Special Proceedings

Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020

Jose Maria College of Law

Special Proceeding – is a remedy by which a party seeks to

establish a status, a right or a particular fact.1 Natcher vs CA
G.R. No. 133000 October 2, 2001
Action – an ordinary suit in a court of justice, by which a party
Doctrine: Matters which involve settlement and distribution of
prosecutes another for the enforcement or protection of a right,
the estate of the decedent fall within the exclusive province of
or the prevention or redress of a wrong.2
the probate court in the exercise of its limited jurisdiction.
Ordinary Action Special Proceeding Facts:
A remedy by which a party It is a remedy by which a Spouses Graciano del Rosario and Graciana Esguerra
prosecutes another for the party seeks to establish a were registered owners of a land in Manila. Upon the death of
enforcement or protection of status, right or a particular Graciana in 1951, Graciano, together with his 6 children
a right, or the prevention or fact.
entered into an extrajudicial settlement of Graciana's
redress of a wrong.
adjudicating and dividing among themselves the said land.
Involves two or more parties GR: May involve only one
– plaintiff and defendant party, who usually initiates
the proceedings with a Accordingly, TCT No. 11889 was cancelled, TCTs
petition, an application, or a were issued in the name of Graciano and the children. Further,
special form of a pleading said heirs executed and forged an "Agreement of
Consolidation-Subdivision of Real Property with Waiver of
XPN: Correction or
Rights" where they subdivided among themselves the land
cancellation of entries under
into several lots.
Rule 108, in which case, the
Local Civil Registrar should
be impleaded as a On 1980, Graciano married herein petitioner Patricia
respondent Natcher. During their marriage, Graciano sold the (2nd) land
Governed by ordinary rules, Governed by special rules, to his wife Patricia to which a TCT was issued in her name. On
supplemented by special supplemented by ordinary 1985, Graciano died leaving his 2nd wife Patricia and his
rules rules if applicable like rule
children by his 1st marriage, as heirs.
on payment of docket fees
and the requirement of
certification against forum In a complaint, private respondents alleged that upon
shopping. Graciano's death, Natcher through fraud, misrepresentation
Initiated by a complaint, and Initiated by a petition and and forgery acquired the TCT making it appear that Graciano
parties respond through an parties respond through an executed a Deed of Sale. And, that their legitimes have been
answer after being served opposition after notice and impaired.
with summons publication are made
Heard by courts of general Heard by courts of limited
Petitioner‘s Allegations: She was legally married to
jurisdiction jurisdiction
Graciano in 1980. Thus, under the law, she was likewise
Based on a cause of action GR: Not based on a cause of
action considered a compulsory heir of the latter. That during
XPN: habeas corpus Graciano's lifetime, Graciano already distributed, in advance,
Issues or disputes are stated Issues are determined by law properties to his children, hence, herein private respondents
in the pleadings of the may not anymore claim against Graciano's estate or against
parties herein petitioner's property.
Adversarial Not adversarial except for
correction or cancellation of
RTC (Manila): Deed of sale is void being contrary to law. No
entries under Rule 108 108 (it
may be summary or evidence of separation of property or a decree of judicial
adversarial depending on separation of property between them, the spouses are
what is sought to be prohibited from entering (into) a contract of sale; Prohibited
rectified). donation; Although the deed of sale cannot be regarded as
such or as a donation, it may however be regarded as an
1
Section 3, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court
2
i.d.
21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

