to reserve such
property as he may have acquired by Operation of law
for the benefit of relatives who are within the 3rd
degree and who belong to the line from wich said
property came. “reserva troncal”
Ex.

 Formula: under new FC.

“Legtime of one child = estate/2 times no. of
children

311 889 – legitime Of LEGITIMATE

PARENTS/ASCENDANTS: ½ of the hereditary estates of
their children and desc

same same.

Ex.
M and F, parents of C.
If estate is 1M. each parent gets, 250k. same same
with the remaining.
If C has legit chil. Not inherit. Secondary lang
remember.
312 890 – divide equally to parents. If 1 should have
died, whole shall pass to the survivor.
M and F parents. If M died and gave parcel of land to
C. C no descendant and no will. F then inherited the
land by operation of law. said land is reserve truncal
meaning F only owns it only till he dies, and at his
death, it will not go to anybody he desires. BUT to M’s
relatives. (in favore of the line from which the
property came). Within 3rd degree to be counted from
C.

If no father nor mother? Ascendants!
Ex.
In this case:
-If all survives. Ofc G’s get nothing.
-if M predeceased T, F gets the whole.
If, in this case, the property may be acquired by the
brother of M as a result of reserva troncal.
Cases 315”
“A married B, then may son and grandchild”
“A second marriage, married C, then may anak na isa”
“A died, binigay land kay son sa second wife”
“However, son died, thus napunta kay second wife”
If second wife died, can the son and grandchild get?”
“yes, half share of the land, can get by reserva troncal.
Present claimants are relatives within the third
degree.
Note: sa unang example, MCF. (requisites?)
1. Transfer from M to C or pwede din form C’s
bro to C,by gratuitous title
2. Then transfer from C to F, by OPErATION of
law.
 Gratuitous title pa din ang “compromise”
 Origin may be: ascendant, bro or sis
 Propositus: descendant acquiring by grat title
 RESERVOR: ascendant who inherits by ops of
law (obliged to reserve)
 RESERVEES: relative within 3rd degree
belonging to the line of the origin.
SUMAYA v. IAC319. “obli din to annotate in the RD the
reservable character of the property” “reserva
extinguished from the time of death of the reservoir”
subject to prescription”
“origin must be legitimate relative ofc”
“what if ticket ang binigay then nanalo? Article NOT
apply”
“note propositus OWNED the property, incident lang
ung namatay siya na wala heirs, only the asc”
“Reservor page 324 = “operation of law dapat, not by
a will, sale etc.” “also a full OWNER, but subject to a
REsolutory condition which is, death niya and there
exists relatives within the 3rd degree of the propositus.
“title is similar to a VENDEE a retro” or a fiduciary in a
fideicomm substitutition”
 Property subject to reserve be alienated??
YES daw. Kasi owner, naman. Without prejudice to
reimbursement by his estate concerning personal
props and without prejudice to the reservation insofar
as real properties are concerned. Page 326 327.
Note: sabi ni sir “delayed succession” “no right to
dispose daw”
 Annotate the reservation in the RP within 90
days from the time he accepts the inheritance.
 If failed within the period, reservees may
judicially demand the reservoir to comply.
 Right to compel, only after 90 days.
 If alienated, and if purchaser knew, purchaser
himself may be compelled to annotate. Exs in
328
RESERVEES – “death ni reservor, alive reservee, and
within 3rd degree from the propositus. “ note, inherit
form propositus NOT from the reservoir”
“his right only accrues when moment reservoir dies”
“legitimate relative of the origin and prpositus”
 If property reserve was MONEY, but when
reservoir died, he had no cash. Reservees then
may: select property equivalent from estate or
reservor, or demand sale of property.
Manresa.
 Reservee may sell property even if reservoir
still alive, but still subject to the condition! But
not sure. Only based on a spain SC decision.
 3rd degree counted from the propositus,. Ex.
parents of prop 1st degree, GP, bros, sis of
propositus 2nd, uncle aunt by blood, great
grandparents nepwhew nieces 3rd degree.
 As long as 3rd degree at the time propositus
dies, Expectancy. Then definite right namatay
reservoir.
 If 2 reservees? 2nd and 3rd? Former gets all.
 334 335 more read
 “NEARER EXCLUDES farther”
EXTINGuishment OF RESERVA:
1. death of reservor
2. death of all reservees ahead of reservoir
3. loss of reservable props, no fault or neg of
reservoir
4. prescription (30 years real, 8 years personal
begins from the death of resrervor)
5. registration under torrens
6. renunciation
7. there can be no valid waiver if made when the
reservoir is still alive
may be chena if under insurance. Or if
exprorpraaited? Indemnify!
HOW MUCH IS RESERVABLE:
 Reserve maxima theory page 337 338. “dito
ung anak tinrasnfer niya by will all the pera” so
kahit by will, pwede pa din, parang all meaning all
bukod sa reserve? Or reserve minima?
344 893 – testator leaves NO LEGIT DESC, but leave
PRUPOSE of reserve troncal: asc? Surviving SPS shall have a right to ¼ of the
Keep the property in the family line or origin hereditary state.
line.
From the free portion.

341 892 – if only 1 leg child/ desc survivies, surviving Ex.

sps shall be entitled to ¼ of the hereditary estate. T estate is 400k
No children, only BC parents and SPS.
Legal sep? surviving sps may inherit if it was the Thus, D inherits 100k.
deceased who had given the cause for LS.
HM sa parents? Ewan haha
2 or more legit, surviving sps shall be entitled to a
portion equal to the legitime of each of the legit. 344 894 – if may ILLEG children, surviving sps shall be
eintitled to 1/3 of the HE. And the illeg to another 1/3.
Ex. Remaining 1/3 free protion.
1st par=
T = left 1m estate Ex.
B anak T = 900k estate
C sps. B and C ack natural
B’s legitime is 500k and C is 250k. (1/4 of the D sps.
hereditary estate)
Thus, 300k each (all the illeg, SPS. And free
Remaining 250 is free protion. protion) note in this case, walang LEGIT DESC NOR
LEGIT ASC PARENTS.
2md par-
if LS. C gets 250k, if it was A who is the faulting 344 895 – LEGIT of ack natural and natural by legal
party casuing LS. fiction shall consist of ½ of the legitime of each of
the lgit children. (so basta illeg, ½ ni legit)
3rd par-
T = 600k estate  Legit and illeg both exists.
3 legit child. Thus, tig 100k each. Sps, prtion  Ex.
EQUAL, thus 100k din. A = 1m estate
B legit child
Remaining, free protion (200k) C ack natural
D recognized spurious
 note: grandchildren still inherit based on the
rights of their parents (child of the tesatator) Thus,
(so based pa din kung ilang ung legitimate children) 1. B = 500k
 refusal of 1 children, DOES not after the 2. C = 250 (half of the legitime of a legit)
legitime of the sps 3. D = 200k (4/5 of the legitime of an ack natural
ex. 3 legit child. Thus 100k kay sps. If nag renounce child/ 2/5 of the legit of a legit child)
1 legit. Legitime of SPS still remain. 4. 50k free
 LEGACY or devise to suriving sps, considered as
ADDITION to his or her legitime. Thus, must (note: Fam code, no more distinc bet natural and
also be charged to the free protion. Same spurious)
footing as those given to strangers.
  reason why illeg are given ; considered as thus, 3 leg = 600k or 200k each
INNOCENT, but since born outside of marriage, sps = 200k
kaya LESS. 2 illeg = 100k each =-== free protion of 200k

346 896 – ILLEG and ASC exising, illeg entitled to ¼ of 348 899 – SPS, w/ legit parents, w/ illeg
the HE taken from the free portion. SPS entitled to 1/8 of the HE, illeg to ¼.

Ex. Ex.
T = estate 1m Estate is 800k
B father A n B parents
C illeg D sps
E n F illeg
Thus, C is entitled to 250k 91/4 of the hered estate.
Thus,
346 897 – if SPS, with legit, with ack nat or nat child Sps 1/8 = 100k
by legal fiction, SPS shall be entitled to a portion Illeg = 100k each
equal to the legitime of each legit cild, taken from A n B = 400k each ½ of HE
the free protion.
Requisites:
Ex. 1. 1 legit parentat least
Estate is 1m 2. SPS
5 legit 3. Illeg (wether ack or spurious)
1 ack natural 4. NO legit children, kasi if meron walang parents
sps (185 no disctina gain wejter ack nat or spur)
349 900 – SPS only. ½ of the HE. ½ free
thus, legtime of each legit child is 100k
thus, sps , gets 100k. if marriage solemnized in articulo mortis, testator
died within 3 months from the time of marriage,
note here madami legit. legitime shall be 1/3, except when they living as
husb and wife for more than 5 years.
347 898 – surviving sps with legit, and illegit other
than ack nat/ nat child by legal fiction, same as Gr: ½
provided in the presecing art. Xpn: If articulo mortis, and died within 3 months after
marriage. (danger of death in the time of the
Ex. marriage AND if the cause of death is THE SAME as the
So same portion equal to the ligitme of legit child sickness, illness or injury) – purpose is to avoid
marriages for financial gain.

 legit child and illeg surviving together(w or
w/o sps)
ex.
1. give legtime to LEGIT and of SPS if any
2. second, give legitime of illeg (half of kay legit) if
sufficient
3. if Insufficient, whatever remains of the estate
Xpn to the xpn: living as husband and wife for more
than 5 years without benefit of marriage.
-aplies only to testamentray daw?
 Why SPS legitime is dependent on the
legitime of others?

estate 1.2 M 351 901 – ILLEG ONLY, ½

3 leg 351 902 – rights if ILLEG in 901 are transmitted upon
sps their death to their DESC, wether leg or illeg.
2 illeg
 Ex.

