Case Synthesis
Note: All of these instruments are contingent on death of the owner of the property. In all, death is the reckoning period or event from which subsequent rights may be acquired.
Instrument involved
Death mentioned
Reservation
Revocability/Irrevocability
MAGLASANG AUSTRIA BONSATO REYES
Deed of conditional Kasulatan Deed of Donation named Donation
donation involving 4 Kaloobpala Mortis Causa
similar instrument
over a property
effective upon death effective upon death transfer effective
of donor upon death
a portion must be expressly provided use during lifetime
reserved for the that donation is absolute and full title
expenses that may irrevocable acquired only upon
be incurred for her death
burial They are
taken out from the
property being
donated;
The controversy is irrevocable act express intent is to Irrevocable;
on the condition on based on di na make the instrument Reservation clause
the part of the mababawi or transfer but interpreted as
decedent that is irrevocable donation inter vivos
subject to variables.
Thus, should the
donee die ahead of
the donor, the
property agreed
upon shall be
rescinded. It shows
the intent that the
property must be
returned to the
donor.
Note:
Property: rights emanating from title: right to enjoy includes the right to: jus
possidendi jus dispodendi, jus utendi, jus abutendi, jus fruendi. Here if there was
already an inter vivos donation from the moment of acceptance, How come the donee
cannot enjoy the property? Shouldnt it be construed as mortis causa? Because, if
the sister is already the owner, she should full enjoyment of the property. Here the
right to enjoy was retained by the transferor from himself and denied the transferee
for as long as the transferor was alive or until the death of the transferor.
Twin Aspect of ownership
1. Naked title
2. Beneficial title
If both in one person, there is Full ownership.
If it was expressly intended that full ownership shall vest during the lifetime
of the transferor subject only to subtraction of burial expenses, Mortis Causa
or Inter Vivos?
-Inter Vivos
If it was expressly intended that naked title is transferred during the lifetime,
but beneficial title is retained by the transferor and that both title shall
consolidate only upon death
-Inter Vivos
If what was donated was the beneficial title effective inter vivos and the
naked title will pass upon death,
-Mortis Causa
Reyes case,
what was transferred was naked ownership during lifetime. When the naked title was
passed from the moment the instrument was accepted, what is the effect of death in
the beneficial title? It will now pass to the donee where consolidation takes effect.
Absolute and naked title shall be acquired only upon death.
When do you say that it is revocable or irrevocable to make it mortis causa?
- Revocable at will by the donor
Irrevocable from the moment of execution of the instrument
- Inter Vivos
Characterize the instrument:
Situation: From A to B a parcel of land; deed of transfer
1. I, A, give my parcel of land out of love and devotion
That this transfer shall take effect upon immediate acceptance by B, in this
instrument or by separate instrument
However, from the moment of acceptance, B is prohibited from registering
the property under ths only. B cannot alienate or encumber the property as
long as Im alive.
-Mortis Causa
If it is expressly irrevocable, it is inter vivos but any provision that makes it
revocable by judgment of the donor or transferor, makes it mortis cause
GR: Donation inter vivos are irrevocable. (not absolute)
EX: Grounds to revoke a donation inter vivos (appearance of children
,legitimation of a child inofficiousness, adoption of a child, commission of
acts of ingratitude)
Thus, if the revocation is dependent on grounds provided for by the law, it is
revocable (inter vivos). But if it is ad nutum, discretionary upon the donor, it
is mortis causa.
When will title pass? If the transferor retains control over the property upon
the execution of the instrument while the donor is alive, he does not intend it
to be an inter vivos one. it will take effect only upon death.
Characteristics of Mortis Causa
1. Conveys no title or ownership
2. Revocable
3. Transfer
MORTIS CAUSA
If the transferor conveys only beneficial title to the transferee but
retains naked or even full ownership while still alive,
If the transferor provides revocability for any ground, for any cause
on any time despite the execution of the instrument,
If it provides for reversionary clause in case predeceased, the
property should be returned to the transferor
What is the form in Mortis Causa?
- In form of a will
- Public instrument required only for donation inter vivos