extension of advance inheritance of Patricia Natcher being a decedent, partake of the nature of a special proceeding, which
compulsory heir of the deceased. concomitantly requires the application of specific rules as
provided for in the Rules of Court.
CA: Reversed and set aside RTC‘s ruling. (It is the probate Clearly, matters which involve settlement and distribution of
court that has exclusive jurisdiction to make a just and legal the estate of the decedent fall within the exclusive province of
distribution of the estate… Thus the court a quo erred in the probate court in the exercise of its limited jurisdiction.
regarding the subject property as advance inheritance. What
GENERAL PROVISIONS
the court should have done was merely to rule on the validity
RULE 72
of the sale and leave the issue on advancement to be resolved
in a separate proceeding instituted for that purpose. Section 1. Subject matter of special proceeding –
(a) Settlement of estate of deceased persons;
Issue: Whether or not the RTC (in an action for reconveyance) (b) Escheat;
may adjudicate matters relating to the settlement of the estate (c) Guardianship and custody of children;
of a deceased person particularly on questions as to (d) Trustees;
(e) Adoption;
advancement of property made by the decedent to his heirs.
(f) Rescission and revocation of adoption;
(g) Hospitalization of insane persons;
Ruling: (h) Habeas corpus;
No, the RTC trying an ordinary action for reconveyance/ (i) Change of name;
annulment of title, went beyond its jurisdiction when it (j) Voluntary dissolution of corporations;
performed the acts proper only in a special proceeding for the (k) Judicial approval of voluntary recognition of minor
natural children;
settlement of estate of a deceased person. (Petition
(l) Constitution of family home;
DISMISSED)
(m) Declaration of absence and death;
(n) Cancellation or correction of entries in the civil
A civil action is one by which a party sues another for the registry.
enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or Section 2. Applicability of rules of civil action – In the absence
redress of a wrong. A civil action may either be ordinary or of special provisions, the rules provided for in ordinary actions
special. Both are government by the rules for ordinary civil shall be, as far as practicable, applicable in special proceedings.
actions, subject to specific rules prescribed for a special civil
Judicial Approval of Voluntary Recognition of Minor
action. A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party
Natural Children
seeks to establish a status, a right or a particular fact.
Venue: the child or his parents SHALL file a petition to the CFI
There lies a marked distinction between an action and of the province in which the child resides.3
a special proceeding. An action is a formal demand of one's
right in a court of justice in the manner prescribed by the court Proof Required:
Art. 172 (Family Code) – The filiation of legitimate
or by the law. It is the method of applying legal remedies
children is established by any of the following:
according to definite established rules. The term "special
proceeding" may be defined as an application or proceeding to (1) The record of birth appearing in the civil register
establish the status or right of a party, or a particular fact. or a final judgment; or
Usually, in special proceedings, no formal pleadings are (2) An admission of legitimate children in a public
required unless the statute expressly so provides. In special document or a private handwritten instrument
proceedings, the remedy is granted generally upon an (during the lifetime of the parent) and signed by
the parent concerned.
application or motion.

In the absence of the foregoing evidence, the

Applying these principles, an action for reconveyance legitimate filiation shall be proved by:
and annulment of title with damages is a civil action, whereas
matters relating to settlement of the estate of a (1) The open and continuous possession of the status
deceased person such as advancement of property made by the
3
Section 1, Rule 105 of the Rules of Court
21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

of a legitimate child; or other courts.

(2) Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court
and special laws. Rules as to Presumptive Death (Family Code)