Estate is 1m, in will 500 for B and 500 for stangr.
Illeg is B.
However, B predeceased testator.
C, is illeg child of B can get, 500k. B’s share. By right of
representation.
 Illeg decendant of legit children, CANNOT
inherit by representation. Barrier between
legitimate family. Ex. T testator, A son, B illeg
son of A. if A predecease T, B illeg cannot
inherit by representation.
Ex in 352.
“T has illeg child A.
A has legit child B and an illeg child C,
If A predeceases T. both B and C will inherit by
representation in the proportion of 2 is to 1. (895?)
353 903 – legitime of parents, who have an illeg child
(who leaves no legit desc, sps, illeg) = is ½ of the
hereditary estate of such illeg child.
 Basta ito LEGITIME of ILLEGITIMATE PARENTS
AS THE ONLY COMP HEIRS
ESTATE OF AN ILLEG CHILD TO.
And said child walang compl heirs syempre.
Ex.
B is the illeg child = estate is 1M
B has no com heir
Only illeg parents
Thus, 500k
If may child si B, no mana parents. Ex in page 354.
Ex. di ko gets example B sa 354
Note: illeg child pwede magmana ang parents niya,
and but not grandma of illeg.
354 904 – testator cannot deprive his COMP heirs of
legitimes, XPN in cases provided by law.
netiher can impose, burden, encumbrance, condition
or subtittution.
355 905 – Renunciation or compromise of a FUTURE
LEGITIME, IS VOID. (between testatir and comp heir)
may still claim upon death. , but they must bring to
COLLATION whatever they may have received by
virtue of the renun of compromise,
 Why> mere expcepctancy kasi or inchoate
right. Not subject of a contract. Nullity may be
clamied by a prejudiced heir.
 Waiver, is null and void. Pwede pa din claim.
 Note, even if the compromise is between co
heirs. Void pa din,
 Present legitime ofc, may be renounced. Or
compromise,
356 906 – Comp heir, given less than the legitime may
demand to be fully satisfied “COMPLETION OR
SATIsFACTION OF THE LEGITIME”
 HOW?
in this case, kulang , unlike sa pretertion (omitted)
358 907 – testamentray dispo imparing the legitime
of the comp heirs shall be reduced on the petition of
the same, inofficioous and excessive.
REDUCTION OF INOFFCIOUSE DISPOSITION”
358 908 – determination of legitime:
VALUE OF PROPERTY DEDUCTING ALL DEBTS AND
CHARGES. NOT INCLUDING THOSE IMPOSED IN THE
WILL.
Net value of the estate, added the value of all
DONATYIONS by the testator that are subject to
COLLATION, at the time he made them.
 Property minus debts and charges plus valu of
collationable donations = Net HE.
“CHARGES” – THOse demandable, not imposed in the
will.
NOT PAID = NO DISTRIBUTION
If 1M estate, tapos sabi, give my friend 900k.
NO, since it would impair the estate, irereduce ng
500k. lang.
Note:
Ex 1m estate, 1.2 debts, collation 500k.
In this case, net HE is 500k! not 300k, bec. Donations
cannot be responsible for the debts. Thus, 0 na nun
ung sa estate. Natira 500k. na donated na.
“value collated” value at the time the donation were
made.
 How determnide? In judicial proceeding,
ADMINISTRATOR must deermine the value of
the state. Helped by a tax appraiser.
 If no Jud pro, heirs must determine. , subject
to the internal revenue code.
Pagkatipunan vs. IAC. 361
363 909 – Donation given to children shall be charged
to their legitime.
Donation to stragners, charged to the free
portion.
If, inofficious, shall be reduced arroding to
rules established by this code.
 Donation to hildren, charged to their legitime,
If excess? Charged to free protion. IF STILL
EXCESSIVE, REDUCED NOT TO IMPAIR
OTHERS’ LEGITIMES.
 STRANGERS – FP, REDUCE IS EXCEED FP.
 DONATIONS TO STANGER BE COLALTED? TO
DETERMINE VALUE OF NET HE? No, Manresa,
speaks only collation of dantion to comp heors.
Page 366 365 see
Ex.
A gave B, his child, a donation of 500k. and C 1m.
when a died, estate was worth only 1m.
Thus, 1M plus 500k. 1.5m net estate.
Legitime is 750k half ni 1.5
Thus, reduction of dination to 750 to stranger. Kasi
more than free portion MANRESA OPINION.
FACLON OPINION. 2.5 net HE. Legitime, is 1.25,
thus sakto lang ung donation kay C.
Author’s opinion: follow falcons daw. Kasama
stanger sa collation. As advance to the free
protion.
368 910 – donation to ILLEG, charged to his legitime.
Exceed, reduced in the manner…
NEVER IMPAIR LEGITIME of legit. Excess? Charge to
the FP. Donation are collationable.
368 911 – after determination of legitime, reduction
shall bemade as follows:
1. Donations shall be respected as long as the
legitime can be covered, reducing or annulling
the devices or legacies in a will
2. Reduction of Devs or legacies shall be pro rata
Testator may say that certain devis or legc be
paid in preference to others, thus ung iba
muna magsuffer
3. Devise or legacy consisits of susfruct or life
annuity, compulsory heir may choose bet
complying with the testamentary provisoons
and delvering to the devs OR the leagatee the
part of the inheritance of which the testator
could freely dispose.
In general:
1. Give the legitimes
2. Donations inter vivos
3. Preferred legacies and devicees
4. All other.
Thus, mauuna ipapambayad ung number four.
 Why preferred and donation kesa disposition
mortise cause? They were made first.
 If, 2 or more donation? Recent DATE shall be
reduced first.
 READ ARTICLE 950. About insufficiency to
cover legacies or devisces .
Ex.
A died.
B child.
Estate 1m
C preffered legacy of 300k
D legacy 150k
E legacy 100k
Adding all legacies = 550k, thus impaired legitime.
How?
 a. Gets 500
b. C preferred gets 300
c. Then remaining 200, propratiantely given to D
and E. thus, 3:2 ratio “120 d, and 80 E”
Ex. 372 pa
 USUFRUCT or Life annuity rule-
Last paragraph*
Ex.
A 200k estate
B legacy of usufruct over land (value120K)
Free portion is only 100k
Thus, comp heir given the right to EITHER COMPLY
WITH THE TESTAMENTARY PROVISON BY GIVING
SAID USUFRUCT OR ELSE, GIVEBMERELY THE SUM
OF MONEY EQUIVALENT TO THE FP.
Reason: 373.
Annuity” 374 page
374 912 – if devise consist of a real property, cannot
be convivnenitly divided, it shall go to the devisee of
the reduction does not absob=rb ½ of its value. If
contrary, COMP heir shall reimburse
ex.
hoise 2M. devised to X.
but excessive, has to be reduce by 800k.
in this case, house. Kay X pa din, and X has to
reimburse 800k to comp heir.
If reduction is 1.5M, comp heir gets the house, but
Comp heir give 500m to X.
If exactly half? Deivsee gets the house. Intent of
testator must prevail. Over literal statement of
law.
2nd par. Devisee entitle to a legirme may retain
the entore property, provided its value does not
exceed the free protion and his legitime.
A’ legitime 1M
Free prtion is 500m
If A was given as devise a house worth 1.5. a may
retan the house.
375 913 – if the heirs or devisees do not choose to
avail of the right granted by 912,any heir or devisee
who did not have such right may exercise it, if ayaw
din niya, PROPERTY MAY BE SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCION
at the instance of any one of the interested parties.
Ex.
House worth 2M devised to X
But excessive it has to be reduce by 800k.
House should go to X right, kasi wala pang half.
But X does not want the house??
Thus, the comp heirs can get the house and just pay
the X for 1.2M.
If comp heir ayaw din?
Sold at public auction. At the instance of the
interresed parties.
If only one heir lang may like, ode siya lang.
376 914 – Testaor may DEVISE and bequeath the FP as
he may deem fit.
Unkike leg, FP may be subject of a charge, substi, or
condition,
Note not exactly free kasi, subject pa sa existence ni
SPS and or illeg.
OVERVIEW: 376 AND 378
DISINHERITANCE
377 915 – A COMPULSORY HEIR may be DEPRIVED of
his legtime, through Dishinheritance. BUT ONLY FOR
CAUSES SPECIFIED IN
 DISIN - testamentary act of depriving any
comp heir/s.
 PURPOSE – not VENGANCE, but
RETRIBUTION. (so punishment for ungrateful,
cruel or culpable act)
 WILL – thus cannot be in legal succ
 Only COMP heirs, so di disin ang bro sis, unlike
disin, in legacy or device, may be set aside for
any reason.
  COURTS may inquire into the validity of the
DISIN.
 DISIN – excludes not only LEGITIM, but also
FP!
 OTHER MODES OF DEPRIVATION OF LEGITME
– predecease, incapacity, repudiation (note in
pred and incap, may be represented by his
own heirs), or LIABILITIES of estate exceeds
assets.
379 916 – Disin effected only through a will, and legal
cause shall be specified.
REQUISITes:
1. In a will
2. Expressly made (cannot be presumed)
3. LEGAL CAUSE (authorized by law, If not,
inefffective)
4. TRUE CAUSE (917 918)
5. EXISTING CAUSE (cannot be CONDITIONAL or
preventive disin, BUT REVOCATION OF DISIN
MAY BE CONDITIONAL)
6. TOAL disin or COMPLETE (not partial)
7. CAUSE MUST ALSO BE STATED IN THE WILL
ITSELF (pero kahit not exact word of the law,
basta indicated the fact of disin and cause
made together in one will) (or not reuiqred na
in the same instrument) kasi “any will”
8. HEIR must be clearly identified
9. WILL NOT REVOKED OFC. OR atleast insofar as
the disin is concerned.
Ex. 380
 “disinherit SOME of my children? = not valid.
Unless may way na ma ascertain thorugh the
face of the will, or extrinsic evidence other
than oral declarations.
 If partial disin, it is as if NO disin.
 “if my SON tries to kill me” no valid disin, kahit
actually tinry patayin, because cause of disin is
not “EXISTING”. BUT but will not inherit pa din
because of he is incapacitated to succeed
pursuant to 1032, and not because of the disin.
(unworthiness)
 NOTE valid ang conditional revocation of disin.
381 917 – BURDEN OF PROVING THE TRUTH OF THE
CAUSE FOR DISIN shall rest upon the other heirs of
the testator, if THE DISINHERITED DENIES.
 So executor or heirs shall ask the judge to
declare X as disinherited and consequently
deprived of his legitime. If X denied, thru an
opposition. Then other heirs have to prove the
truthfulness of the cause. Other heirs may
present WITS, or DOX, and X may rebut. If B
could chena, institution of heirs remains as
long as B’s legitime is unimpaired.
383 918 – DISIN w/o specification of CAUSE, or of the
truth is not proved, or not authorized by law = shal
ANNUL the institution of heirs insofar as it may
PREJUDICE the person DISINHERITED. But Devises and
legs shall be valid to such extend as will not impair the
legtime.
Pertains to “INEFFECTIVE DISHINERTIANCE”
1. Cause not stated
2. Not authorized by law or not legal.
3. Not proved if contradicted.
4. read next par.
Note: “subsequent reconciliation” - ineffective DISIN
din daw. Recon between the offender heir and
offended testator after there was disinheritance.
(922?)
 effect: institution of heirs annulled, insofar as it
impairs the legitime of the person disinherited,
same rule sa DEVS and LEGS = valid to such
extent as will not impair the legitime.
Ex. 383.
Kapag ineffectively disin = he shall get his
LEGITIME only of na dispose n ung FP. If not
dispose, then may share din siya dun. (intestate
share)

#2 – accused of murder, etc.
preterition 854
 similarities, pretrited and ineffective disin –
“both gets at least legtime, both LEGS and
DEVS valid in so far…., both refer to COMP
heirs.
397 919 – CAUSES for DISIN (applies to comp heirs,
desc, leg or illeg):
1. guilty of an attempt against the life of T, his
spouse, his desc or asc;
2. accused the T of a crime punishable for 6 years
or more imprisonment, and IF the accusation
has been found GROUNDLESS;
3. adultery/concubinage with the spouse of T
4. child/desc by FIVU casues T to make a will or
change one already made
5. refusal to support the Parent/asc w/o
justifiable cause
6. Maltreatment by word or deed
7. Child/desc leads a dishonorable or disgraceful
life
8. Conviction of a crime which carries a penalty of
civil interdiction
#1 - final judgement of conviction (come before or
after the execution of the will)
- Intent to kill
- T, spouse, desc, asc
- Exs in 388
- If attempt is a CAUSE, then also if
CONSUMMATED, or FRUSTRATED.
- Pati If only acting as ACCOMPLICE, basta may
intent to kill.
- PARDON? Still disin, unless based on complete
innocence
- HOMICIDE thru reckless impru – not a ground,
there being no intent to kill.
- Here, the ACCUSATION was “T killed the me, a
Child, or against any desc? Or ANYBODY daw
haha gulo.”
- T acquitted on the gorund of “lack of proof of
guilt beyond reasonable doubt” or “lack of
criminal intent” NOT NECESSARILY MEAN,
GOUENDLESS! NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO
DISINHERIT HERE. 389
REQS:
- ACT OF ACUSING
- FACT THAT ACCUSATION WAS FOUND
GROUNDLESS
- OFFENSE/ CRIME CARRIES IMPRISONMENT FOR
AT LEAT 6 UEARS
 HERE ACCUSATION – includes institution of
criminal action, or mere STATEMENT of heir as
a witness against the T, so testify against T
daw. , ALSO if heir wits deliberately fail to
reveal facts that would acquit T, same effect
daw.
#3 – step mother, or even real mother
- Final judgment din
- But may mother disinherit him on the same
gorund? Given ns siya jowa ng anak niya? Haha
NO daw.
#4 – FIVU
#5 – ex. justifiable cause may be, is father cruel
kaya di nagsupport, no funds to do so, or
abandonment. Justified.
- No judicial demand needed. Law does not
require.
- Pag nagcomply DAHIL lang sa JUDICIAL
COMPULSION? PWEDE pa din I DISIN.
 #6 – Maltrato, word deed, slanderous or offensive
language.
- Caused intentionally dapat
- Against T lang ditto.
- What if made by 14 pa lang? then
subsequently became insane? NOT sufficient
to disin daw.
- Maltrato – need nit resulted to phys inj, so
kapag may attempt daw tapos di na convict,
pwedeng ito ung ground.
- NOTE: maltreatment by ASCENDANT, di pwede
ditto, law said chil or des clang, di daw pwede
ground na I disinherit si asce.
#7 – disgraceful, dishonorable.
Ex. prostitute, immoral life, no final judgment
needed, but SINGLE act not necessarily leads to
that.
#8 – civil interdick.
- Final judgment here ofc.
- Accessory penalty to – death, reclusion perp,
temporal. 393
393 920 – sufficient casues for DISIN of ASC, wether
legit ir illeg.
1. Abandonment, induced daughters to live a
corrupt or immoral life or at least attempted
against their virtue;
2. Convicted of an attempts against life of T,
Spouse, desc or asc
3. Accused same
4. Adyltery conc
5. FIVU
6. Loss of parental authority for causes specified
in this code
7. Refusal to support without just cause
8. Attempt against life of the other parent,
unless reocnsiliation.
#1 abandonment, induced, attempt virtue
- Also failure to give due care or attention,
- Abandon physical, moral, social or educational,
so kahit di technical abandonment
- Negligence in performing duties, intentional or
not
- Commit rape nga un, same if moother helped
- Prosti
- “attempt against virtue” need not to be in FJ.
#3 – same, unless found true, no valid disin
#6 – loss of parental auth “see art 228 Fc”
- parental auth term:
death of parents, emancipation, adoption,
appointment of legal guardian, judicial
declaration of abandonment in a case filed for
the purpose. (228 229 fc), FJ divesting parental
auth, judicial dec of absence or incapacity of
the person exercising parental auth.
- Merelt suspended parental aauth – conviction
of crim case civil interciction, or court dec.
- Subsequent marriage loses par auth daw,
unless s will ni husband provides that wodow
might marry again
- Or children themselves may deprive parents of
their auth or suspend, matrato, or treat with
excessive harshness corrupt orders etc.
- DISIN, continues to be valid kahtit
subsequently recovered parentaka tuh. Why?
Sufficient kahit one time lang daw. But sabi ng
iba, disin becomes ineffective, authot sides
with the latter thought.
#8 –need NOT FJ, unless reconciled. Lving in same
house, recon is presumed. LAW says parents,
thus, does not apply to lolos lolas.
398 921 – CASUES for disin of SPS.
1. Attempt against life, desc or asc
2. Accused same
3. Fivu
4. Given cause for LS
5. Given gorund for loss of PARENTAL AUTH
6. Refusal to support, not justified. (756, 855,
674a)
399 – 922 – SUBSEQUENT RECON. Renders the DISIN
ineffectual.
“recon” – mutual restoration of feelings to the status
quo. Resumption of friendly relations.
 Express of implied.
  Ex. where no recon: Thus, C, instituted heir gets 750k.
1. General pardon at the hour of death to all
2. Pardon not accepted by the disinherited  Note B does not have the usufruct or admin of
3. Pardon not specifying the act concerned nor 250k. this is exception to the rule that a parent
the act committed. has the admin and usufrusct of the property of
4. If given in the SAMW WILL WHERE THE disin his child under his parental auth.
was made.  “disinherited in this article” means only to a
disinherited CHILD/DESC.
 No disin can be done, or if already made,  What if disinherited daw, pero may FP? Or
Ineffectual. devis or leg? (not sure how possible kasi dba if
disin both legitime and FP? Hmm) = same will
WHAT IF cause of disin, is also cause of go to the subtitutes daw. If no sub, to other
unworthiness? heirs, legats, or devices by accretion. If
 Note: UNWORTHINESS = incapacity to succeed. accretion not proer, legal heirs by intestacy.
 Like: ABANDONMENT of children
 Attempt to take life
 MERE FACT OF RECON, EXTINGUISHES ALSO
THE UNWORTHINESS, NO DOX NEEDED.
 WHY? REAL will or intent of the testator
prevails.
 IF unworthiness not made ground of disin, or
no disin at all = 1033 applies,”if T made a will
fully knowing causes of unworthiness, said
causes of unworthiness shall be without
effect”

How disin rev0ked??