X accept while Y is still alive. X cannot take possession while Y is alive but may
register the property.
- Inter vivos
-
Rules whether an instrument is intended as mortis causa
1. The name or title given to the instrument is immaterial
2. Time of acceptance is also immaterial
3. Various provisions in the instrument must be taken together
4. Full and naked title shall only pass upon death
5. Revocable during the lifetime of the transferor
6. The transfer is void if transferee died ahead
7. Determination is not as to form
-to validly effect transfer: last will and testament
If notarized: at least three witnesses
Succession Mortis Causa: Article 774. Succession is a mode of acquisition
by virtue of which the property, rights and obligations to the extent of the value of the
inheritance, of a person are transmitted through his death to another or others either
by his will or by operation of law.
3 KINDS OF SUCCESSION MORTIS CAUSA
1. Legal/Intestate takes effect only in the absence of a valid will
- The legal or intestate heirs may go beyond the relatives in the direct line
and extend as far as collateral relatives in the 5 th degree (e.g. nephew
and nieces from 1st cousin)
- If no 5th degree relative: Republic of the Philippines (intestate heir but
not compulsory heir)
2. Forced - most superior; refers to system of legitimes
- Certain portions of the estate are reserved to compulsory heirs (limited
to relatives by consanguinity in the direct line; the only exception is the
surviving spouse)
- Compulsory heirs are also intestate heirs
3. Testamentary takes place by virtue of valid will; takes place after the
application of forced succession
- Every will must respect legitimes
- Testamentary or voluntary heirs: can inherit the remaining estate as
long as qualified.
- Testamentary heirs may be Natural or Juridical persons
- Voluntary heirs are divided into two:
a. Universal heirs: given the whole or a fraction of the hereditary estate
b. 1. Legatees beneficiary of a legacy; gift of a specific personal property
2. Devisees- beneficiary of a devise; gift of a specific realty
e.g pigeon house with all the pigeons- pigeon house immovable;
pigeons immovable as long as there is animus revertendi
Between the 2 kinds of voluntary heirs, the legatees and devisees are preferred in the
payment of their inheritance. The universal heir are paid last
Order
1. Compulsory heirs
2. *if with will, legatees and devisees
3. *if with will, universal heirs
4. *if will does not cover the entire estate, remaining portion is liquidated
through legal or intestate succession
Succession as a mode acquiring ownership of a property must be construed merely
as a privilege. It is not a right.
1. By operation of law
1.a. Forced succession-heirs are called compulsory or forced
-system of legitimes whereby certain parts or portions of the net estate are reserved
by law for the benefit of certain relatives of the decedent. These relatives are called
compulsory heirs and are limited to the following, those in descending line from
decedent . In their absence, those in the ascending line, and the surviving spouse.
Outside of them no other relative of the decedent may demand legitime. Brothers and
sisters of the decedent are not compulsory heirs. One who has no ascendants,
descendants or spouse, may freely dispose by will or inter vivos.
1.b. Legal or Intestate Succession-kind of succession that can only take effect in
the absence of a valid will. The potential heirs cover not only those in the direct line
but also collateral relatives up to the 5th degree. Eg. Grand nieces
If no relatives- Republic of the Philippines
Forced succession is superior, legal is subordinate
2. by will- testamentary succession
-applies only to the portion of the hereditary estate remaining after legitimes.
Testamentary is secondary to legitimes. When the will encroaches with the
legitimes, that will may be nullified. The requirements for both form and
substance must be fulfilled.
Two forms
a. Notarial
b. Hollographic
sister brother
Substantive provisions of the will: Order of succession,
successional rights, qualifications of heir etc.
Eg. nat res can you give a devise a parcel of land to a non-
Filipino?
-No. contrary to constitution. Private lands and alienable lands of public domain can
only be acquired by qualified Filipino citizens.
Exception: hereditary succession
Can the American husband inherit a parcel of land from the wife?
- No. According to the Constitution, the foreigner must be a former Filipino.
In testamentary succession, the heirs are called voluntary or testamentary heirs.
Voluntary heirs can be classified into two.
1. Universal heirs- given the whole through inaction
2. Legatees and devisees
The traditional view is that legitime is part of testamentary succession.
(Opinion) It is wrong. Testamentary succession is always subject to legitime because
the system of legitime imposes restrictions on the power of disposal.
Contractual Succession does not exist in our system. Hereditary rights cannot be
acquired or given away by mere contract. It is only by operation of law or by will.
Marriage settlement as contract cannot dispose property post mortem.
Arellano Case
Facts: Parcel of land sought to be included in the estate of the deceased brother.
Upon death of the donor, he was survived by the sister and the brother. The brothers
are requiring the sister to bring back to the estate that parcel of land subject of
donation inter vivos (collation) so that the whole nest estate could be computed.
Contention of brother: divide all three including the property donated inter vivos
Donation
Sister
Inter vivos
to sister
Contention of sister
sister Sister
Brother
brother
Issue: Can she be compelled to bring back the property?
Held: No. There are no compulsory heirs. Hence, the two systems of succession do
not apply (forced and testamentary). Division of the estate will be based on intestate.
In legal or intestate succession, there is no duty to bring back to the estate.
Del Rosario Case
Facts: The husband and wife agreed that they will donate the house to their daughter.
In Donation Mortis Causa provides that it is irrevocable. It was intended by the
spouses while they are still alive to give the children including the granddaughter as
representative of the deceased child equal portions. The wife died first. The husband
assigned his rights to one of the children.
Issue: whether or not title passed to all of them by the deed of donation or to by virtue
of deed of assignment.
Held: Deed of donation
*What is partition inter vivos? Is this a partition inter vivos?
Who is the partitioner in a partion inter vivos?
- In this case, it is the spouses being the owners of the property. The
benefeciaries are the two children and granddaughter
In partition inter vivos would title pass inter vivos or mortis causa? wife. He did not inherit. It is not a succession at all but an acquisition through
suspensive condition. It is an ordinary acquisition through contract.
- Inter vivos. The husband has no right to assign. From the moment of
partition inter vivos in the form of a donation inter vivos was effected by the Hypothetical Questions:
spouses, they were already stripped of their right to the property and the
naked title already passed to their children and grandchild. There was 1. At the time of death of the wife, the amount was the only property and they
nothing to assign and the husband was seeking to modify the pre-existing had a child. Same results?
agreement. - Forced legitime would apply.
2. Survivorship agreement but the party was not the wife but the paramour.
Note: Partition Inter Vivos, so long as done by the owner with respect to the Valid and enforceable?
compulsory heirs, it must be respected, even after the partitioner has died. - No. Persons guilty of concubinage or adultery cannot acquire property
from each other. The donation would be void on the ground of public
When may a partition inter vivos be set aside? morality.
3. Parties are not related at all with each other. They decided to open a joint
1. Legitimes are encroached or burdened account in which anyone of them may withdraw or deposit. If one of them
2. A stranger is included survives, he would take all. Valid?
- It depends. If one of them has children, it will encroach into legitime.
Partition inter vivos is an advance to the legitimes. Hence, strangers cannot be
included.
GR: Survivorship agreements are valid
*Justice Vitug considers Partition Inter Vivos as a separate kind of succession Mortis Exceptions:
Causa 1. Impairs or encroaches legitimes
2. If it conceals or hides inofficious or void donations
Vitug Case 3. Defraud creditors
4. Circumvent the law on formalities of the donation
Facts:
Article 774 Legal definition of succession mortis causa
Disputed property: Joint Account of the spouses. The agreement was called
survivorship agreement. Either of them can withdraw. In case of death, the surviving Elements of Succession Mortis Causa
spouse is entitled to the balance in the account. The wife died first. The husband
advanced from the money in the account in certain expenses chargeable from the 1. Succession is merely the mode by which title passes by one to another
estate. That is why he is seeking reimbursement. The executor of the wifes estate Modes of Acquisition
refused because she believes that the account was part of the conjugal property. 1. Law
2. Intellectual Creation
*Note of Family Code 3. Delivery
4. Donation
From the moment marriage is contracted and assuming that there is no marriage 5. Prescription
settlement, who will be the owner of funds earned by one? Conjugal property (co- 6. Occupation
owned by husband and wife) and in case of death what happens to the community? 7. Succession
Liquidated. Half of it shall form part of the estate of the wife and half of it shall form
part of the share of the husband. Original Mode: Law, Intellectual Creation, Occupation

SC Held: The survivorship agreement was valid. All others are derivative.

It is an aleatory contract whereby the happening of the event, unknown or uncertain 2. Title cannot be passed without a mode recognizing the law. Title on its own
event is made the condition. The condition in the case is the death of one over the is useless because it cannot be acquired or transmitted. Title is the right to
other. The husband became the absolute owner of the funds upon the death of the ownership.
 3. Parties:
transferor (decedent)-general term
Testator- died with a valid will
Legal succession
Intestate-one who transmits
Tranferees: heirs(compulsory, testamentary, legal)
Object of transmission (Hypothetical Questions)
X died and at the time of his death he was survived by wife, 3 children and 4 house
and lots. Which one forms part of the estate? At the time of his death, X was a
grantee of a franchise by the LTFRB to operate a taxi business. Shall it form part of
the estate? Yes
At the time of his death X was a partner in a law firm. Will the rights arising from the
partnership be transmitted upon death? No. only the assets are what the heirs are
entitled to
At the time of his death, X was the president of a stock corporation. Is the position as
president transmitted to heirs? No.
At the time of his death X was the President of Phil. No
At the time of his death X was the plaintiff in a pending civil case. Is the right to
pursue the action transmissible? Yes. But if its an action based on personal injury?
At the time of his death X was the owner of several parcels of land. Transmissible?
Yes
Four years after his death, certificates of title remain in the name of decedent X and
those were sold. Valid sale? See Opulencia and Aggabao
At the time of his death X was the debtor in a loan obligation? Transmissible? Yes but
limited to the estate.
Is hereditary estate the same with inheritance?
Hereditary estate-refers to all property rights and obligations of the decedent that
survives the death; transmissible despite death
Transmissibility or intransmissibility is determined by the nature of the right or
obligation or by contract.
The rule is that pending obligations, monetary in character are not transmissible to
the heirs but are chargeable against the estate. Whatever remains after payment to
the creditor of the estate forms part of the INHERITANCE
Elements of Succession Mortis Causa
1. It must be treated simply as a mode of simultaneous transmission and
acquisition of title over property rights and obligations and as a mode of
acquisition, it must be construed as a derivative one rather than original.
Of the seven modes, three are original while the rest are derivative. In
succession, there is always a transferor and a transferee
2. For succession to vest title, there must be death.
Death is the supervening event that opens succession. It is the operative
act that transfers hereditary rights. For purposes of opening succession, it
must be distinguished between actual or physical death and presumptive
death.
Actual physical death takes place when the heart stops beating
-To determine the exact time of death, there must be a pronouncement.
Under the current rules, the pronouncement must be made by a doctor (for
hospital deaths).
-For non-hospital deaths, municipal or city health officers are the ones
authorized to fix the time of death but they delegate it to the officers of the
funeral parlour.
Presumptive death is always based on prior absence. Absence is the civil
status of a person who disappeared from the domicile and whose whereabouts are
unknown. Presumptive death may be founded in two kinds of absence.
Ordinary Absence means that at the time of disappearance or last news or
information, there was no danger of death
Extraordinary Absence is when at the time of disappearance or the last time of
disappearance or last news or information regarding the person, he was under the
danger of death by reason of the following:
1. The person was on board a vessel or plane which is lost or missing in its
voyage
-Both passenger and crew as well as plane and vessel must be missing.
2. That the person took part in battle or war
3. Disappeared under similar circumstances
Note: Family Code Ordinary absence and to allow the present spouse to remarry, the
period is 4 years. In extraordinary absence, 2 years.
PRESUMPTION OF DEATH TO OPEN SUCCESSION

Ordinary Extraordinary

After 10 years from last news or information or last time seen but if After 4 years
the person is 75 years old, the period is 5 years

*petition for probate or will shall take effect

*if no will- petition for settlement of estate OR
*If the heirs agree- extrajudicial settlement of estate
(opinion) Extrajudicial settlement is not enough because only the court can declare a person presumptively dead. Without court declaration, there is no
basis to extrajudicially settle.