- Subsequent recon
- New will makinf the disinherited heir an
instituted heir.
- NOTE: a void will conatainig a DISIN denied
for probate, cannot be said to revoke a disin.
Pero! Wala naman talaga, no DISIN in the frsit LEGACIES & DEVISES
place, ngek, basta un .
403 924 – ALL THINGS WITHIN THE COMMERCE OF
402 923 – representation of the DISINHERITED MAN MAY BE BEQUEATHED Or DEVISED.
heir: children and desc of the disinherited shall
take his place and shall preserve the rights of  LEG IS PP
comp heirs with respect to the legtime.  DEV IS RP
 TESTAMENTARY DISPO
“can represent only insofar as the legitime”  Specific, unlike institution of heir na aliquot
part or fractional portion
Ex.  Separated from the UNVIERSALITY of the
A = 1m inheritance, they have for their purpose:
B and C = children 1. Compliance of testator of social duties
B = disinherited 2. Rewarding of the love and devotion of friends
C = given 1m and relatives
B has child D 3. Gratefulness for acts done to him
D repsesents B in getting B’s legititme which is 4. Benevolent acts for charity ganun
250k.
“Within the Commerce of MAN”
 Bought sold exchanged donated
 Conveyed in any manner
 May be appropriated (not res nullius, public
dominion etc)
 SAME RULE – liquidation of estate first bago
distribute
NOTE: heirs are not solidarily liable for taxes to be
paid by them on account of props received thru
inheritance or succ.
404 925 – a testator may CHARGE with Legs and devs
not only his Comp heirs but also the legatees and
devs.
Latter liable only for the charge to the extent of the
value of the legacy or dev received by them. Comp
heirs not liable for the charge beyond the amount of
the free portion given them.
“duty of giving the legacies and devises” = GR no one
is charged with this duty. It is the estate which must
give. Ofc estate represented by the executor/
administrator.
Article applies when “duty given to COMP heir” or to
“legatees or devisees” themselves, they must comply
with said duties, subject to limitations imposed by law.
 REASON WHY TESTATOR ALLOWED TO
CHARGE THEM WITH THIS DUTY: “right to
dispose carries with it the right in general to
impose conditions”
“legacy proper” – estate has the duty to give the
legacy
“pre legacy” – duty is given to the estate but the gift is
given to a specific heir or legatee, wut ex. T gave his
car to S his son, the car is a pre legacy)
 “Sub legacy/devise”
– duty on the heir “I institute C my child as my
only heir, however he must give a car worth 400k to L”
legacy of car is a sub legacy
- Duty on the legatee or devisee “I give my car
to L my friend, but I want L to give 500k to X”
Ordinary legacy car ung kay L and sub legacy
ung kay X. L is burdened insofar as the 500k is
concerned.
-
Note: a legatee bound to give a sub legacy is liable
only to the extent of the legacy given to him. 924
par 2
- A comp heir bound to give a sub legacy only
insofar as his legitime has not been impaired,
same article and par. (ex. if A comp heir,
legitime is 10k and fp share of 5k, sabi ng will
give niya X ng 10k, A is only liable to give 5k)
405 926 – When T charges one of the heirs with a
Legacy or devise, he alone shall be bound.
If not charged anyone, all shall be liable in the
same proportion in which they may inherit.
“in proportion to their institution to the FP”
ex. 406
estate is 1m
A and B children, instituted.
A= 3/5
B=2/5
They were required to give F a legacy of 50k.
Thus, proportional to their share in the FP.
Thus, A has 600k. (250 as legitime and 300 sa FP)
B has 400k (250 and 200)
Thus, 3:2 sa FP = it follows that A must give 30k and
20k)
407 927 – if 2 or more heirs take possession of the
estate, they shall be solidarily liable for loss of a
thing devised or bequeathed, even though only one
of them have been negligent.
Ex.
A and B took possession of estate and car given as
legacy to C.
A wrecked the CAR.
C = the legatee, can ask for reimbursement from A OR
B. (kahit isa lang ang negligent)
407 928 – heir bound to deliver the legacy or devise
shall be liable in case of eviction, if the thing is
generic and is indicated only by its kind.
Ex.
B an heir was ordered to give A a car. If car given to A
is lost by A thru eviction as when real owner defeats A
in a court action, B is liable. Since the legacy WAS a
GENERIC THING. Kasi heir should have selected a car
not subject of eviction.
 Ofc if specific. Not liable since B has no choice
but to give.
 Generic – not segregated from its class
 Also warranty against hidden defects or
encumbrance if devise.
408 929 – if T only owns a part of the thing, THEN
UNDERSTOOD NA BINEBEQUEATHE is LIMITED TO
SUCH PART OR INTEREST, unless T expressly gives its
entirety? How e di naman sakanya nga dba?
XPN: T expressly declares that he gives the
entirety even if the T knows that he does NOT
own the thing. (so dapat alam niya na di
sakanya)
 Why? Kasi kung AKALA NIYA lang SAKANYA,
pero in fact he only owns a portion, then the
part that he owns should be given, the REST
void legacy (pursuant to next article).
 How xpn applied: “even if I own only half of
the property, I hereby give the whole to D”
 NOTE: prove na alam ni T na hindi sakanya
thru: will itself or extrinsic evidence. Burden
lies with the recipient.
Ex. in 409
Weird and complicated examples. Look
 Pwede Apply sa mga future property na
magiging owner ung Legatee? Basta 409
 Applies sa usufruct? So T divests the naked
ownership to the devisee. Upon usufruct’s
death, owner na siya sa lahat. Kasi upon exting
of usuf, full ownership reverts to the naked
owner.
410 930 – thing belonging to another devised or
bequeathed = VOID if T believed thing is owned
by him. But shall take effect if the thing, not
belonging to him at the time he made a will,
afterwards becomes his. By whatever title.
“acquisition by subsequent title within MAKING
OF WILL AND DEATH” ofc kasi kapag patay na
pano pa niya maaacquire
“reason? Had T known that he does not own, he
would not have given the devise of legacy”
“so knowledge na di niya alam di presumed, ito
ung presumed na di niya alam na di sakanya”
411 931 – so T may order kay heir na a thing
belonging to another be acquired then given to a
legatee or devisee. Said heir or estate must
acquire it and give it.
If the OWNER refuses, or demands an excessive
price THE HEIR OR THE ESTATE SHALL ONLY BE
OBLIGED TO GIVE THE JUST VALUE OF THE THING.
“here T knows he does not own”
“order may be express or implied” the law did not
distinguish. Implied: “I hereby by give X’s car to Y”,
kahit walang express order to acquire like here,
give kabud.
Ex. 412
 Applies kahit ung owner ng CAR nagiba. Sa
example sa taas, si X binenta niya kay A. then
need pa din iacquire ung car kahit A na owner.
 Same if, ung car na acquire subsequently ni T
himself.
 Kahit na acquire din ni Y, the ordered heir. And
Y entitled to reimbursement. Because
acquisition was by onerous title. Estate
reimburse Y. article 933 to’
 If acquisition by donation? X donated to Y. then Y
not reimburse. Article 933 to
413 932 – Thing already belongs to the legatee at the
time of exec of the will, is INEFFECTIVE. Even though
another person may have some interest therein.
T orders that the things be freed from such interest
or encumb, legacy or device shall be valid to that
extent.
Ex. 413.
“since legacy is void, legacy/deisee cannot claim
monetary value” “cannot given what is already his”
“same presumption na kapag alam ni T di na niya
bibigay…”
ex. if co-Owner sila T and D sa land. Ang mapuputna
lang is ung part pertaining to T. pero OFC actually
since co-own, nagging sakanya na lahat syempre. Void
or ineffective ung part na binibigay ni T kay D ung part
na kay D naman talaga.
nd
2 par ex. T ordered L’s car to be freed from any
chattel mortgage. Order VALID.
414 933 – ineffective pa din, if legatee/devisee
subsequently alienated to another the thing already
owned by him at the time exec of a will.
same rule, if legatee devisee acquired it grat, he can
claim nothing; BUT if he acquire it by onerous title,
HE CAN DEMAND REIMBUSRSEMENT from heir or
estate.
 THE THING TO BE CONSIDERED IS if legatee,
OWNS the thing at the time of exec of will. if
yes, VOID.
 If at the time of exec, not sakanya. Then
nacquire nya ba onerous title. Then reimburse.
 If Legatee bought the thing, to the T himself?
Is the Legacy void? Revoked? NO! entitled pa
din reimbursement.
 Ex. 416
 If T, after making the legacy, SOLD the thing.
The Legacy is REVOKED! Thus kahit mabili ni L,
cannot be reimbursed. (revocation of leg is
957)
 Who reimburses? ESTATE or heir, legatee or
devisee charged.
417 934 – if the thing is pledged or Mortg to secure a
recoverable debt is the subject of the LEGACY or
DEVISE, then THE ESTATE IS OBLIGED TO PAY THE
DEBT or in other words free the said property para
maibigay kay leg/dev, UNLESS THE CONTRARY
INTENTION APPEARS.
SAME RULE IF thing pledged or mort AFTER the
execution of the will.
Any other charge, perpetual or temporary,
passes with it to the legatee or devisee.
 So ditto, si T ang nagpledge or mort nung
bagay ni binibigay niya okay.
 Said pledge or mort may be executed before
or after the exec of the will.
 Estate MUST free the property from: pledges,
morts, any other encumb or lien.
 XPN: contrary intention, pledge or mort NOT
given to secure a recoverable amount, BUT TO
SECURE, FOR EXAMPLE, A PERFORMANCE OF
THE FUNCTIONS OF A POSITION OR OFFICE 417
ESTATE no duty to free:
1. Easements
2. Usufructs
3. Leases which are real rights (those over one
year, or if not for more than 1 year but
registered)
4. Leases in nature of personal rights
5. Other charge with which the bequeathed or
devised is burdened. Par 2.
 REMEDIES of the Mortgagee: ( ROC) either
-/ abandon the security, completely disregard the
mortg, and proceed with the probate court to
claim the debt as creditor
-/ foreclose ordinary action disregarding the
probate proceedings and, if insufficient deficiency
in the probate court against the state
-/ or rely on the mortgage alone foreclose
anytime (note statute of limitations 10 years)

419 935 – Legacy of a credit against third person or
REMISSION of a debt of the legatee shall be
EFFECTIVE ONLY as regards that part of the credit of
debt EXISITNG AT THE TIME OF DEATH OF THE
TESTATOR.
FRIST CASE, estate shall assign the credit to the
legatee. (all actions and rights T has against the Dr)
SECOND case: giving legatee acquittance, SHOULD HE
REQUEST ONE.
Note: at the time of T’s death.
2 cases here: “legacy of a credit and Remission”
of a credit MUNA:
 Really in nature of a NOVATION. Legatee is
subrogated
 Admin may assign to the legatee, or collect
the credit himself then deliver the proceeds to
the legatee
 If ADMIN assigns, NO WARRANTY that the
credit really exists or legal. Why? Kasi
sinusunod lang wishes ni T.
 Effective only as regards the part exisiting at
death. (so kapag, nassign na credit at the time
will was exec, pero 600 was paid nab ago
mamatay , then upon then death 400 na lang)
 May be revoked
 May be a specific credit or a generic one
pertaining sa kahit anong credit of T
 Guarantees deemed included (surety,
guarantor ganun) or mort or pledge
LEGACY OF Remission NAMAN:
 Amounts to donation mortis causa, thus
subject to the rule if inofficious.
 Remitted should be added in net herediary
estate.
 “debt already paid” IBA sa “although X not yet
paid, I am considering it as if paid” ung first di
remission, mere ack.
 Resibo pwede magbigay, or ack of payment
should leg requested for such/
421 936 – Legacy reffered to in 937 shall lapse if the
testator should bring an ACTION against the debtor
for the payment. Even if such payment should not
have been effected at the time of death.
The legacy to the DR of the thing pledged by
him is understood to discharge only the right of
pledge.
 “revocation” ang par 1. So kahit hindi nabayad
actually nuh, basta may ACTION against DR. ex.
T bigay credit niya kay D against L. pero T
action against L. thus, credit legacy kay D
revoked.
“action is judicial” extra jud demand, not sufficient.
“unless the testator provides na legacy stands insofar
as the uncollected balance is concerned and action
will not revoke whole legacy”
“applies to CREDIT or REMISSION rule”
 2nd par. “L pledged a ring to T bec L owed T 1m.
T gave to L a legacy of the ring. In this case,
applying. Only the pledge has been
extinguished. Debt still remains since accessory
lang pledge.
If the principle obli is remitted, since accessory, carries
with it the pledge.
2nd par, applies to mort, anti chres. Or any security.
423 937 - A GENERIC LEGACY OF REMISSION of debt
COMPRISES those existing at the time of execution of
the will. NOT SUBSEQUENT ONES.
Generic = all wHether pure conditional or w/ a term.
 If remitted all the DEBTs but FP not enough?
Thus, application of payment rule should Be
applied. ARTCLE 950 ATA? Or oblicon? Ewan.
 ********************************
423 938 –legacy/dev made to creditor shall not be
applied to his credit! Unless un ang intention.