Death took place after the lapse of 10/5 years Death took place at the time he disappeared
Effect on computation
Illustration:

1999 2009 1999

(disappearance) (after 4 years)
(disappearance) Value of property 2m Value of property 4m
Value of property 2m Value of property 10m

Accrued Property
After 2009, a petition for probate or extrajudicial settlement of (increment to the property)
estate can already be filed. His estate is computed at 10 million
His estate at the time of death is 2m.
*Accrued property cannot pass to testamentary heirs because the property is
added from the time of death.
*Only the legal heirs are entitled unless there is an express provision to the will.
The first duty of the lawyer is to prove death through presentation of death certificate.
If it is spurious, the best proof to dispute it is proof of life
Presumptive death is proved through the expiration of the period and the last news or
disappearance.
3. Object
Between the transferor and transferee, the object of succession is the
hereditary estate. It covers all transmissible property, rights and obligations whether
real or personal, tangible or intangible for as long as they are not purely personal in
character or declared intransmissible by law or by contract. GR: rights and obligations
are transmissible
Intransmissible based on the nature and character: marital rights, rights arising from
parental authority and custody (extinguished by death)
Usufruct: intransmissible; death of the usufructuary terminates the usufruct but the
death of the naked owner does not affect the usufruct. That is why the heirs of the
naked owner must continue the usufruct.
Rights arising from agency: intransmissible because both by law and nature it is
purely personal. It is based on trust and confidence. Death of the agent or the
principal revokes it subject only on agency coupled with interest.
Partnership: rights arising from partnership are generally intransmissible. That is why
death dissolves a partnership
Copyright:
Those that survives the death includes not only property and rights but obligations as
well.
Monetary obligations are charged to the estate. They are transmissible to the estate
but intransmissible to the heirs. The unpaid liabilities cannot be charged against the
individual heirs. It is purely personal upon the decedent.
Illustration:
At the time of death, decedent had
Gross Hereditary Estate: 100 million
Unpaid Debts: 120 million
Net Debts: 20 million
Insolvent estate
Decedent was survived by legitimate children A, B, C, and D. Can X who owns the
unpaid ordinary and unsecured claim proceed against ABCD? NO. Intransmissible to
heirs.
After accumulating so much indebtedness and leaving no property, can the heirs be
sued? NO.
The liability is limited to the estate unless the heirs divided the estate among
themselves without paying the creditor. The creditor may now sue them in their
personal capacity but only to the extent of what was taken out of the estate. However,
for non monetary obligations that directly attach to the property of the estate, in the
form of liens or encumbrances, these must be respected by the heirs. The heirs take
the property subject to subsisting liens or encumbrance.
E.g. Debtor prior to death contracted a loan secured by REM over the parcel of land.
When the debtor died, was the mortgage lien extinguished on the land? NO. The
heirs acquire the land subject to mortgage.
E.g. Lease
Contract of Lease creates real right when 1.) it is more than 1 year or 2) registered. If
the lessor dies, the heirs take along the burden.
Distinguish between hereditary estate and inheritance
Hereditary estate: total value of all property belonging to the decedent at the time of
death.
Include in the value of GHE, the accrued property, property added to the estate at the
time of death.
e.g bank interests, rental income, dividends on shares of stock
Distinguish accrued property from after acquired property
Illustration:
(2002-Will) (2012 death)
Will: Give to X all my cars No. of cars: 16
No. of cars: 3
13 cars are
AFTER ACQUIRED PROPERTY
(property acquired after the making of the will)
The concept of after acquired property is relevant only in testamentary succession.
Can X claim all 16 cars? NO. In the law, only the property at the time of the making
of the will shall pass. X can only claim 3. The 13 after acquired property shall pass
through legal succession or succession by operation of law unless the will expresses
that the after acquired property shall pass to X.
How to come up with the value of inheritance upon satisfying the debt? D= 12m

From the GHE subtract the totality of value of all the debts and liabilities chargeable -
to the estate.
A B C
e.g. (missing since 2003) (4m) (4m)

GHE: 120m A1 A2
Debts: 100m (2m) (2m)
Net estate: 20 m INHERITANCE: the source of the distributive share
Presumptive death is equated with predeceased. The law presumes that he
If there is reasonable ground to believe that prior to or even after the death, property died before the decedent. A is presumed dead after 7 years for purposes
belonging to the estate passed to others who were not entitled by law, those property other than his succession. As such, when a compulsory heir predeceases
may be recovered and should form part of the GHE. the decedent or testator, he is entitled to be represented by his own children
or descendants.
E.g. Parties prior to death simulated a deed of sale to paramour. The property should Note: 2-4 years: remarriage
belong to the estate. 7 years : for purposes other than succession
Steps on arriving to the value 10 years : succession
1. GHE is through an inventory
First step in all probate proceedings, after the appointment of the
administrator is to inventory the estate. For voluntary heir-predecease does not entitle him to anything
2. Determine the debts
Creditor must file individual claims and is required to adduce proofs to said e.g. X, the one give with cars is not at all a legal or compulsory heir
claims.
3. Determine who are the heirs .
(2002) (2003) (2012)
Who are the parties? Will X disappeared death of testator
Transferor: decedent
Heirs: by operation law or by will Ordinary: deemed to have died in 2010. As of 2012, can the heirs of X claim
Heirs must be alive, qualified and willing at the time of the opening of the cars?
succession. - NO. He died ahead. He is a voluntary heir.

Hypothetical Questions: Who are QUALIFIED HEIRS?

1. Wife was 5 months pregnant when the husband died. How many heirs?
- 2, the wife and the child
2. A month later, wife suffered early delivery. The child survived only for 3
hours.
- Only the wife
3. 4 months later, wife delivered in a critical circumstances. Foetus was
expelled but survived for one hour only.
- 2 heirs. There are two transmissions from husband to wife and child,
and child to mother.
4. During lifetime father had 3 legitimate children. Father died in 2014.
However as 2003 A, first child was already missing. How many heirs are
alive at the time of death of the father? 6m each or 4m each?
X, having extramarital sexual relation with the testator who is married. Valid?
-No. persons who are guilty of adultery or concubinage cannot give each
other gratuitously.
The one given the devise is a non-Filipino citizen Qualified?
- No
Assuming alive, the heir must be willing that is why heirs are given the right
from the moment successional rights vest to either accept or reject. Ones
kindness or liberality cannot be imposed to another. The law presumes
acceptance.
PASCO Case
Issue: Upon the death of the creditor who has the right to prosecute?
Held: At the moment of death, the heirs are considered the extension of the
personality of the decedent. Therefore, even without judicial appointment, they can
already perform matters relating to the estate. They are considered legal
representatives but only in behalf not just for themselves but for all the heirs.

Balus Case

Questions Opulentia Aggabao The property cannot be subject of succession since when the decedent
What was sold? Parcel of Land Stock died, he failed to pay the loan which caused the foreclosure of the property.
Who sold? Daughter of decedent Wife and legitimate Foreclosing the property will not vest ownership automatically. However, in
Daughter Children this case, within the redemption period, the heirs did not repurchase the
Who was appointed as Wife and Children
property
administrator?

Was there court None None

approval?

How come the sale is Valid because she did Void since they must
valid or void? not sell the property as first seek the approval
an administrator but as of the court before
an heir; there were no selling the assets Dela Merced, Coronel, Paulmitan, Rioferio, Emnace (Successuinaol rights
other heirs that will be because there were vest only from the moment of death)
impaired; she illegitimate children
represented that she who will be prejudiced. Dela Merced Case
was selling the property The purpose of the
because she needed courts approval is to Joselito, an illegitimate child of Francisco, was not given his
the money ensure that the
legitimes.
legitimes of the other
heirs will not be
impaired Iron Barrier Rule (Article 992)- an illegitimate child cannot inherit by
operation of law from the legitimate relatives of his mother or father.