If un ang intention, then creditor have the right to
collect the excess if any.
Ex. T Owes A 1m. in t’s will gives 1m kay A. applying,
not bayad utang! Kasi no intention eh. Thus A is
entitled to 2m. why? Kasi Legacy or devise is
supposed to be a GIFT not a payment. (bayad utang
on top of legacy)
Pwede din sabihin ni T binibigay niya isang bagay for
payment ng utang. Pwede un, as long as the creditor
legatee accepts.
Ex. 424 second par. A gives a credit na sobra sa utang
niya kay creditor legatee as payment. Ung sobra is
considered as true legacy.
424 939 – if T orders the payment of a debt not owe
(pero actually di niya owe), considered as NOT
WRITTEN.
IF more than the amount was ordered to be paid,
excess not due, unless that is the intention.
“solutio indebitii” applies -
ex. if he thinks he owes 100k. pero 80k lang pala. But
100k is ordered In the will, excess will not be taken by
the legatee unless that is intended, intended as
legacy.
--- Not prejudice, fulfillment of natural obli.
 Excess will not be given, unless ung intention
niya, magbayad ng sobra as legacy.
 Natural obi – if T knowing the the debt had
prescribed, pwede.
425 940 – Alternative Legacies or devs, the CHOICE is
presumed to be left to the heir charged with the duty
to give the legacy or devise, or exec or admin if none.
If said heir dies? Right shall pass to the respective
heirs.
Once made, irrevocable.
Last par. See.
 Ex.
A orders B to give C a ring or CAR. Here, B is
given the right to choose. If B dies, transmitted
to B’s heirs. (unless personal ang pagpili kay B)
I mean sabi ni T si B lang talaga.
 Revocable na if made choice, unless may FIVU.
 Same rule in alternative oblis in oblicon. (last
par ng article to) sample :
- Like “when 2 or more things be given, only one
is possible, legacy converted to simple one
- Choice communicated to the recipient, after
comm, simple na,
- In as much as choice is INVOVLED, rules
relating to generic legs may be applied (941,
942, 943)
426 941 – A legacy of a GENERIC pp shall be valid
even if there be no things of the same kind in the
estate.
If GENERIC RP, valid if THERE IS IMMOVABLE
property of its kind in the estate.
IF Right of choice belong to the exec or admin
to comply by deliver of the thing which is neither
inferior nor superior quality.
 “one auto” vs “one of my auto” sa second if
wala, void.
 If “I give D 100 sq meters of land” if meron
pero insufficient? Void insofar as the are not
sufficient.
 “SOME of my auto” void daw. True intent
unknown.
 Same with “I hereby give to L an animal”
 When must be determined WON the thing
exists: “time of T’s death”
Note: if right of choice given to the estate (exec or
admin) right is not absolute:
1. Choice is neither inferior nor superior of
quality (kapag daw heir or leg or dev ang may
right of choice, this does not apply)
2. If meron sa estate, person who must choose
must choose between those existing in the
estate (942)
429 942 – right of choice given to HEIR, leg or dev, T
may give or the latter may choose whichever he may
prefer.
 Leg or dev here refers to the leg or dev favored
not those burdened.
 Need not be of medium quality
 Irrevocable after made
 Manner of choosing in any way basta clear
intention
429 943 – if said heir,leg or dev given the right to
choose and cannot do so, such right shall pass to his
heirs; choice once made irrevocable na.
 Heirs of favored or burdened
 Not apply to admin or execs
 May be renounce the right, basta valid waiver
of a right
 Choice may be embodied in a will of the
person choosing
430 944 – legacy for EDUCATION lasts until the
legatee is of AGE, or age in order for that legatee may
finish some professional, vocational or general course,
provided he pursues his course diligently.
Legacy for support – lasts during lifetime of
the legatee, unless provided otherwise.
If T not fixed the amount of such legacies,
shall be fixed in accordance with the social standing
and circ of the legatee and the value of the estate.
If during the lifetime, binibigyan na niya ng
support, the amount shall be in the same amount,
unless markedly disproportionate to the value of the
estate.
 Said legacies are personal – cannot be
transmitted unless intended. If successor to
the legatee is specified, restrictions on the
fidecom sub may be followed.
 T may fix amount, but should not ofc exceed
the disposable portion.
 Value of the estate in this article means net
value, minus the expenses, debts, legitimes
etc.
431 945 – if Periodical pension, or a certain amount
(monthly, yearly, weekly) is bequeathed, legatee may
petition the court for the FIRST installment upon
death of T, and for the ff installment when already
due. Payment shall not be returned even if the LEG
should die before the period which has commenced.
 Ofc after meron ng order for distribution, and
ofc aftr din ma pay debts etc.
 Support in arrears should logically given.
Arrears = utang
432 946 – thing is subject to a USUFRUCT, It shall be
respected until it is legally extinguished.
 Connected with last par of 934
 Exting of usuf see; 603
Exting causes: 603
1. Death of usufructuary
2. Expiration of period
3. Merge of usuf and naked ownership
4. Renunciation
5. Total loss of the thing
6. Termination of the right
7. Prescription
432 947 – Legs or devs acquires a right to the pure
and simple legs/devs from the death of the T, and
transmit it to his heirs.
 “vested” at moment of T’s death
 NOTE:
Vested at:
1. If specific = T’s death
2. Generic = after selection becoming specific
3. Alternative = choice
4. Order by T to be acquired from a stranger =
moment of acquisition
 If conditional, same. After T;s death, provided
that condition has been fulfilled.
 Note: suspensive and resolutory
NOTE: if voluntary heir predecease, incap,
repudiates, transmits no right to his own HEIRS. No
right to be represented.
434 948 – Specific thing (determinate) acquires
ownership upon T’s death, as well as the fruits.
(growing fruits, unborn offspring of animals,
uncollected income) but NOT income which are due
and unpaid before the T’s death.
From T’s death, thing shall be at risk of the
Leg/dev who shall bear its loss or deterioration, shall
benefit in case or improvement, without prejudice to
the responsibility of the exec or admin
 Industrial and natural fruits, as well as civil
fruits “income”
 “growing” so kapag nalaglag na, or gathered
na, or separated, di na daw.
 . “res perit domino” so kahit undelivered
 without prejudice to rights of innocent 3rd
persons.
 Note in suspensive: once effective na, it
retroacts, as if owned upon death.
 LEGS and devs subject to: payment of debts,
expenses of administration, family expenses
ROC 89. Creditors are preffered over legs devs.
 DONATIONS inter vivos, not subject to
payment of legs and devs, if are proper
donations ofc.
What if T said, benta ung property to pay a legacy of a
certain amount. HOWEVER the proceeds was less that
the specified amount? Should the legacy be
decreased? JURIS, NO. still pay the amount said by
the T, as long as legitimes not impaired. Unless the T
said that whatever the selling price is, that it the
legacy.
 Case in 437, donation inter vivos nakalagay sa
will for monthly sum for 10 yrs.
437 949 – if GENERIC, fruits and interest shall pass to
LEG DEV only if T has expressly ordered it to be.
 Fruits kasama, only those accruing after the
CHOICE has been made. If expressly said ni T,
then lahat accruing from his death.
 NOTE however, fruits also liable for debts
chargeable to the estate.
 MONEY generic. Interest if may default, or if
there was demand made na.
439 950 – if estate NOT SUFFICIENT to cover all legs
or devs, paymentshall be made in the ff order:
1. Remuneratory legs devs (debt);
2. Declared by T to be preffered;
3. For support
4. For educ
5. For specific things forms part of the estate;
6. All other PRO RATA. (RPSESA)
 “order of preference”
 applies for reduction of legs devs,
 IF legitime impaired or when there are
donations inter vivos chargeable to the FP art
911 governs.
 Note:
First apply CIV pro 729, to find out how much
the gifts must be reduced in order to settle the
debts etc. Then apply 950 which gift to be
reduced.
Ex. 440
T = gross estate of 410,000,
Debt = 50k
Will = 1. Legacy: support 200k, educ 200k,
spefic piano 100k.
Applying, civ pro. All legacies should be liable
proportionately for the 50k debt. Thus:
respectively: 180k, 180k, 90k.
Now no more debts. But adding all legacies, it
is 450k. property estate is only 410k. Thus,
apply 950 na regarding preference. support
check, educ check, = 360k. so wala na for piano
na 90k. waley na. wut. Gulo example paras.
******************************************
 Civ pro not apply if: No debt of, or if T
dedicated what properties shall answer for the
debt.
#1 – why remuneratory top in the list? Moral oblis.
#5 – specific things ONLY PART of estate.
443 951 – thing shall be delivered with all its
accessions and accessories and in the condition in
which it may be upon the death of T.
443 952 – Heir charged or the exec or admin, must
deliver the thing if he is able to do so and cannot
discharged obli by simply paying its value.
Legacy in money must be paid in cash, even though
the heir or the estate may not have any.
Expenses for delivery of the thing shall be for the
account of the heir charged or estate, without
prejudice to the legitime.
 Unless the grantee accepted any other
property.
 RP may be sold to satisfy money leg.
 Court may determine who shall pay necessary
expenses for delivery.
444 953 – Leg dev cannot take possession of the thing
upon his own authority, but shall request its delivery
and possession of the charged heir with the
legacy/dev, or exec/admin, should he be authorized
by the court to deliver it.
 Necessity of making a request for delivery
kahit ownership passes upon death.
 No distribution shall be allowed until
payment of debts taxes etc, unless distribute
give a bond in a sum to be fixed by the court,
conditioned for the payment of said oblis. Roc
rule 90
445 954 – leg dev cannot accept a part of the legdev
and repudiate the other if the latter be onerous.
Should he die before accepting, some of his
heirs may accept and the others may repudiate.
 Example of partly GRAT and partly onerous = x
given a devise of a house, lower story given
grat, while upper story given on the condition
that x would not marry Y. thus, X is not
allowed to accept only the grat, and renounce
other. WHY? Presumed that T would not have
given the devise without the onerous part.
 If X dies agad, his heir A and B may accept or
repudiate his share. UNLESS it is INDIVISIBLE.
446 955 – legdevee of TWO leg/dev, and one is
onerous, cannot renounce the onerous one and
accept the other. If both are of the same nature, free
to accept or reject both, or renounce either. Unless, T
intended that inseprabale or indivisible.
A legdevee comp heir, may waive the
inheritance and accept the legacy or devise, or
renounce the latter and accept the former, or waive or
accept both.
Note: second par means legitime and legdev. So un,
apply. Pwede I repudiate legitime and kunin lang leg
pala or vice versa. Or both,
447 956 – Legdevee cannot or unwilling to accept, or
for any reason the legdev becomes ineffective, it shall
be merged INTO THE MASS of THE ESTATE, except ofc
if may sub and of right of accretion.
 Incapacity or repudiation. Will descend by
intestate sux. So kapag nirenounce ni legatee,
will not go to his heir ofc,there is no
representation.
 ACCRETION: art 1015. When two are called to
the same inheritance, dev leg, part assigned to
the one who renounces, or cannot receive his
share, or predeceases the T, is added to that of
his co-heir/devisee/legatee. (so predecease,
incap, renounce)
 ISRAI? Institution, substitution,
representation, accretion, intestacy.
 If Legdevee “BSRAI” b is bequeathe
449 957 – leg dev shall be w/o effect if:
1. T transforms the thing in such a manner that it
does not retain either the form or
denomination it had;
2. Alienates by any title whole, or part. If partial
only, ineffective only with respect to the part
alienated. If T reacquired? Shall not arise the
VALDITY, unless reacquired by virtue of right
of repurchase.
3. Thing is totally lost during T’s lifetime, or after
his death w/o the heir’s fault. “but, note in
928 person obliged to pay in case of eviction of
a generic thing”
#1 = Transform =
“form” physical appearance
“denomination” designation
ex. school converted into apartment.
“refers to specific”
#2 Alienates =
donates or sells etc = implied revocation. Presumed
change intention.
“kahit binigay tapos subject to a resolutory condition
then nabalik kay T” still not valid.
Xpn: right of repurchase, or involuntary sale like
attachment, or case na narevoke legacy dahil thru
fraud, sinabi na patay na legacy. (vitiated consent)
#3 – LOST =
devised house was burned before T died. Khit was
burned after T’s death as long as no fault on the part
of the heirs of T.
eviction nasa 928 din, if GENERIC
Loss= physic, or legal, like expropriation.
452 958 – mistake as to the name of the thing, is of
no consequence, if it is possible to identify the thing T
intended.
Ex. “my only car, bmw edition 2001” pero ang meron
edition “2002”, typo lang.
452 959 – dispo made in GENERAL terms in favor of
T’s relatives shall be understood to be in favor of
those nearest in degree.
 Note: means relative within the 5th degree,
since past that degree no longer considered
relative.
 “nearer excludes the farther”
 right of representation does not exist!
Because pursuant to the old civil code, the
phrase was now omitted in the NCC.
Ex. “to the relatives of my wife” cannot apply article
kasi testator’s relatives daw.
“to all who are entitled thereto” same. Kasi meaning
ni T, intestate heirs.
LEGAL/ INTESTATE SUX
456 960 – it takes place when:
1. dies w/o a will, VOID will, subsequently lost
its validity.
2. Will DOES NOT INSTITUTUE an heir or dipose
all property belonging to the T. (legal sux shall
take place only with respect to the property of
which the T has not disposed)
3. SUSPENSIVE CONDITION ATTACHED to the
institution of heir does not happen, or heir dies
before the T, repudiates inheritance, and NO
sub, and no right of accretion takes place.
4. Instituted heir is INCAPABLE of SUCCEEDING,
except in cases provided in this code.
 Legal SUX: kind of sux prescribed by law, which
takes place when the expressed will of the
decedent has not been set down in a will.
 LEGAL = because fixed by law.
 INTESTATE = No will
Note:
“presumed will” ang law.
case:
/ Heirs presented partition which the court approved.
But a will turned up. Rule: Intestate Court cannot
make declaration of the invalidity of the will, it has no
juris to do so. Dapat PROBATE court. Separate order.
/ Intestate and Probate court generally has no auth to
determine issues of ownership.
 Reason for Legal sux: “unexpected death”
generally.
 NOTE:
1. w/o will = none made
2. void will = lacks essential requisites/ denied
probate
3. subsequent lost its validity = revoked/
ineffective
par2 = no heir, or when partial disposition.
Par3 = note: no legal sux if accretion or substitution.
Par4 = aside from incapacity: intestacy when:
expiration of resolutory term; fulfillment of the
resolutory condition.
NOTE: before intestate heirs may inherit on the
ground of VOID will, OFC there must be DECLARATION
OF THE NULLITY OF WILL, OR DISALLOWANCE.
Preterition: converts a testate proceeding into
intestate. But if only ordinary civil action to annul
partition, it does not convert it to intestate. Because in
ordinary civ action, court is limited with the properties
alleged in pleadings.
Total intestacy if walang leg dev. If meron mixed.
460 961 – in DEFAULT of TESTAMENTARY heirs,
inheritance shall pass in accordance with rules on
intestacy, in legitimate and illeg relatives of deceased,
sps, and in state.
Note: intestate heir is not necessarily a comp heir. Like
a bro, not comp, but intestate heir pwede.
 LEGAL sux, cannot be altered by a contract.
Case:
/ salary adjustments and unused vacation sick leaves
are part of the salary, thus conjugal thus half to sps.
BUT retirement benefits gratuitous, thus goes to the
estate, if no beneficiary.
Note: INTESTATE HEIRS which are COMP heirs may
be DISIN. Cannot DISIN not COMP heirs but ofc may
be excluded expressly “I exclude 1 of my borther, X”,
or impliedly “someone is instituted, leaving bothing
for the intestate heir”.
 Exclusion: must not be comp heir, state
cannot be excluded, the excluded alone is
excluded and not his own descendants,
express exclusion of 1 intestate heir makes
the property go to the heirs of the same
degree, if any, if none, to next degree. Wut
462 962 - Relative nearest in degree, excludes the
more DISTANT ones, saving right of representation.
If same degree, inherit in EQUAL shares, subject to
article 1006 w/ respect to relatives of the full and half
blood, and 987 par2 concerning paternal and maternal
lines.
“nearer relative excludes farther relative”
“rule on proximity” ito tawag dun. Favors nearest in
degree to the decedent.
EXAMPLE:
A died intestate, leaving Bro and Cousin. Only Bro
inherits. If 2 bros, equal shares.
If Granpa and bro? if same degree, apply “DIRECT
LINE is preferred over the COLLATERAL line”
 WHY IS DESC PREFFERED OVER ASC? Law
presumes that dec shall favor the desc.
Note rules:
1. Right of REP, takes place in direct descending
line, never in ascending. 972
2. Right or REP in collateral line, takes place only
in favor of children of bros or sis, whether full
or half blood.
3. Full blood and hald blood bro survives, former
is entitled to share double of the latter’s.
4. If merong more than 1 ascendant of equal
degree belonging to the same line, divide the
inheritance per capita, if different lines but
equal in degree, half to paternal half to
maternal. Par2 987 see.
5. XPN in rule of equal division: in ascending line,
between full and half blood bros and sis (2:1),
and div in cases of representation, and division
between legit and illeg children under fam
code
RULE ON EQUAL DIVISION: important. Gr; if same
degree, equal amounts, xpn, ung mga un. Sa taas.
RELATIONSHIP
Cases:
/uriarte case, half and full, important only to
determine amount of the share.
/ Bagunu case. Decedent died without any direct desc
or asc. Thus respo piedad, maternal aunt (3rd degree)
of decedent inherited intestate. Now petitioner argues
that she is also entitled as she is decedent’s daughter
of first cousin of deceased (5th degree). SC ruled,
proximity rule. Law favors the relative nearer in
degree, excludes others.
/ sayson case. Case is aunts and uncles vs 1 legit and 2
adopted children.
Issue here: if legally adopted? Yes, since they may
inherit like a legit. Now in right of rep, regarding their
parents, only the legit has such right, not the 2
adopted. Bec the relationship is created by virtue of
adoption is rel between adopted and adopter.
/
Proximity rule = absoulute. Xpn is nepwhews and
nieces?? 962.
464 963 – Proximity of relationship is determined by
number of generations. Each gen is 1 degree.
464 964 – series of degree forms a LINE, either direct
or collateral.
Direct line = ascendants and descendants
Collateral line = persons who are not ASC and DSC,
but come from common ancestor.
464 965 – see provision.
If all ABC repudiates = then shall pass to all 4
grandchildren. XYWZ. Each 300k IN THEIR OWN
RIGHT. Not right of rep.
If only C repudiates? Then A and B gets 600k (each),
children of A excluded nearer (A) excludes farther (his
children). Same with son of B. while son of C cannot
represent C.
If all are incap? Right of rep applies, X and Y gets 200
each. W 400, Z 400.
If all predeceased? Same in previous. Repudiate lang
talaga naiba.