However, this rule is inapplicable in this case because the right of

Joselito to inherit came from his fathers estate. He is not claiming to inherit
from Evaristas Estate but from Francisco
Coronel Case
Why did the Supreme Court uphold the first sale instead of the
second sale when In fact when they entered into the first sale, it was not
their property still?
Registration is not a mode of acquiring title over the property; it only
confirms the title; it is a mere confirmatory act.
When then did title vest in this case? Upon the death of the
decedent. Thus, they already have the right of ownership to the property. It
was only perfected upon registration. That is why they already sold it validly
in the first transaction
Paulmitan Case
Why did the SC divided the property in such manner?
Implied trust is created when property is registered in the name of
one who does not have whole or only partial over the property and by the
law the title is vested to some other person. So when Donato registered the
property to his name without Pascual, he was a mere trustee for the heirs of
Pascual as least for his share.
Why is he now the sole owner of the property according to the SC?
What is the prescriptive period to nullify a title on the basis of an implied
trust? The proper action must be filed by the beneficiary within 10 years from
registration
Did the heirs of Pascual assail the certificate of title within 10 years? No.
How did Donato acquire the parcel of land? He acquired it by prescription
and not succession. Ownership can be repudiated.
Rioferio Case
At the time of death, in whose name was the property named? Registered
upon the name of the decedent. Thus, the property forms part of the Estate
because at the time of his death, it was name to the decedent.
What if the property was acquired during their cohabitation and that the
paramour contributed to the purchase of the property? The paramour can
only get up to her contribution
Who has the burden of proving the same? The paramour
Emnace Case
What was the business? It was a partnership of a fishing industry
How was it dissolved? By agreement of the parties. And the agreement was
that the assets be distributed to the partners.
Isnt it that partnership rights are purely personal and therefore cannot be
inherited by heirs? The Supreme Court ruled that the claims of the decedent
over the partnership could be transmitted to the heirs because upon the
death of Vicente all the right and obligation of the father were transmitted
over the heirs through succession, so the assets owned by Vicente were
also transmitted to the heirs
How about the right of mutual agency? Does it pass through succession?
No.
Only purely proprietary rights can be transmitted through succession.
Limjoco
that property rights can be transmitted to the Estate
Estate has a separate juridical entity
Can it be granted a franchise? Yes because the estate was considered a
Filipino. The administrator therefore can continue the business
The rights and obligation of a franchise are not purely personal
Arayata
What kind of patent was issued? Homestead patent.
Were the transaction void? Some of the transactions were void. When the
patentee dies, the properties acquired were transferred to the heirs
ALVAREZ v. IAC
Aniceto Yanes was survived by his 3 children
The property involved was usurped by Santiago. Then he sold it to
Fuentebella, then fuentebella sold it to Alvarez and Alvarez sold it to Dr.
Siason
Unfortunately, Dr. Siason was included in these proceedings. According to
the Rules of Court, the obligation incurred by Alvarez towards Yanes
children and descendants is chargeable against the heirs because that
obligation, although purely monetary in character, is part of the estate.
Q: Here the debts were excluded when Alvarez died, right? And yet
according to the SC, they should be included in the hereditary estate.
A: The SC held in this case that the contractual obligations entered into by
the decedent should pass or transmit to the heirs because at the time of the
death of the person, Aniceto Yanes, the contractual obligations that he
entered into pass into the heirs so that after the payment of the contractual
obligations it could be deducted as the hereditary estate of the heir
Q: Lets see. Lets go back to property. Santiago, at the time he took the
land, had or did not have any title?
A: Did not have any title
Q: So he could not have acquired title, therefore he is a possessor in bad
faith. So when he sold it to Fuentebella, could Fuentebella acquire title to the
property, colorable title?
A: Colorable title
Q: Really?
A: Yes maam
Q: So is Fuentebella a transferee in good faith?
A: no.
Q: Could Santiago pass title?
A: no.
Q: No because Santiago had no title whatsoever therefore Fuentebella is
also in bad faith. So, no title passes. When it was transferred by Fuentebella
to Alvarez, could Fuentebella pass title?
A: No meaning Alvarez is in bad faith
Q: If that is so, how come Siason is in good faith?
A: Dr. Siason is in good faith because when the property was bought from
Alvarez, Siason was merely represented because he was in Mexico and that
he bought the property for value without any impediment
AL: Yes. That is the reason why the children of Alvarez are held liable
because if the property still remained with Alvarez diba pwede ipabalik yan.
Diba? Since Alvarez sold it to Siason and Siason upon good faith, remember
the possession of property by one in good faith can no longer be deprived
thereof. Meaning originally the value of the property should have been paid
by Santiago to the heirs of Aniceto. But since Santiago transferred it to
Fuentebella, the monetary obligation passed to Fuentebella. But because he
transferred it to Alvarez should now have paid the monetary value of the
property. The heirs of Alvarez cannot partition the hereditary estate of
Alvarez without first paying the heirs of Aniceto.
If you are a thief, can you acquire title over the property stolen? No. it is an
immutable fixable in property, diba? If you are a thief and you pass it to
another, even if innocent, can the transferee acquire title? No because no
title passes. From zero pwede bang magkaroon ng good title? None. Its
only after the second transfer that good faith can now be acquired.
LIM v. CA
Q: WHat was included in the estate Pastor Lim but should not have been
included according to the SC?
A: the parcels of land that were registered in the name of the corporations
Q: Were only the parcels of land belonging to the corporations included in
the inventory?
A: Even the corporations
AL: Yes even these corporations that were apparently owned by Pastor Lim
were included by his widow and all properties whether real or personal also
registered in the name of these corporations.
Q: What is the doctrine of separate and distinct personality of corporations?
A: It means that a corporation has its separate and distinct personality from
natural persons. It means that the corporations cannot be held liable for any
liabilities of its stockholders.
Q: But the widow claims that 99.9% of the capital stock of these corporations
or all of the shares of stock actually belong to Pastor Lim and that these
corporations and the other persons whose identities are given there are
mere dummies. Therefore, according to the widow, the corporation and
Pastor Lim should be treated as one and the same. Or is the doctrine of
piercing the veil
A: It is like piercing the corporation in order to clothe the liabilities that were
incurred by the stockholders and this clothe should be pierced in order to
determine if there is a separation between the corporation and the natural
persons or the stockholders.
AL: So when you hear the veil of corporate fiction, you disregard the
corporate entity and treat it as one and the same as that individual/s that
controlled it. Pastor Lim was controlling these corporations. Pastor Lim is
one and the same as the corporations. And in that sense, all property
belonging to the corporations are his. Thats the claim of the widow.
A: No according to the SC.
Q: Why can we not pierce the veil of corporate fiction?
A: because the corporations are still separate and distinct from that of Pastor
Lim
Q: Even if there is allegation that they are only dummies?
A: Yes
AL: Diba mere allegation is not a proof? And there was no proof showing
that these corporations were caught to fraudulent services. Therefore, can
the inventory of Pastor Lims Estate include those corporations?
A: No
Al: No because that would be tantamount to include a person as part of your
estate. Diba? A corporation is a person. Can you include a person as your
property? No. So the property belonging to that another person cannot also
be included in the estate.
ESTATE OF LLENADO v. LLENADO
These are all contracts of lease, right?
Q: What was the rider in the lease agreement in the case of Llenado?
A: Contract of lease with an option to renew DKC HOLDINGS v. CA

Q: When was the option to renew be made? When the current one was contract of lease with an option to buy
expired or during the current one?
Lessee is DKC, Lessor is Encarnacion
A: it should be renewed within the duration of that lease contract?
Q: What were the agreements regarding the option to buy?
Q: Who died?
A: it must be exercised within 2 years, DKC has the right to purchase the
A: lessee. The wife of the lessee found out that the lessor sold the land to real property by executive agreement
his two sons.
Q: Was there a Dowpayment?
Q: According to the widow of the lessee, she has still the right to renew even
after her husband has already died because the right or the option to renew A: There was. 3Million/3k?
is purely contractual and it forms part of the estate of the deceased lessee.
Q: Who died?
Q: How about the option to renew? Is it transmissible?
A: Lessor
A: yes
Q: Who acquired the property by hereditary succession?
Q: who can exercise it?
A: Her only son
A: the parties in the contract
Q: IS the option to purchase an obligation of the estate of Encarnacion?
Q: But the original parties of the contract have already died? Still
transmissible? A: No.

A: Yes Q: In what way?