465 966 – degrees are counted as there are

generations, excluding the progenitor (origin)

child is one degree from parent, 2 from Granpa etc.

in COLLATERAL, from common ancestor. RIGHT of REPRESENTATION

465 967 – Full blood relationship is same parents. “accretion applies if 1 of the 4 children, incap, and
said incap has no desc or sps” then other 3 shall
Half blood, one parent same. inherit by accretion.

466 968 – several relative of the same degree, one or 467 970 – Representation is a right created by fiction
some are UNWILLING or INCAP to succeed, his portion of law, representative is raised to the place and
shall accrue to the other of the same degree, w/o degree of the person represented, and acquire rights
prejudice to the right of REP. which the latter would have if he were living or he
could have inherited.
ex.
D, leaves 3 first cousin. If 1 unwilling. Then the 300k  Applies in case of:
estate. Shall be distributed equally to the 2. 100 each 1. PREDECEASE
then hati sa 100 nung unwilling. 2. INCAPACITY
3. DISINHERITANCE
Note: if repudiate, NO right of representation. If incap,
meron. 977  INTESTATE = ALL which could have been
inherited
466 969 – if the SOLE nearest degree heir  TESTATE = only legitimes. Heirs of Voluntary
REPUDIATES, or all nearest heir, the following degree heir no right to represent.
shall inherit in their own right and cannot represent
the person repudiating. Ex.
T 900k
Ex. ABC legit
D = estate 1.2 mil D son of A
ABC legit children T said each son gets 300k.
XY legit of A If A incapacitated.
W legit of B
Z legit of C Then D gets, 150k, legitime of A. 150k of A acquired by
accretion to B and C. thus, in sum, tig 375k si b and c.

 Not actually XPN sa nearer excludes farther.
Because, sa right or rep, the representatives
takes the degree and place of the person being
represented.
 Direct line pwedeng umangat, degree by
dgree.
ADOPTION:
1. Adopted child cannot represent.
2. Neither may an adopted child be represented.
3. RATIONALE: no filiation whether by blood or by
law between child and the PARENT of the
adopter. LEGAL FILIATION IS ONLY BETWEEN
ADOPTER AND ADOPTED.
4. Cannot be represented because: same, no
legal fiction between child of the adopted and
the adopter.
Adoption effects in general:
1. Same right as legit (but adoption does not
acquire Ph cit by virtue of the adoption only)
2. Auth of natural parent dissolved, unless ofc if
the adopter is sps
3. Adopted may use adopter’s surname
4. Adopted person now legal heir. Many provided
in page 470
5. Adopter shall not be legal heir of adopted
(ngek why) if natural parents are alive. If dead,
then adopter take place of the natural parents.
Testate or intestate.
6. EFFECTS under fam code: adopted deemed
legit;
7. Parental auth of natural terminate
8. Adopted remains intestate heir of his blood
relatives and parents
9. Art 190: see page 471. Sux of adopted
decedent. (50-50 sa adopter and natural
parents) (50-50 sa sps or illeg and adopters)
(illeg and sps and adopter 1/3 each) (adopters
only, inherit entire estate) (collateral blood
relatives, then ordinary rules of intestacy)
 Article (fam code article ata) or 970? applies
only in intestate/legal sux.
 Representation COVERS RIGHTS & OBLIS.
Transmissible obli only ofc.
Case:
“Bagunu case”
right of rep NOT apply to “others” like collateral
relative within 5th civil degree. Page473
 Right of rep in the Cultural line: takes place
only in favor of children of bros and sis
(nephews nieces) and not grand nephews and
grandnieces.
473 971 – Rep is called by LAW and NOT by the
person presented. THUS, DOES NOT SUCCEED THE
PERSON REPRESENTED but the one whom the person
represented would have succeeded.
 Representative inherits form the decedent, not
from the one being represented.
 Thus, property received by representation
cannot be applied to the debts of the person
being represented.
ex.
T
A and B =children
C and D = A’s children
A dies, and giving 2/3 to C and 1/3 to D.
If T subseqinetly died. Despite the hatian. Will inherit
from T equally. Dividing to both the supposed share of
A.
474 972 – ROR takes place in the direct descending
line, never in asc line.
In collateral, only in favor of children of bros
or sis (full of half).
476 973 – for Representation to take place
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSELF MUST BE CAPABLE OF
SUCCEEDING THE DECEDENT.
 Capacity to succeed governed by “NATIONAL
LAW of the Decedent” not by the national law
of the person represented nor representative.
 Note: If A disinherits B, his son. B may still
represent A to succeed from A’s asc. Because
law says that capacity to succeed from A’s asc
is the determining factor.
477 974 – whenever there is sux by REP, the division
of the estate shall be made per stirpes. The
representative /s shall not inherit more than the
person they represent would have inherited.
 Per stripes = means inheritance by group, all
those within the group inherit in equal shares
 per capita =
**********************************
WAYS OF INHERITING:
1. PER STIRPES OR PER CAPITA – how much
2. By representation or own right – How
Thus:
Es.
T and disin person dbuh, so why siya lang di
Sons = A B C
A no child.
B (deceased) has two children.
C (deceased) has one child.
In this case, also GR is equal degree inherits equally.,
in this case chil of C inherits more than children of B.
because children of B paghahatian pa nila ung kay B,
compared sa child ni C na solo. This article applies
straight.
477 975 – if Nephews and nieces survive, they shall
inherit form the deceased by REP, if they survive with
their uncles or aunts. But if alone (or no uncles or
aunts), they shall inherit in equal portions.
Ex.
Siblings = A B C
X = B’s son
Y and Z = C’s son.
A = decedent.
Estate 900k
If C = predeceases A. then Y and Z represents him
right.
Applying = B gets 450k, Y and Z collectively gets 450k
din (225 each) (this is when may kasama uncle and
aunt like in tharticle)
What if both B and C predecease?
(this if “alone”) thus, inherit in their own right, PER
capita. X Y Z, 300k each. Gets.
478 976 – A person may represent HIM whose
inheritance he has renounced.
Example: D – C – B – A (A is pinaka matanda)
 Even if C repudiate niya share niya sa parent’s
estate (B). He, C, can nevertheless represent
his (B) parent to inherit from his grandad (A).
Pero ung anak niya,D, anak ni C, since nag
repudiate, cannot represent para mag inherit
from B.
 A renouncer may represent = but cannot be
represented.
 Why? (pero note pwede irepresent an incap
pwede?) because, siya lang ung voluntary.
 Repudiation is an act of disposition. Thus, he
takes a away his right to dispose of the
property he could have inherited.
 But incases of incap or disin = loss is
involuntary. Their heirs should not suffer for
things they cannot control thus may represent.
478 977 – One who repudiate their share MAY NOT BE
represented.
Notes: nandun explanation sa taas.
ORDER OF INTESTATE SUX
NOTE: DESC-ASC-ILLEG-SPS-COLL-STATE.
480 978 – Sux pertains to, in the first place to the
DESCENDING DIRECT LINE.
 So “descending line is preffered”
 DESC – ASC – COLL
Note: Does not mean that OTHER comp heirs, like sps
and illegs are excluded pursuant to “nearer excludes
farther”. They are “concurrent intestate heirs” with
legit descendants.
ORDER OF sux to the estate of a legit child:
1. Legit children and their desc (979)
2. Legit parents other legit asc (986) (if no legit
parents, ADOPTING PARENTS will take their
place)
3. Illeg children and their desc (wether legit or
illeg) 988 990 992
 4. Sps, w/o prejudice to rights of bros and sis,
nephews and nieces if any. 995
5. Collateral relative ap to the 5th degree 1011
6. STATE.
Order of sux as to estate of illeg child:
1. Legit children other legit desc 979
2. Illeg children and other desc 988 989 990
3. Illeg parents (no legit daw ang illeg decedent?)
4. Sps, illeg bros sis, neph nce.
5. State.
481 979 – Legit children and their desc succeed the
parents and other asc, w/o distinction as to sex or age,
and even if they should come from different
marriages.
An adopted child, succeeds in the same
manner as a legit child.
 Includes “legitimated” – legitimated by
subsequent marriage. Retroact to the time of
child’s birth. What children died before celeb
of marriage? It shall benefit their DESC. (181
FC)
 XPN to Adopted children. If the adopter is
survived by legit parents or asc and the
adopted, the LATTER shall not have more SUX
rights than an ack natural child. (343?) so here,
the only child, is an adopted one.
 So if may legit, same share si adopted at si
legit.
 NOTE: adoption makes the adopted legal heir,
BUT the adopter shall not be legal heir of the
adopted, whose parents by NATURE shall
inherit from him 342, 970, PD 603)
 So adopted children, excludes sister of
deceased.
483 980 – Children of the deceased shall always
inherit from him in their own right, dividing the
inheritance in equal shares.
 True even if children come from different
marriages. Kasi common parent naman.
483 981 – Children of deceased and desc of other
children who are dead survives (so apo?), FORMER,
shall inherit in their own right, latter by REP.
 Also applies to cases of incapacity, so not just
predecease.
484 982 – Grandchildren and other desc shall inherit
by right of rep, and if any one of them should have
died, leaving several heirs, portion pertaining to him
shall be divided among the latter in equal proportion.
Ex.
A decedent.
BCD children
EFGHJ grandchildren
KL are J’s child
Estate = 900k
BCD and J predecease.
Thus, represent, hati hati.
Note as long as no repudiate, bec cannot represent.
Thus, if all children repudiate. Grandchildren inherit in
their own right, per capita, (equal shares)
Note: Nephews and nieces survives, inherit in EQUAL
portions, per capita (975).
Case/
If SPS and nephew nieces/ bros sis survivies. Half-half.
(see 975 kung di gets)
485 983 – illeg survives w/ leg. See 895.
 half of leg’s share, and taken from the FP =
share of illeg. (NOTE: still legitime should not
be impaired)
 if impaired = whatever is left Is given to the
ILLEG.
486 984 – adopted child dead, without issue, his
parents and relatives by CONSAGUINITY, not by
adoption, shall be his LEGAL heirs.
 Pwede naman by will bigyan niya si Adopter.
Dbuh. Oki. Hehe
 “reversion adoptive” – page 486
case/
reversion adoptive applies to judicially adopted child.
So nainherit ni adopted child props from adopter.
Then pwedeng mapunta sa natural parents.

ASCENDING DIRECT LINE
487 985 – in default of legit children and desc, parents
and asc inherits excluding COLL relatives.
 Here, legitimate asc.
488 986 – Father and mother, if living, inherits in
equal shares.
If only one lives, he or she succeed tot the
entire estate of the child.
 Why? Both are equally entitled ofc.
 Why 2nd par? No right of rep in the ascending
line.
488 987 – if NO mother father, ASC in NEAREST
DEGREE SHALL INHERIT.
If meron, pero more than one in EQUAL degree
belonging to the same line, divide the inheritance per
capita; but if different lines but of EQUAL DEGREE, half
go to paternal and other half to maternal. Then hati
na nun per capita in each line.
ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN
490 988 – IF NO LEGIT DESC, illeg shall succeed to the
entire estate.
(ditto ata wala ding SPS?)
490 989 – survives: illeg , desc of another illeg child
(form deceased illeg child), the FORMER shall succeed
in their own right, and the latter by ROR.
 Similar for grandchildren of legit. Thus also
applies in incapacity.
 Here “descedants” meaning both illeg and leg,
article does not distinguish.
491 990 – hereditary rights of illeg granted by 2
preceding article, shall be transmitted upon their
death to their DESC, who shall inherit by ROR from
their deceased grandparent.
 Same ROR. Applies to predecease and incap.
 Same, desc meaning illeg and leg.
492 991 – illeg children with legit asc, half-half.
Regardless of their number, half for asc and half for
illeg.
Ex.
T died
A father
B and C illeg
Estate is 1m
Thus. 500k for A, 500 for B and C.
e. *********************
 “partial intestacy” – first charge the testate to
share of illeg. ex. sabi ni T give 200k to my
firend, no other provision was included thus.
800k estate. Half (400k) to the surviving father.
And the rest to (300) to illeg. so ang recieve
niya is more than his legitime nuh? Kasi sa 889,
illeg entitled to ¼ of the estate charged from
the FP.
 NOTE intent of the law is give as mouch as
possible to the ILLEG.
 So GR in partial intestacy, “charge the legcacies
to the share of those given by law more than
their respective legitime, w/o impairing
legtiime. Charging must be proportionate.
494 992 – illeg child has no right to inherit AB
INTESTATO from legit children and relatives of his
father or mother; nor shall legit child or relative
inherit in the same manner from the illeg child.
 “Barrier” between legit fam and illeg fam.
Ex.
A parent oldest
B legit child, D leg child and E illeg
C illeg, F is leg and G illeg.
Thus, if B and C, predecease.
D can represent B to inherit from M. E cannot, since
illeg siya.
How about C’s line? F and G can represent C daw.
Since 990 and 902, transmitted daw sa heirs. Upon
death of C. (so ang illeg GC pwede irepresent ang
parent which is illeg din) page 497 law is law daw kahit
unfair, kaasi si E di pwede magrepresent dba. Pero F
and G pwede. READ #2 in 497 if nakalimutan. Naka
highlight.
. Page 495 reason.
Cases/ page 496.
Illeg disgracefully looked down upon by legit fam.
Thus legit fam hate by illeg? ngek. Product of sin,
naman tingin ng legit fam.
/ to avoid further grounds of resentment. Law ignore
the existing blood ties.
/ barrier applies not only to intestate, but also to
testate, insofar as legitime is concerned,
/ problems in 498.
/ maria tol-noquera v. villamor, Tol page 500.
/manuel v ferrer. Principle of absolute separation
between the legitimate fam and the illeg”
503 993 – if an illeg child, dies w/o issue, his father
and mother shall succeed to his entire estate, and if
child’s filiation is duly proved as to both parents, both
living, they shall inherit from his share and share alike.
Ex.
A has an illeg child B,
B died without issue.
Thus, A succeed to the entire estate of B, unless B is
proved to be the child of C also. In this case, both A
and C, will inherit equally.
504 994 – if no father or mother, succeeded by
surviving sps, entitled to the entire estate.
If widow, widower should survive w/ bros and sis
(leg?), neph nc, said sps shall inherit half and half for
other.
Illustrate:
F has illeg child A, and legit child L.
A is married to W. if F dies. And A dies, leaving estate
of 1 M. W gets everything, brother L gets nothing.
Barrier.
Surviving Spouse
505 995 – in absence of Legit desc and ASC, and illeg
and their desc, SPOUSE shall inherit ENTIRE. w/o
prejudice to 1001, pertaining to rights of bros sis neph
ncs.
 Ofc spouse MUST be legit. Common law
marriages not recognized in PH.
 Not inherit if sps Is quilty party in case of Leg
sep.
 Note article 900 if articulo mortis .
507 996 – if a widow or wdwr and legit children left,
same share to that of each child.
 Note in this case children”
 What if spouse and 1 child lang?? equal pa din,
intent of the law.
 What if may other comp heir aside from lone
legit child? Then ALL must be given legitimes,
whatever left to spouse.

Case/ Eusebio Hansen (page 508)
1 child and spouse = equal.
Illustrations in 508. Different survivors.
Case/
Wife, 1 leg, and 2 illeg.
Thus, son gets ½. Widow gets ¼. Illeg each gets 1/8.
(pero ordinarily illeg child each gets half of sa son
dba?) di daw pwede kasi kulang. Kasi kung each illeg
gets ¼. Then kulang, since ¼ na lang natira after
mabigay ½ ni son and ¼ ni sps.
510 997 – widow survives w/ legit parents or asc,
spouse entitled to half and other half half.
 So hati si mom fath sa half. If both alive.
If partial intestacy:
1M estate
legacy for 100k
survivors: father and spouse
thus, father gets 500k, legacy bawas sa share ni
spouse. Then 400k sps.
Idk why bakit s asps lagi ibabawas? Hmm