Q: How come the option to renew denied by the court? A: Because there was a prior agreement between the lessor and the lessee

A: The SC denied the option to renew because the renewal by the widow Q: but he was not the new owner of the property?
was made after the expiration of the stipulated period or beyond the period
A: Victor
agreed into by the parties.
Q: Let me summarize the issues raised by Victor. He is the new owner
AL: the option to renew is expressly provided for in the contract that is why
because successional rights vested from the moment that his aunt died and
even the parties and their successors-in-interest must also abide by the
he is not privy with the contract with an option to purchase and contracts
same provisions. Since there was a fixed time within which to renew,
take effect only between parties. How did the court rule?
unfortunately, the successors or the heirs of the lessee did not exercise it
within the period for in the contract. It did pass to the estate except that it A: The Court ruled that Victor even if he is not a party should be bound by
was not exercised within the contractual period the contract entered into with his aunt because Article 1311 of the Civil Code
provides that contractual rights and obligations are transmissible to the
assigns or heirs
AL: Yes. So contractual rights and obligation are generally transmissible.
The nature of these contractual right and obligation does not mean purely
personal.
SAN AGUSTIN v. CA
It involves a lot sold by GSIS to Macaria. There was an annotation at the
back of the title that there must be no conveyance within 5 years from the
time that absolute ownership is vested except in cases of hereditary
succession. However, a day after the issuance, Macaria sold it to Menez.
However, Menez was detained by the military in 1979. When he returned in
the 1990 the owners duplicate copy of the title was lost so he filed a petition
for the issuance of a duplicate copy of the title and such petition was
granted.
Q: But it was being questioned by who?
A: by San Agustin who is a nephew of Macaria
Q: Lets review. PD 1529, who are entitled to notice in such petitions?
A: All those who are listed at the back or the encumbrances at the back of
the title
Q: Is he listed?
A: No
Q: but he can still be an heir?
A: Yes. The SC ruled that since he is not listed in the memorandum
Q: But he is an heir. He has interest over the property. Thats his claim.
A: It is already sold therefore he is already bound by the same
Q: Even if it was not sold, would he be entitled to notice upon the death of
Macaria? Assuming
A: Not still entitled because he was not in the memorandum
Q: What would be contained in the memorandum of encumbrances
A: lis pendens, mortgagees, attaching creditors
AL: Kung sino lang ang nakalagay sa annotations, sila lang ang entitled sa
notice. If he claims to be an heir, then he should have filed a notice of
adverse claim as an heir. Unfortunately, he did not.
BASIS ON THE LAW OF SUCCESSION
1. social in character the law on succession provides for a rational system
of distributing property belonging to one who has died because without that
system of succession chaos would ensue upon death of the owner. It is
actually to maintain social order.
2. economic the natural lifetime of the owner of the property should not
prevent said property from being used for productive purposes. Under the
Consti, ownership of property bears always a social function.
3. natural laws that a person during his lifetime accumulates wealth to
secure the future of his family. That is why the HE (hereditary estate) must
be given foremost to family
4. more private the law in succession respects jus dispodendi meaning its
part and parcel of the right to dispose given by law to the owner
BASIC PRINCIPLESOF SUCCESSION
1. No succession takes place prior to the death of the decedent.
-no hereditary rights can be claimed prior to the death of the owner.
Q: That is why when you go back to the cases involving differences
between donations mortis causa and inter vivos, if under the law if a
 donation mortis causa, would the acceptance prior to death have any
binding effect?
A: None. Because no right has been vested there. So the acceptance would
be useless.
2. The HE always devolves to the family of the decedent.
- That is why we have a system of legitimes which prefers members of the
family to be paid first out of the estate and in accordance with the fractions
or shares provided by the law.
3. The family cannot be totally deprived of the HE.
- In case a will, for example, it omits one, some or all of the compulsory
heirs, then the will is void. The only way by which a member of the family
of the decedent can be ousted from HE would be through disinheritance.
- Disinheritance is always by will.
4. Succession by strangers is never presumed.
-HE devolves to the family. Nonrelatives can only inherit by will. And it is in
that sense that we must understand filiation or proof of filiation. One who
claims to be an illegitimate child must first prove the filiation because
otherwise that child would be a stranger to the estate of the decedent.
- But within members of the same family, for as long as they belong to the
same class of heirs, they inherit in equal shares. Meaning there are
basically 4 classes of heirs under the law (legitimate children, surviving
spouse, recognized illegitimate children and when called by law parents or
ascendants)
5. Heirs cannot be held liable beyond the value of their inheritance.
- applicable only when the estate is divided between or among the heirs
without first satisfying the creditors
6. The State (Republic of the Phil) always has a share in succession.
- The Republic is entitled by way of estate taxes. In intestacy, the Republic
is entitled as an heir in the absence of 5th degree collateral relatives of the
decedent.
LEGITIMES
- this refers to the most superior form of succession whereby certain portions
of the HE cannot be given by will because they are reserved for the benefit
of certain relatives called compulsory heirs
- it is called forced succession because the law imposes such shares upon
the testator
- the will of the testator is totally disregarded when it comes to legitimes.
WON he likes them, the law requires that he gives to his widow, children or
his parents etc. That is why it is only after the satisfaction of the legitimes
that a will take effect and only with respect to the remaining portion of the
estate.
UNDERSTANDING LEGITIMES in THREE DIFFERENT BUT
CORRELATIVE SENSES
1. Legitime refers to the fraction given by law to a certain class of
compulsory heirs
- As a mandatory fraction, the legitime may either be a fixed one or a
variable legitime:
a. Fixed legitime when the fraction assigned by law to a class of
compulsory heirs remains the same and unchanged whether surviving
alone or surviving with other classes of compulsory heirs
Example: If the only surviving heirs are the legitimate children, the law
assigns to them an immutable of the entire HE. But if the legitimate
children will also survive with the widow or widow, it is still .
b. Variable legitime when the fraction given by law changes on whether
that compulsory heir survives alone or with the other classes.
Example: share of surviving spouse
2. Legitime, under the second meaning, refers to properties whether real or
personal, tangible or intangible.
Example: total value of HE = 16 M
If here is only one legitimate heir, he is entitled to receive of the 16M =
8M
However, the 8M is satisfied not necessarily in cash because the state can
increase let us say condo unit, a parcel of land, a bahay kubo, shares of
stocks, cash in banks and others that were part of the estate. Hence, the
8M would have to be determined on the basis of the properties
appropriate or most suitable to be distributed to the heirs.
- It refers to the property actually delivered as payment of the legitime.
- Under the 2nd meaning, legitime is an offshoot or outcome of the partition
of the HE. Kaya its always a challenge on the part of the partitioner as to
how to divide the estate based on the principle that the equality must not
be based only in the quantity but also in the quality.
3. The 3rd meaning of legitime is that it refers to the intangible right conferred
by law to the compulsory heirs
- As an intangible right, it has the following characteristics:
a. that the legitime is not subject to deprivation
b. the legitime is not subject to impairment
c. it is not subject to condition, burden or substitution
d. the future legitime cannot be the subject of contract, compromise or
waiver
1st and 2nd characteristics of legitime: nondeprivation and non-
impairment?
Deprivation means that the heirs are totally deprived of their legitimes
because the HE was already given or is intended to be given to complete
strangers
- nothing is left of the HE to satisfy the legitimes
Impairment the compulsory heir is given LESS than what the law requires
Example: The decedent/testator (D/T), prior to death, executed a donation
inter vivos (IV) in favor of the BFF for P12M. At the time of death, the estate
has a value of zero. No property in his name. D/T was survived by 2 legits
(A&B) and the surviving spouse (SS).
Q: At the time of death, if we allow the donation IV as is, A, B and the SS
would they not be deprived?
A: So the rule is that the legitimes of the compulsory heirs cannot be totally
deprived from them or denied from them. Under this situation, there is a
need for collation. Bring back the value of property donated prior death in the
process of collation. Why? Because the donation IV are considered
advances out of the HE. Therefore, at the time of death, legally, the value of
the estate is P12M, the donated property. That is the entire estate. And
therefore, it has to be returned in order to satisfy the legitimes.
Dagdag tayo ng isang illegit.
Therefore, if we dont collate then none of them can inherit. Those under
legitimes. If we allowed the done to retain it and not subject the property to
collation, then the compulsory heirs would be absolutely deprived of their
legitime.
BUT
Same example this time impairment
Since the donation IV is required to be returned to the HE so that there is no
impairment or deprivation to the legitime of the compulsory heirs, then the
legitimes are charged against the value of the donated property. And the
donated property would be distributed as follows:
A 3M
B 3M
SS 3M
Remainder is the free portion that may now be given to the BFF
Therefore, if we dont collate the property there could be impairment to the
legitimes of the compulsory heirs. You need to preserve the legitimes. Keep
it intact that is always the challenge against non-impairment and non-
deprivation.
Q: How may impairment and deprivation take place? Thats to be figured
here
A: By acts inter vivos such as donations IV that are inofficious
- If you go back to the rule on donations, the inofficiousness of the
donation can only be determined at the time of death of the donor. That is
why revocation of inofficious donations is inherent to the heirs.
Q: Can the donor revoke on the ground of inofficiousness?
A: No. Buhay pa siya eh. Diba? Pano niya alam na inofficous yun eh
buhay pa siya
Q: How can deprivation or impairment take place?
A: By acts mortis causa through a will
Example:
There is total deprivation amounting to preterition (the will omits one,
some or all of the compulsory heirs in the estate) in the following
testamentary provision:
Entire HE = P12
Will of D/T: I hereby give my entire HE to my BFF.
Note: Children A and B and the SS are not mentioned or are not
given the same at all.
There is total deprivation known as preterition. The will is void.
There is impairment in the following testamentary provision:
A P100 Entire HE: 12M
B 100
SS P1.00
Remainder BFF
There is no preterition. Because preterition means there is
total omission. They were not omitted in fact they mentioned.
That is why what happened here is impairment. They are given
less than what the law gives to them.
The impairment as to A and B is 2,999,900 each; as to SS is
2,999,999. That is why BFF gets only the remainder because if we
give the entire estate based from the testamentary provisions, A, B,
and SS would be suffering deficiency.
Remedy of the heirs: to demand completion or whole satisfaction of
their legitime
3rd characteristic of legitime: no condition or burden
- Since the legitime is not dependent upon the will of the D/T, the testator
cannot impose any condition to the compulsory heirs for them to accede
their legitimes (kasi nga imposed by law yan)
- Simply disregard those burdens or conditions. Treat them as if they were
not written if they are imposed on your legitimes.
- They can only be validly imposed as to share coming from the free
disposable portion of the estate (yung extra lang)
What do we mean by no substitution?
SUBSTITUTION of heirs is possible only with respect to the free disposable
portion and only by will but not upon the compulsory heirs
Example: Incase my first born child cannot inherit the legitime, the same
should be paid to my best friend.
VOID provision in the will because in case of predeceased, disqualification,
etc. or vacancy in the legitime, it comes by right of representation and the
rules on right of representation are also prescribe in the Civil Code

4th characteristic: future legitime cannot subject to contract, LEGITIMES: FRATIONS ASSIGNED BY LAW AND TO WHOM THESE
compromise or waiver ARE GIVEN

- Even in such contract, compromise or waiver includes the owner of the Legitimes are demandable as a matter of right only on the part of certain
property. compulsory heirs

Example: I, the lone child of Mr. and Mrs. Bill Gates, anticipating their death,
hereby sell the property which I may acquire from them when they actually
die.
Q: Can you actually sell?
Two classes of compulsory heirs
1. Primary forced heirs these are the compulsory heirs entitled to the
legitime after all circumstances for as long as they survive the decedent
whether they survive alone as a group or class or survive with another class

A: No. Remember, the seller must have free disposal of the property. You - There is an order of priority among the primary forced heirs. Thus pay
must at least have a right of ownership. the legitimes first and foremost of the

That is why when we said future legitime or future inheritance, they is yet no a. LCDs (legit children and/or their descendants)
heir. Without death, there is no succession. And without succession, there is
no heir to speak of. You are not an heir until somebody dies. b. but LCDs can also concur with the second in the order of priority the
widow/ widower / SS (surviving spouse)

c. ICDs (illegit children and their descendants)

2. Secondary forced heirs they are secondary because they are called to
the legitime by operation of law only in the absence or in default of another
class of compulsory heirs

2 kinds:

a. If the D/T is legit (so it is the civil status of the decedent that is
controlling), the secondary forced heirs are the LPAs (legitimate parents or
ascendants)

b. If the D/T is illegit, then the secondary forced heirs would be limited to
the mother or father of the testator

Note: No other ascendants can be called to the legitime because of the

iron-barrier rule.

WHO ARE THE PRIMARY FORCED HEIRS?
A. Who are the LCDs under the Family Code (FC)?
1. Those who are born or conceived during valid marriage. Under the
FC, for as long as born or conceived during the subsistence of the
valid marriage, the child is considered a legitmitae child of both
husband and wife
2. Children born or conceived of a void marriage for as long as the
judgment of nullity arises from Art. 36 of the FC (Psychological
incapacity) or Art. 35 para. 6 in connection with Arts. 52 & 53 (yung
subsequent marriages contracted without first recording the final of
nullity)
- the marriage is void but the children conceived or born out of said
void marriage would be legitimate
3. Legitimated children of the testator those who were born out of
wedlock but conceived by parents who were capacitated to marry
each other (if there is no legal impediment at the time of conception)
and the parents subsequently contract a valid marriage
- The marriage took place after the birth of the child.
- Legitimation is a process that takes place by operation of law
retroacts to the date of birth of the child for as long as the parents
validly marry each other. At the time of the birth of the child, he/she is
illegitimate (kasi out of wedlock). But when the parents marry one
another and for as long as their marriage is valid, the child is
considered legitimated even after the death of the child.
Q: But if at the time of the conception of the child, one or both of the
parents are suffering from legal impediment to marry one another,
can that child be legitimated by the subsequent marriage of the
parents?
A: No. What is controlling would be the lack of legal impediment for
the parents to marry each other when the child is conceived
4. Adopted children acquire all the rights of a natural legitimate child
even if there is no blood relation between the adopter and the
adoptee.
- In case the legitimate filiation of the child is repudiated or denied,
then that child may file an action for compulsory recognition
ANYTIME DURING THE LIFETIME OF THE CHILD (Arts. 172-175 of
FC) because the child is claiming legitimacy and not illegitimacy;
PROVIDED that the ff. proof of filiation are also adduced:
a. the record of birth (Cert. of Live Birth / CLV) duly signed by the
presumptive parent conclusive proof: no need for the child to
file compulsory recognition
b. In the absence of the childs record of birth, final judgment
declaring the child to be legitimate
c. authentic writing whether in a public or private instrument for
as long as it contains express acknowledgment of filiation and
signed by the putative parent
d. In lieu of the above, then legitimate filiation may also be
established on the basis of open and continuous possession of a
status of a legitimate child
e. other means allowed by the Rules of Court (i.e. proof of family
reputation, proof of genealogy, and other writings including DNA
evidence
General Rule: Legitimate children are not required to prove their filiation in
order to inherit their legitime
Exception: It is only when there is a question raised that proof is necessary
Take note of the public policy: The law prefers legitimacy over
illegitimacy.
B. widow/ widower / SS (surviving spouse)
There should only be one SS.
 If there are several claiming to be the widow/er of the decedent at the A marriage contracted by minors without authority on the part of
time of death, there is a necessity for each or for all of them to the solemnizing officer
establish and prove validity of their respective marriages to the
decedent. Without license

There should only be one valid marriage. Bigamous or polygamous marriage

Assuming that the validity and subsistence of the marriage at the time
of death of the testator is proved, it must be further established that
there was no decree of legal separation between the parties in order
to entitle the SS to a legitime.
If there is a final judgment of nullity or annulment, then there is no SS
that has been called because the marriage has been terminated not
by the death but by prior final judgment.
But legal separation does not sever the marital bond. If there is a
decree of a legal separation prior to death affecting both, then
determine now who under the judgment is the guilty spouse (is the
one who caused the legal separation or who gave ground for it)
If the SS is the guilty spouse not entitled to legitime UNLESS
instituted in a will after the legal separation (kasi institution in a
will is an act of condonation)
mistaken identity
incestuous marriages
Art. 38 void marriages pursuant to public policy quasi-
incestuous
*All of those produce illegitimate children. And the illegitimacy
here retroacts to the date of their birth (nung naipanganak sila,
akala nila legitmate kasi wala pa naming final judgment nullifying
the marriage of parents. Pero nung nag away ang parents nila,
illegitimate na.)
TAKE NOTE: For illegit children of the D/T to claim the legitime, the filiation
must be proved. This is the class of compulsory heirs that must establish
their relationship. And it is that relationship that proves title to their hereditary
rights