511 998 – survivors: wdw with illeg.
wdw = half, illeg other half.
512 999 – survivor: wdw with legit or their desc, and
Illeg children. Wdw = same share as that of legit.
 Here Spouse survived with, legit, illeg.
Ex.
Estate is 700k.
Survivors are: sps, 2 legit, 1 illeg.
Thus,
Applying “sps same share as legit”
Thus, spous= 200, 2 legits 200 each. =600k
Remaining 100 to illeg. “intestate shares”
Note: ditto hindi impaired legitime ng children dahil
400 ung pinaghatian. Since legitime is 350 dba.
514 1000 – survivors: legit asc, sps, illeg. then, asc
=half, other half divided between sps and illeg. (1/4 ¼)
case/
note: presence of adopted child, does not exclude asc.
So sps = ¼ , adopted ¼ and Mother = ½.
Partial intestacy problem:
Estate 1m
Legacy 100k.
Thus,
Father, get half 500k
Spouse gets 150. (minus the legacy)
Illeg gets 250. (note ordinarily 1/8 ang legitime ni wife.
To 1/8 of 1M is 125k. so nakuha niya pa ung sobra na
25k)
516 1001 – survivors:
bros sis (or NN) with Sps, half-half.
Ex. in 516. Looos, dami situations.
BCD bros.
D has wife, 1 leg and 1 illeg. thus,
if W only, then sakanya lahat.
If, BCW, then art applies. Half-half.
Note:
Bors and sis excluded by existence of ILLEG children.
Oki oki. So favored child talaga.
518 1002 – If surviving spouse, gave couse for LS, not
entitled to inherit.
 Note not just giving cause, there must actually
be legal sep.
 Unless, subsequent RECONCILLIATION.
COLLATERAL RELS.
518 1003 – only if no Desc, Asc, illeg, or sps, COLL
receive ENTIRE.
 They are intestate, but no compulsory heirs.
 NOTE RULE: nearer X farther.
 Regardless or blood ties, thus half bllod or
full!
519 1004 – survivors are bros and sister in full blood,
equal shares.
520 1005 – survivors are: BROS SIS W/ NN, (AH ETO
NA YUN), former shall inherit PER CAPITA, latter per
stirpes.
Illus in page 520.
 ROR only up to Neph and nieces. Not
grandNNs.
Case/
Survivors: sister, 4 nephs, 1 neice, and 6 other NNS.
Those who did not sign the egreement as beneficiary,
should inherit per stirpes.
Case/
NN’s and Aunt in another line ata. NN’s excludes the
Aunt. 523 (1009)
523 1006 – survivors: bros and sis Half blood, and
those full. Full’s is double the share of the half.
 Note ditto: si deceased bro, magiinherit mga
kapatad niya.
524 1007 – half blood on mother side and father side.
All shall inherit in equal shares w/o distinction of the
origin of the property.
Note in this case:
There are 3 marriages involved.
The surviving spouse of two prior marriages, married
each other.
And the decedent is the CHILD in the latest marriage.
So may borther siya sa father and mother side. EQUAL
shares here.
525 1008 – children of bros of the half blood shall
succeed per capita or per stripes, in accordance w/
rules laid down for bros and sis in full.
 Pertains to half blood nephews ncs.
525 1009 – IF no bros sis, NNs, other COLL shall
succeed.
w/o distinction of lines or preference among
them by reason of relationship by the whole blood.
 NOTE: what if? Full blood NNs with half blood
NNs? Same rule, na full twice as much as half.
527 1010 – right to INHERIT AD INTESTATO shall not
extend beyond the 5th degree of relationship in the
collateral line.
 Limited to the 5th degree.
 Limitation to promote socialization of
ownership of property.
STATE
527 1011 – In default of ALL said, and relative within
the 5th degree.
 To not leave the property ownerless
 Last intestate heir
528 1012 – ROC must be observed, for state to take
possesson.
 “RULE 91, ESCHEATS” page 528. French word
means accident/ chance.
 HOW? SOL GEN shall file petition praying for
the properties to be declared escheated. Of
must prove na wala heirs, etc.
529 1013 – After payment of charges and DEBTS, PP
SHALL BE ASSIGNED TO MUNICIPALITY WHERE
DECEASED LAST DECIDED. If RP, where It is situated.
If never resided in PH, whole estate shall be
assigned to municipality or city located.
FOR benefit of public schools, charitable inst.
Court shall determine the share of the beneficiary
based on the needs of beneficiary.
Court may also establish permanent trust, so
that income from porety shall be used.
530 1014 – Claimant must! FILE A CLAIM within 5
years from the date of the delivery of the property to
the state. If proper, entitled to possession of the
same. If already sold, municipality shall be
accountable to himfor such part of the proceeds AS
may NOT HAVE BEEN LAWFULLY SPENT?
 Nasa ROC din to’
 Notes rules: 530
Tables in 533
COMMON prvisions to testae and INTES
RIGHT of ACCRETION
Right based on the PRESUMED will of the deceased,
that he prefers to give certain properties to certain
heirs rather than to his legal heirs.
535 1015 – 2 or more are called to the same
inheritance, devise of legacy, the part assigned to the
one who renounces, or cannot receive his share, or
predecease, IS ADDED OR INCORPORATED TO THAT
OF HIS CO-HEIRS, CO-DEVISEES, OR CO-LAGATEES.
 Reason = based on presumed will. see
definition sa taas.
Case/
Share of the usufruct on favor of her cousin’s children
who died, shall accrue to the surviving cousin’s
children.
 May be avoided by; designating a sub, or
providing na accretion WILL not occur.
 Requisites:
 1. Unity of object
2. Plurality of subject or heir Ex.
3. A portion is vacant (repudiate, incap etc) Par 1 = One half each of the house. Since not
4. Acceptance by the person entitled. earmarked may ROA.. Unless sabi, 1st floor 2nd floor
chenes.
 It is a RIGHT. Not obli, thus also re
prepudiated. Or CAR. 1/3 and 2/3 A B. may ROA. Since mere fixing
of protion does not make the property determinate.
Ex.
Car. Par 2. Self explan.
If fraction, ahit pera. Not earmarked.
 Note: in some case, like: A first floor, B 2nd
floor. Here, if A repud, B cannot because may Case/
SPECIFICATION. Thus, accretion may occur Facts: ABC, T died said I leave to them my credit
when T said na, if “other gets the property”. balance. 30k. A pred.

NOTE: in incap or pred., REPRESENTATION to the Apply. ISRAI.

legitime takes precedence over accretion. Institution No.
Sub no, bec none.
 Note actually no accretion in LEGAL sux, dahil Representation? Not proper because voluntary.
inheriting in their own right. Accretion??? PWEDE.
Thus, di na need INTESTATE.
ex.
Aside from Incap, pred and repud. It may take place Case/
when: if suspensive condition is not fulfilled (form of INTESTACY takes place ONLY when ACCRETION is not
incapacity actually, and failure to identify to possible. Thus mapupunta sa other instituted heir.
IDENTIFY one particular heir, devisee or lagat, while
other can be identified. 541 1018 – In legal SUX the SHARE of the Person who
repudiates the Inheritance shall always accrue to his
co-heir.
538 1016 – to take place in testamentary sux:
1. 2 or more persons be called to the same  Accretion in intestacy.
inheritance, or same portion, pro indiviso;
2. that 1 of the person called, die before T, Ex.
renounce, or incap to receive. T = no will.
A B bros of T and only heirs.
Ex. T instituted A and B as his heir. If a cannot. B If A repudiates, B will get his share.
receives half by institution and half by accretion.
What if A has a child? No cannot. Because cannot be
 Pro indiviso means undivided. represented.

LEGAL accr – 1015 and 1018 Note ISRAI. So if rep muna bago accr. So if INCAP,
TESTA – 1016. pwede REP hindi accr.

539 1017 – “one-half for each” or “in equal shares”,

or other phrase, though designating an aliquot part,
dos not make each heir the exclusive owner of the 542 1019 – the heirs to whom the portion goes by the
determinate property, shall not exclude the ROA. ROA take it in the same proportion that they inherit.