If the SS is the innocent party give the legitime Thus, under the FC, illegitimate filiation may be proved by the same
means as legitimate children.
C. ICDs (illegit children and their descendants)
1. By record of birth The action for compulsory
Who are illegitimate children? 2. By final judgment recognition based on these three
3. Or authentic writing may be filed anytime DURING the
1. these are off springs born out of wedlock - cannot be legitimated 4. Open and continuous possession oflifetime
a statusof the child.
and will remain illegitimate even if their parents subsequently marry 5. Other means allowed by the Ruled of Court
one another if at the time of the conception there was legal
The action for compulsory recognition may be filed anytime DURING
impediment the lifetime of the putative parent. So, after the parent has died, the
action is bared. So, after the parent has died, no relationship because no
UNLESS: Adopted
action for compulsory recognition would be allowed after the death of
the putative father based on no.4 & 5, UNLESS, according to
2. those who are born or conceived under void marriages
jurisprudence, there is DNA evidence gathered from available
biological samples after death
If the filiation cannot be proved either because of the lack of evidence or it is
barred by prescription, they are complete strangers. No legitime passes to
one claiming to be an ICD.
For LCDs and ICDs, the Law includes their descendants.
Note: These descendants are entitled to the legitime only by right of
representation. They can represent their parent in the succession of the
D/T only if the parent:
1. Predeceases the testator
2. Is declared by a court incapacitated or disqualified to inherit
3. Is validly disinherited in the will of the testator
But A died ahead of the D/T. A died in 2010. The D/T died only in 2015. At
the time of the opening of the succession of the testator, he was already
predeceased by one of the compulsory heirs. That will not deprive, as a
general rule, that compulsory heir of the legitime except the legitime will
descend by right of representation through A1 and A2. Therefore, for
representatives, their ultimate shares are called per stirpes shares. It is a
division of the original legitime based on the number of the representatives.
The P4M will now be divided in two representatives. Each one could get a
per stirpes share. A1 and A2 will get P2M each. Per capita share is the one
that is divided among the representatives. The totality of the per stirpes
shares cannot exceed the per capita share of the person they are
representing.

Pursuant to the right of representation, the representatives should be

grandchildren kasi yung children, legit children or illegit children vis--vis the
testator. So the representatives are those in the farther descending line. So
grandchildren yan or great grandchildren as the case may be.

These representatives are raised to the same rank or level as the person
that they are representing and therefore should be given the legitime.

Illustration:

D/T was survived by two legitimate children. The LCDs are A and B. A is
married to spouse. Out of that marriage A1 and A2 were born. A1 and A2 are
the grandchildren of the D/T. The legitime assigned by law to A and B as a
class amounts to P8M. If A and B are both alive, qualified and willing at the
time of death of the decedent, then they would divide equally the legitime
assigned to them by P4M each.
If the person being represented is legitimate, we apply the iron-barrier rule.

Q: What is the iron-barrier rule, Art. 992. It applies to both legitimes and
intestacy.

A: According to the Court, the iron-barrier rule involves an impenetrable wall

that separates legitimates from illegitimates. They cannot inherit from one
another by operation of law. Meaning, illegitimate children cannot inherit ab
intestato from the legitimate relatives of their mother or father and vice
versa. Acknowledged illegitmate children can inherit from their mother and
father. But they cannot inherit by operation of law from the parents of their
parents or from the other relatives of their parents because of the iron-barrier
rule.
Q: Thus, if during the marriage A to the spouse, A had a girlfriend and the
girlfriend gave birth to X and X was acknowledged by A as an illegitimate
child, can X represent A in the succession of the testator?
A: No. Barred / Iron-barrier rule). (John Snow cannot inherit from the
relatives of [Med Stark? haha] because he is a bastard, diba? Yun yung
feudal nature ng law on succession. Because of this feudalism, you cannot
ascend into the throne if you are a bastard. It is only Queen Elizabeth)
In the case of an illegit heirs or compulsory heirs, there is no pure legitimate
line that must be preserved. That is why the iron-barrier rule does not apply
when it comes to representation.
D/T is married that is why A and B were born during such marriage. A and B
are legitimate children of the D/T. But as all men do, testator had a girlfriend
and she gave birth to C. Even if the decedent acknowledged C as an illegit
child, please take note C can inherit from D/T. But what if C has C 1
(legitimate) and C2 (illegitimate, also acknowledged)? If C dies ahead of the
D/T, or is declared disqualified, or disinherited in the will of the testator, Cs
legitime went pass by right of representation without any concern for the
iron-barrier rule. That is why C may be represented by C1 as well as C2.
Unlike here (previous illustration), X cannot at all interfere or intervene in the
legitimate clan. So, it bars X from succeeding from the legitimate line of the
D/T. Here (present illustration) there is nothing to be preserved. Illegitmate
na siya from the beginning. That is why both C1 and C2 will inherit per
stirpes.
Let us modify the example. The legitimes of the LCDs as a class is P12M so
A and B will get P6M each. C will get, pursuant to the Family Code, of the
share, P3M. But since C predeceased, or was disqualified, or was
disinherited in the will of the D/T, the legitime of C will pass to C 1 and C2
regardless of legitimacy or illegitimacy for as long as they are descendants.
The question here is unresolved by any jurisprudence of the SC.
Q: How much would be the per stirpes share of C1 and C2? There is no
question that they can represent. But how much is their respective shares?
A: One theory is this. Consistent with the Family Code, C 1 will get P2M while
C2 will get P1M because illegitimates will get the share of of the share of
legitimates. But Justice Vitug says they should be equal because they are
not inheriting from their parent. They are inheriting from their grandparent.
And therefore, the first impression should always be equal. Therefore 1.5M.
I do not know which one is correct. My opinion is that yung 2:1is the correct
one because of the FC. The FC does not really distinguish between
legitimes inheritance or representation. So, if asked in the quiz, answer both.
If asked in the bar, eh di answer both.
Q: What happens in case of predecease, incapacity or disinheritance and
there are no representatives kasi walang further descending line?
Q: A died without any children or grandchildren. So, no one can represent A
in the succession of the D/T. What shall we do with the P6M legitime share
of A?
A: It will go to a co-heir in the same class by his own right. In the absence of
representatives, the vacant legitime will now be acquired by the co-heirs
within the same class and in their own right.
Q: Sino yung co-heir ni A?
A: B. kasi pareho silang LCD. Kung meron iba jan, then the 6M will
distributed to the other co-heirs. Do not call it accretion because there is a
specific meaning to accretion. So, it will pass to B as a co heir in his own
right.
Note: The rule is absolute that one who renounces or repudiates is not
entitled to be represented. This applies in all kinds of succession
testamentary, legitimes or intestacy. That is the penalty according to the Civil
Code for refusing a gratuitous act in you favor. (Ma pride ka daw).
One who is disinherited may still be represented. For example, a child may
be disinherited in a will for attempting against the life of the testator. You are
in better standing if you attempt against the life of the testator than when you
repudiate. Because while you are disinherited because of attempting against
the life of the testator, you can still be represented by your children. But if
you renounce your inheritance, you will never be represented. Your children
will also suffer.
Q: What will happen to the repudiated share?
A: Again, it will pass to the co-heirs in their own right.
Q: In case of absence of representative or repudiation, how much is the
legitime of B all in all?
A: To get the entire 12M kasi wala siyang ka-share.
SECONDARY FORCED HEIRS are those called to the legitime by
operation of law in default of one class of forced heirs.
If the D/T is legitimate (in your quiz or exam, if I dont mention the status or
filiation of the decedent, it should be construed as legitimate. Pag illegitimate
yan, imemention ko. Or if I dont mention, you have to determine if he is
legitimate or illegitimate yung decedent), called to the succession as
secondary forced heirs would be the LPAs (legitimate parents or
ascendants) and only in default of LCDs. Meaning walang legit children
yung namatay. That is the time when the mother, father or other ancestors
may be given the legitime.
Among the LPAs, follow the rule of proximity.
Q: How many sets of grandparents do you have if you are legitimate?
A: 2 Sets all in all.
Q: How many humans are there?
A: 4
Follow the rule of proximity
Under the rule of proximity, the nearer relatives exclude the remoter ones.
So, if those closest in degree are several in number, divide between the
maternal and the paternal line. And then give each line an equal share in the
legitime.
Illustration:
The D/T died young and was survived by mother, father, the maternal
grandmother and the maternal grandfather and then yung great grandmother
and great grandfather on the maternal side. And then, on the paternal side,
surviving are also the paternal grandmother and paternal grandfather and
the great grandfather on that side.