In case of money of fungible, if share is NOT

earmarked, there shall be ROA.
  Ex here. 3 are heirs. ½ , 1/3 and 1/6 share. Is
the one with ½ repudiates. The other two shall
inherit in proportion to their original shares.
 NOTE: similar sa substitution. Na same share.
543 1020 – The heirs to whom the inheritance
accrues shall succeed to all the rights and OBLI which
the heir who renounce would have had.
 Unless may contrary provision sa WILL. or said
obli are PERSONALLY applicable only to the
orginial heir.
543 1021 – Among the comp heirs, the ROA shall take
place only when the free portion is left to two or more
of them. Or to any one of them and to a stranger.
Should the part repudiated is a legitime, other
co-heirs shall succeed to it in their own right, not by
the ROA.
 ACCR among comp heirs
 NO ACCR INSOFAR AS LEGITIME IS
CONCERNED.
Ex.
Estate is 600k.
T institute heirs his two legit children XY and Z frined.
Thus,
First give legitimes to X and Y. 150k each.
Thus FP is 300k.
Divide equally to XYZ.
Thus, 100k Z gets.
Suppose X, predeceases T.
Thus, supposed legitime of X goes to Y. the remaining
100 (the instituted protion) will equally go to Y and Z
by ROA. Equal kasi equal din and instutition sakanila.
545 1022 – In testa sux, when ROA DOES NOT take
place, the vacant portion of the instituted heirs, if no
SIB, shall PASS to the LEGAL HEIRS of T. same charges
and obli. (ISRAI)
ex.
when the portion was earmarked. Thus no ROA, goes
to heir.
545 1023 – ACCR shall also take place among DEVS,
LEGTS, and USUFS, under same conditions.
CAPACITY TO SUCCEED BY WILL OR BY INTESTATCY
546 1024 -
ACCEPTANCE & REPUDIATION OF THE INHERITANCE
577 1041 – Acceptance and repudiation is an act
PURLEY VOLUNTARY AND FREE.
 Vitiated = revocable
 Acceptance presumed kaya repudiation
requires more formalities
 Partial pwede
 Legitime may be repudiated
 Reason: no one can be compelled to accept
generosity
 ACC/REP CANNOT BE MADE DURING LIFETIME
OF T. XPN: COLLATIONABLE DONATIONS
INTER VIVOS AND REMISSIONS
 1041 applies to donations inter vivos and to
remission of debts
578 1042 – Effects of Acc or rep shall retroact to the
moment of death of Decedent.
 Prevent time where a property is not owned by
anyone
 MUST BE PURE AND ABSOLUTE.
579 1043 – No person may accept or rep an
inheritance unless he is caertain of the death of the
decedent, and of his right to the inheritance
 Must be made in due time:
1. Certain of the death (presumed dead
enough) if made if alive, not valid.
2. Certain of his right to inherit (thus,
acceptance of a legacy is uselss if the will is
void)
DEATH:
Presumed dead for purposes of opening SUX = after
absence of 10 years.
If after age of 75 = 5 years is sufficient.
Also; presumed dead for all purposes:
1. Vessel lost, missing plane – for 4 years since
the incident
2. Armed forces, taken part in war – 4 years
3. Danger of death four years.
NOTE: Reappered? Recover property in the original
condition, if not possible the price if already
alienated, CANNOT claim fruits rents etc.
580 1044 – Any person having free disposal of his
PROP may ACC or REP.
If minor or incap? Parents or Guardian may
accept. Repudiate? Need Judicial authorization.
If inheritance left to poor? May accept by
those designated by T if none, pursuant to 1030.
 Accept need not jud auth, unless w/ burdens.
 Note Lucid interval.
 RePud = alienation KAYA NEED JUD AUTH.
581 1045 – JUDICIAL ENTITiES – MAY ACCEPT.
REPUDIATE? COURT APPORVAL.
 WHY? PUB POL DAW.
581 1046 – PUBLIC OFFICIAL establishments –
Approval of GOVERNMENT necessary to Acc or Rep.
 Executive or department head
 Who are these? Those estab for public prupose
and supported by public money, schools,
hospi, charity etc.
1047 – married woman = need not consent of
husband. Rep or acc.
 OLD CC married woman need consent to
repudiate.
 Dahil separate prop naman daw.
1048 – Deaf mute may acc or Rep personally or thur
agent = basta Can Read and write. If cant? Thru
guardians w/ JUD APPROVAL to REP only.
582 1049 – Acceptance MAY BE TACIT OR EXPRESS.
Express = in public or private dox
Tacit = acts, intention to accept.
But acts or mere preservation or provisional
administration, do not imply acceptance if, thru such
acts. The title or capacity of an heir has not been
assumed.
 Tacit (actions in the capacity of an heir)
 Express
 Presumed – (1057) – 30 days after court issued
an order of distribution of the estate, people
concerned have not signified either acc or rep.
 Acts of mere preservation ex. = harvesting
fruits, collecting income, repairing,
583 1050 – Inheritance DEEMED accepted:
1. Heir sells, donates, assigns his rights to a
stranger, or to co-heirs, or to any of them;
2. Renounces for the benefit of one or more of
his co-heirs
3. Renounces for a price in favor of all his co-heirs
indiscriminately, (but if gratuitous and shall be
in favor of those who may acquire by
accretion, shall not be deemed as accepted).
 This is implied ACC
Par 1 = disposal implies ownership
Case example – A “renounced” the legacy in favor of
his creditor to pay of his debt.
Par 2 = repudiation here is actually disposition of
property rights.
Par 3 = he received something in exchange for his
share.
Manresa = kahit not in favor of co-heirs; kahit legal
heirs, subsititue, accretion? Basta for consideration =
implied acceptance.
 ROA = not accepted= why? This is actually
ABSOLUTE REPUDAITION.
586 1051 – REPUDIATION!!=
1. Public OR authentic instrument
2. OR by petition to the court having juris over
the testate or intestate proceedings.
 Thus, REPud must be EXPRESS!
  Why? Act of disposing, unnatural, disturbs
juridical relations, Creditors of renouncer must
be informed.
 “AUTHENTIC” - : genuine, not forged duh
 PETITION - must be presented within 30 days
from order of court for the distribution of the
estate, otherwise deemed accepted. 1057.
 Repudaite = never owned
 SEE article 954 and 955 when CANNOT REP.
586 1052 – if heir REPUDS to the prejudice of his
CREDS, latter may petition the court to authorize them
to accept it in the name of the heir. Wow.
Only the extent sufficient to satisfy their
credits, EXCESS shall NOT pertain to the renouncer.
But to person entitled by law. (intestate heirs or other
or state)
 “waiver not allowed to prejudice 3rd persons”
 Note Creds accept in Renouncer’s name
 Accept only to the extent of their credit
 NOTE: Renouncer still considered as
RENOUNCED.
 NOT prejudiced if: may properties pa si
renouncer, if naging creditor ONLY AFTER THE
REPUDIATION.
Cases/
588
note sa problem = “accretion excludes right to inherit
by intestacy. “
589 1053 – Heir died w/o having ACC or REPUD, his
right shall be transmitted to his heirs.
 Here na inherit na actually, kaya lang namatay
din siya agad after namatay ni decedent.
 Note: principle na “renouncer cannot be
representred but may represent” applies in
predecease not survival, see example (b) in
page 589
590 1054 – if several heirs = some may accept and
other may repud
 Here, may “individual shares”, so acc or repud
their respective shares.
590 1055 – An heir called to inherit by WILL and ab
intestate, repudiation of inheritance in his capacity as
testamentary heir is understood to be repudiation in
both capacities.
Repudiation as an intestate heir, w/o knowing
he is also a testamentary heir, he may still accept it in
the latter capacity.
 Par 1 = non acceptance of testamentary share
= non acceptance of intestate
 AUTOMATICALLY DISQ daw, so cannot repud
testa and accept intestate. Note mere
presumed.
 This is actually implied repud, based on an
express repud.
 Par 2 = intestate share rpud, pero not know na
merong testate share. (baka gusto fulfill wishes
ni T)
 What if knwing na meron test pero repud and
intest? May still accept pa din daw.
 Will > presumed will or intestacy.
 Kaya DISREGARDING WILL = DISREGARDING
PRESUMED WILL. not vice versa.
592 1056 – Accep or Repud, once made is
IRREVOCABLE, CANNOT BE IMPUGNED. XPN:
VITIATED CONSENT, UNKNONW WILL APPEARS.
 Prevent confusion
 Xpns: fivum and Unknown will.
 Note:
UNKNOWN WILL:
1. If mere inSignificant changes, will not impugn
acc or rep
2. SUBTANTIAL CHANGES, YES.
 If may condition, heir accepts. But condition
not fulfilled = acceptance is VOID.
593 1057 – within 30 days after the court issued
order of distribution of the estate, HEIRS shall signify
ACC or REP. if not, deemed accepted.
 Here, may SETTLEMENT OR ARDMI
PROCEEDINGS.
  OFC 1050 pa din pwede mag apply, sa binenta
ganun,
 Can no longer, REPUD after 30 days.
EXECUTORS & ADMINS
595 1058 – Governed by ROC
 ROC 78-90
 Exec v Admin
 Exec appointment confirmed by court
 Proof of Decdedent’s death before
appointment of exec or admin.
 Admin pendent lite – habang pending sa
appointment ng regular exec or admin
 SPECIAL ADMIN – allowed to sell property with
court’s approval, but not allowed to pay debts,
 Preference of SS to be regular admin. ROC
 Order of preference page 597
Principal duty – administering, settling, closing the
administration without delay. Determine properties
belonging to the estate, bring actions to recover,
submit inventory and appraisal or pps and rps. Render
proper accounting.
ADMIN – need prior approval of court to enter
transactions regarding the estate,
Generally – liable sila sa attys fee, for legal services,
and reimburse sa estate.
600 1059 – assets not sufficient to pay DEBTS,
preference of credits shall be observed (2239 and
2251, provided that expenses incurrde reffered to in
2244 no 8 shall be those invpvled in the
administration of the decedent’s estate.
2244 gives order of preference.
Case/
Gr not issue writ of execution. Di need to satisfy claim
Xpns:
Satisfy debts of estate out of contributive shares of
heirs devs legs , enforce payment of expnses of
parititon, costs for examination proceedings.
Legacy or devicee, not a debt of estate thus, cannot be
enforced by a WRIT of EXECUTION.
601 1060 – corp or assco auth to conduct trust
business in PH may be appointed as executor or
admin guradina of estate, or trustess, in a manner
like an individual, but shall not be appointed
guardian of the person of a ward.
 Guardian of property pwede, not person.
COLLATION
601
PARTITION
Minsan extra jud part w/ waiver. Usually SS waives.
Para sa anaks.
629 1078 – ESTATE, IS OWNED IN COMMON by the
co-heirs before partition. (subject to payment of debts
first)
 Co-heri – cannot acquire share of other by
prescription, as long as hier recognizes
expressly or tacitly existence of co-heirship.
 Pwede ata oral. Case na oral, then possess na
nila separately and paying taxes respectively.
No longer co-onwers to prejudice 3rd person.
(kunwari sasabihin nung isa pwede pa iredeem
since wala pa partition)
/ if not yet partitioned both money and property, legal
redemption pwede should the other one sell his share.
(1088)
/ if money partitioned and stip na they will continue to
enjoy the land undivided? Should 1 sell his share, 1620
(30 days leg redempt from notice by vendor applies,
not 1088 because there was already partition of
inheritance. Pero same lang ata? Old civil code iba.
 ONE heri, no need judicial declaration of his
heirship. He may adjudicate to himself the
whole thru summary adjudication thru an
affidavit. ROC
REMEMBER: for extrajud settlement to be valid:ROC:
1. NO will
2. No debts
 3. Heirs are all of age, if may minor,
representned by judicial guardian or
representative
4. Partition be mean of public instrument, or
affidavit filed in the RD
NOTE: asdministrator NOT a mere alter ego of heirs,
BUT an OFFICER of the COURT. Thus, generally heirs
have no right to interfere In its administration
634 1079 – What is partition? In general, it it’s the
separation, division, and assignment of a thing held
in common among those it m ay belong. The thing
itlsef may be divided or its value.
 Kinds:
1. Provisional or permanent 1084
2. Partial total
3. Judicial or extrajud 1080
EXTRA JUD may be:
1. May by T
2. Decedent in act inter vivos
3. Heirs
4. 3rd erson entrusted by testator or decedent
GR: no valid partition until after the will has been
probated. Unless those things not embraced in the
wills.
/ as long as it ends co-heiship or ownership, there is
partition, kahit sale exchange, compromise etc.
/ ORAL partition is valid. Non registration not affect its
validity.
/ JUDICIAL Partition:
base on draft or project of partition. Submitted by
exec or admin upon courts order.
Heirs not parties to Jud partition cannot bind said
heirs, action for them? Reinvindictario.
/Extra Jud made by T:
1080
in a will. must not prejudice legitim pa din.
/Extra jud by Decedent (act iner vivos)
1080 pa din.
Kahit died intestate, possible pa din na gumawa siya
ng partition.
/Extra jud by HEIRS:
as long as:
1. no debts
2. of age (guardians)
3. Orally pwede(must be proven! Cannot use
hearsay) (note oral partition not binding on
3trd pers without registration) but if pursuant
to will, probate muns!
4. Register said agreement, PUBLIC DOX.
5. NOTE: ROC, presumed NO debts if within 2
years from death of deceased, no creditor has
petitioned for letters of admin.
Extra jud made by designated. 1081
640 1080 – act inter vivos partition., or by will, must
be respected as long as not impair legtms
A parent, may order that leitime of child/dren
be paid in cash, in order to preserve an enterprise or
agri land etc. (as long as admin or management was
given to one or more heir) see sample in638
641 1081 – DEC may intrust power to make partition
after his death to any person other than the heirs
(inter vivos or mortis causea designation pwede).
If may minor, still follow this article and the
640. Mandatary shall make proper inventory of the
estate.
 Only power to make physical division
 NOT allowed to make distribution!
 NOTE: such power cannot be allowed to be
entrusted to an HEIR, kasi need impartial. juris
 If minor or under guardianship: 1. Notif to co-
heirs creditors legatees devisees, and
inventory of the estate.
 MANDATARY – person empowered, not
hwever, may be approved or rejected by the
heirs, if rejected, probate court shall decide.
 Note partition need not foramlities of a will.
nor formalites of danation. None actually.
642 1082 – Ending Indivision = deemed partition.
  Sale of property check.
 Compromise check deemed deed of part
 Those not yer partitioned, pwede pa din pa
chena sa court.
645 1083 – every co-heir has the right to demand
partition, UNLESS T have expressly forbidden it. (not
exceed 20 years) 494 cc. applies to non parititon of
legitime din.
If forbidden, may however be allowed, if co-
ownership terminates for causes of dissolution of PAT
or when court finds compelling reason upon petition
of heirs.
 If prohitied, then heirs partitioned by mutaula
agreement (pwede pa din daw) nge. . Can no
longer ask for rescission, estopped.
 Lone minority, may be upheld by court.
647 1084 – if may condition, cannot demand partition
until condition fulfilled. Co-heirs may demand it
though by giving security for the rights of heir with
condition. If not yet fulfiiled or cannot be complied,
PROVISIONAL partition.
 Here may pure heirs and may conditional heirs
 Pure can demand partition anytime. Provided
if may conditional give security.
 Conditional, need fulfill.
 PROVISIONALpartition
647 1085 – In partition, EQUALITY shall be observed as
far as possible. Dividng and assignment
 Project of partition filed, heirs must submit
proof of reasonablemness or
unreasonableness of the project.
648 1086 – If indivisible, or may be impaired if divided,
it may be adjudicated to one, and said heir shall pay
others the excess in cash.
One heir may demand thing to be sold at
public auction and strangers be allowed to bid.
649 1087 – co0heirs shall reimburse one another for
the income and fruits which one of them may receive,
any useful and ncessay expenses made upon the prop,
and any damage therto thru malice of neglect.
 Reimbursment can be sought in the judicial
partition. But still reimburse kahit extra jud
daw.
649 1088 – heir sold his hereditary rights before
partition, any or all heirs may redeem. 1 month from
the time they were notified in wrtign of the sale by the
vendor.
 “legel redempt”
 here buyer is a stranger. (legs devsare also
strangers, creditors din
 Sale before partition. Sale not donation!
voluntary or involuntary.
 1 heir lang sufficient to demand.
 Includes legats and devis. S
 NOTE: approval of project or partition
retroacts to the date when projects was made.
Thus, hindi pwedeng after project of partition
JURIS.
 Not apply to properties sold to pay decedents’s
debt. Kasi hereditary rights hindi specific
properties here.
 Note; KNOWSLEDGE of sale equals notice.
 Oral notice pwede din.
/ IDK if this case is correct: registration of the deed os
sale with RD not sufficient notice , especialy when the
property is unregistered land daw, applies only to
registred land na sufficient notice and registration.
Hence, here pwede pa redeem since prescription not
run yet since no wrtiiten notice yet. Since THE LAW
DID NOT PROVIDE OTHER MEANS FOR NOTICEDIN.
/ kahit nabenta nung 3rd person na mas mahal.
Irereimburse lang ung orig price na binenta ni co heir.
Because legal redemption of co heir different from
legal redempt to co owner.
656 1089 – titles of acquisition of ownership of each
property shall be delivered to the co heir to whom
said property has been adjudicated.
657 1090 – if 1 title, two lands. Title shall be delivered
to the one having the largest interest, and authentic
copies shall be fursnished to others at the expense of
the estate. Is same interest, TO THE OLDEST.

EFFECTS OF PARTITION AND RESCISSION
661 1097 – Partition may be rescinded or annulled for
same causes as contracts
 Extrinsic defect like prejudice to creditors
 Intrinsic like vices of consent fivum
 But mere disregard of provision of will, not
annul partition, if everybody consented. Here,
estopped.
/ partition not binding on an heir absent, and not
consented.
 GR action for partition among co-heirs. NOT
PRESCRIBE. Provided that 1 does not hold the
property adversely against others. (4 year
period from discovery of fraud or from
registration by the heir pretending to be sole
kahit meron pala co heir)
/ refusal to partition not mean that he is claiming, thus
pwede pa ding ma prescribe. (kasi co heir cannot be
prejudiced by partition of such co heir recognizes co-
ownership).
/ premature partition of there is stil issue in charges to
the estate. Or when ownership is still in dispute.
Accounting first.
663 1098 – A partition may be rescinded on account of
LESION, when 1 of the co-heirs received things whose
value is less, by at least ¼, than the share to which he
is entitled. (value at the time of adjudication)
 lesion or damage must be at least ¼. Otherwise
cannot be rescinded. Action for damages na
lang.
663 1099 – BUT partition made by T cannot be
impugned on the ground of lesion, except when
Legitime are prejudiced, or the intention of T provides
otherwise.
664 1100 – action for rescission on account of lesion
shall prescribe after 4 years from partition.
/ note however, in Judicial partition, it runs from the
time there is court approval.
664 1101 – Heir who is sued shall:
1. indemnifying the plaintiff for the lossOR
2. Consent to new partition
Indemnity thru, payment or delivery of thing of
same kind or quality.
If new partition instead, it will not affect those not
prejudiced nor those who have NOT received
more than their share.
 If received MORE? Cannot ask for recission.
Those received less lang.
665 1102 – Can no longer ask for recission if HEIR
alienated, in whole or in part, the RP adjudicated to
him. (he shall only have right to be indemnified in
cash)
 Reason – kasi need mutual restitution.
665 1103 – Ommission of 1 or more objects in the
inheritance shall not cause rescission on ground of
lesion, BUT the partition shall be completed by the
distribution of said objects omitted.
 Preterition in objects.
 Thus, give rise to mixed sux.
666 1104 – Preterition in partition, will NOT cause
rescission XPN:
1. Fraud
2. BF.
3. If xpn, then invalid partition.
Person omitted entitled to be paid by persons
responsible proportionately for his share.
 Ack natural child can bring action for recovery
of his share from other co-heirs.
/ so if preterition in partition, NO BF and frud, proper
remedy is not RESC but paid the value of the shaer
pertaining to said heir. Remand to make proper
vakuation.
667 1105 – Pertition which includes A PERSON
believed to be an heir, BUT WHO IS NOT, shall be void
only with respect to such person.

 “intrusion”
 partly void.
 If may sobra, give the sobra to the one
entitled.