Following the rules of proximity, this one is 1 degree, 2 degrees and 3

degrees. Therefore, whom will you give the legitimes? To the lowest, closest
living, the first degree relatives who are the mother and father. Since there
are more than one within the closest degree, divide between the maternal
and the paternal.

Q: Assuming, you only have 3 surviving relatives within the 3 rd degree; 3rd
degree being the closest. But they do not all belong to the same line.
Therefore, how will you distribute the estate?

A: 4M maternal side: Great grandmother and great grandfather get 2M

each

Winner takes it all si paternal great grandfather gets the entire 4M

Therefore, if the law grants to the LPAs as a class a total of P8M, mother
and father get P4M each to the exclusion of the other older ones.

Q: Assuming, the closest relatives are the grandparents one each side.
Then, how do you distribute the 4M for each line?

A: 2M Maternal grandmother

2M Maternal grandfather

2M paternal grandmother

2M paternal grandfather
Right of representation

When the law speaks of the legitimate children and their TESTATOR
descendants or illegitimate children and their descendants, descendants
referred to such inherit only by right of representation. It takes effect by
operation of law whenever the person represented could not inherit the
legitime on the ground of predeceased wherein he or she died ahead of the
A B C
testator or declared by law or by court to be incapacitated and disqualified or
validly disinherited by way of a valid will. In that case, the legitimes will now
pass to the other descendants for as long as the iron barrier rule is
A1 A2 B1 B2 B3 C1 C2
observed. Under the iron barrier rule, illegitimate children cannot inherit from C3
the legitimate relatives of their parents or vice versa wherein the legitimate
relatives of the father or mother cannot inherit from the illegitimate children. *if only one repudiated, for example A, the legitime cannot be
passed to A1 and A2 because one who renounces cannot be
Article 992 of the NCC imposes an impenetrable wall that
represented. Instead, the share or legitime of A will pass to B
completely separates legitimate from illegitimates. On the other hand, if the
person being represented is an illegimate heir of the testator, there is no iron and C. On the other hand, if all of them, A,B, and C, repudiate,
barrier rule. For example, an acknowledged illegitimate child of the decedent the legitime from the decedent, A1-C3 will inherit in their own
died ahead or declared incapacitated or was disinherited, then his legitime right. The legitime will be divided by 8. They will inherit per
will pass to either legitimate or illegitimate grandchildren of the decedent or capita.
testator; there is no pure line (legitimate line) that needs to be perfected. In
the absence of qualified representatives, then the _______ (di ko po
maintindihan ung word na nagamit) legitime created by those who
predeceased, etc shall pass to the co-heirs within the same class and
degree. Or in case of repudiation, the repudiated legitime will never pass by
right of representation. That is why it will also pass to their co-heirs in their
own right. If all the closest descendants or heirs repudiate their legitime, then
those next in degree will inherit in their own right, not per stirpes
 A B
v

C F D E- - - - I

G H

J K L

In 2009, A died, who are the compulsory heirs?

C, D,E as LCDs What if J dies assuming that E is the mother and I is the father of J, who are the heirs,
B as the surviving spouse if any? If the decedent is an illegitimate like J and dies without children whatsoever

What if in 2009, C had already passed away as of 2005, who would be the GF ------- H W
compulsory heirs?
The legitime of C would pass to G and H. X
H did not acknowledge X as his illegitimate child. X suddenly died leaving an estate
If C died in 2005, who were the compulsory heirs of C? worth P100m.
G and H as LCds
F as the surviving spouse Who will be the compulsory heirs of X.
The mother.
If E died in 2010, who are the compulsory heirs of E?
Can H inherit from the estate of X?
*what is the principle of concurrence? No. He did not acknowledge X during the latters lifetime. Thus, there is no
The presence of one class of compulsory heirs will allow him or her to inherit relationship between the presumptive father and the illegitimate child.
along with another class. The principle of primary forced heirs is applicable here.
* What is the principle of exclusion? What is H then acknowledges X. Will the acknowledgement have an effect?
When one class is present, then another class is specifically excluded. The Family Code on proof illegitimate filiation
principle of secondary forced heirs is applicable here. If the proof is on open and continuous possession, acknowledgement must
be done anytime during the lifetime of the father
So, J and K are the compulsory heirs. No one else concurs as a class? But this applies when an illegitimate child seeks recognition from the
putative father. Not when a father seeks recognition as the father of an
Secondary forced heirs- LPAs illegitimate child.
Who are secondary forced heirs of an illegitimate decedent? Mother and Father, and
only in the absence of children or descendants whether legitimate or illegitimate. Law is silent.
Applying such, J and K will concur with B as secondary forced heir because
E died without any LCDs.
Possible answer: Acknowledgement of H would not have any effect for reasons of If concurring with both LPAs and ICDs- 1/8 (Baog Rule)
fairness and equity.
If it was H who died first and he did not acknowledge X as his illegitimate ICDs- they must prove their filiation in accordance with the family code
child during his lifetime, X could not inherit from him. If ICDs concur with LCDs- follow the Family Code- of the share of legitimates;
So H should also not inherit from X because of the non-acknowledgement. however, if there are more ICDs than LCDs, the totality share of the ICDs cannot
reduce the share of LCDs below provided by law.
GF ------- H W If the illegitimates do not concur with LCDs follow the civil code
If ICDs concur with LPAs-
X If ICDs concur with SS- 1/3
If concurring with LPAs and SS-
X1 X2
Secondary forced heirs
If this was the case, the acknowledgement of H as the father of X could be allowed LPAs surviving alone-
since X1 and X2 would benefit from such acknowledgement like asking for support. In LPAs concur with spouse only-
this case, H will benefit from the estate of X and will also be burdened because when LPAs concur with illegitimates only-
he dies, X1 and X2 can inherit from him.
IPs(Illegitimate parents; secondary forced heirs of an illegitimate testator)
Going back to our main problem, what if J dies, being an illegitimate decedent and IPs surviving alone-
assuming that I is the father, but I refuses to acknowledge J, who will be the IPs concur with spouse- for each of them
compulsory heirs? IPs concur with LCDs and ICDs- none

Can B inherit from J? No because of Iron Barrier rule. Thus, the entire estate can be
given freely because there is no compulsory heirs

What if D dies in 2012, who would be the compulsory heirs?

B alone.

What if B dies, who would be the compulsory heirs?

G and H.
But by right of representation or in their own right?
In their own right per capita, similar to right of representation, as if all of them
renounced

Shares
For LCDs whether surviving alone or concurring with other classes-1/2 of the entire
net estate (fix legitime)
In case there are several LCDs simultaneously inheriting within the same class, divide
the based on their number
If there is only one legitimate child- entire

For the widow/ widower, the fraction given by law changes depending on whetehr the
heir survives alone or concurs with other classes:
If alone, no other compulsory heirs- of the estate
If alone but the marriage is in articulo mortis and the testator dies within three months
from the marriage and they cohabitated for 5 years or less-1/3(Gold- diggers rule)
But if the cohabitation was for more than 5 years-
If the widow or widower concurs with LCDs and there is only 1 legitimate child- of
the entire estate
But if there are several LCDs, equal to the share of one
If the widow concurs with LPAs(secondary forced heirs)-1/4 of the entire
If concurring with ICDs only- 1/3