Note: the list under Rule 72, Section 1 is not exclusive. 7 years Presumed dead for all purposes,
except succession.
Constitution of Family Home 10 years For the purpose of opening of his
There is no longer a need for a formal constitution of family succession
home. 5 years Disappeared after the age of 75
years, to open his succession
Extrajudicial Constitution of Family Home (Art. 240, 242 of
Family Code) 4 years (1) A person on board a vessel lost
 By recording in the Registry of Property a public during a sea voyage, or an aircraft
instrument declaring the property as family home. which is missing, and who has not
been heard of since its loss.
Other Subject matter of Special Proceeding
(1) Liquidation proceedings – it seeks merely of a (2) A member of the armed forces
declaration by the court of a corporation’s insolvency who has taken part in armed
so that its creditors may be able to file their claims in hostilities.
the settlement of the corporation’s debts and
obligations. The petition only seeks a declaration of (3) A person who has been in
the corporation’s state of insolvency and the danger of death under other
concomitant right of creditors and the order of circumstances.
payment of their claims in the disposition of the
corporation’s assets.4 (4) Contracting subsequent
marriage, if the spouse present has
(2) Petition for Rehabilitation – it merely seeks to well-founded belief that the absent
establish the inability of the corporate debtor to pay spouse is already dead.
its debts when they fall due so that a rehabilitation
plan containing the formula for the successful 2 years The absentee spouse is missing
recovery of the corporation may be approved in the wherein there is danger of death.
end.
(3) Arbitration JURISDICTION OVER SETTLEMENT CASES
(4) Alternative Dispute Resolution  MTC – gross value of the estate does not exceed
P300,000 or P400,00 in Manila
SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DECEASED PERSONS  RTC – gross value of the estate exceeds the above
RULE 73 amount.
Venue and Process
VENUE OF JUDICIAL SETTLEMENT CASES
Section 1. Where Estate of Deceased Persons Settled –  Inhabitant of the PH –the proper court in the
province in which the decedent resides at the
If the decedent is an INHABITANT OF THE PHILIPPINES at time of death;
the time of his death, whether a citizen or an alien, his will  Inhabitant of Foreign Country – the proper court
shall be proved, or letters of administration granted, and his in the province where the estate is located.
estate settled, in the CFI in the province in which he resides at
the time of his death. “Resides” – the personal, actual or physical habitation of a
person, actual residence or place of abode. It signifies physical
INHABITANT OF A FOREIGN COUNTRY, the CFI of any presence in a place and actual stay thereat.5
province in which he had estate.
“Residence” – a person’s actual residence or place of abode,
The court first taking cognizance of the settlement of the estate provided he resides therein with continuity and consistency. 6
of a decedent, shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of all
5
Fule vs CA, GR No. L-40502 November 29, 1976
4 6
Pacific Banking vs CA, GR. No. 109373 March 20, 1995. Jao vs CA, May 29, 2002
21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

EXCLUSIONARY RULE or PRINCIPLE OF PREFERENTIAL Section 4. Presumption of death. — For purposes of settlement
JURISDICTION of his estate, a person shall be presumed dead if absent and
 The court first taking cognizance of the settlement of unheard from for the periods fixed in the Civil Code. But if
the estate of a decedent, shall exercise jurisdiction to such person proves to be alive, he shall be entitled to the
the exclusion of all other courts. balance of his estate after payment of all his debts. The balance
 Applicable only to non-resident decedents. may be recovered by motion in the same proceeding.

When two proceedings were filed: Section 2. Where Estate Settled Upon Dissolution of Marriage
1. The intestate case should be consolidated with testate –
proceedings and the judge assigned to the testate
proceeding should continue hearing the two cases When the marriage is dissolved by the death of the Husband
(Roberts vs Leonidas) or Wife;
2. Testate proceeding takes precedence over intestate (a) The community property shall be inventoried,
proceedings. If in the course of intestate proceeding, it administered, and liquidated.
is found that decedent left a will, proceeding for (b) And the debts thereof paid, in the testate or intestate
probate of will should replace the intestate proceedings of the deceased spouse.
proceeding (uriarte vs CFI Negros Occidental)
3. The first court, upon learning that petition for probate If both spouses have died, the conjugal partnership shall be
has been presented in another court, may decline to liquidated in the testate or intestate proceedings of either.
take cognizance of and hold in abeyance the petition
before it, and instead defer to the second court which TYPE OF PROPERTY REGIME
has before it the petition for probate of the decedent’s Absolute Community Conjugal Partnership
alleged last will. If the will is admitted to probate, it Property
will definitely decline to take cognizance. (Cuenco vs the community property shall the conjugal partnership
CA). be liquidated in the same property shall be liquidated
proceeding for the settlement in the same proceeding for
NOTE: the difference between Uriarte and Cuenco is that in of the estate of the deceased. the settlement of the estate of
Uriarte, there was a showing that petitioner in the probate the deceased.
proceeding knew before filing of petition in the second court Prior liquidation, any Prior liquidation, any
that there was already an intestate proceeding in the first court. disposition or encumbrance disposition or encumbrance
involving the community involving the conjugal
Notes: property of the terminated partnership property of the
 The issue on Venue is waivable, marriage shall be void. terminated marriage shall be
 The issue of jurisdiction is Jurisdictional. void.
For purposes of subsequent For purposes of subsequent
Where to file your probate proceeding? marriage, a mandatory marriage, a mandatory
 If prior to the filing of a probate proceeding, an regime of complete separation regime of complete separation
intestate proceeding has been filed in another court – of property shall govern the of property shall govern the
the probate of the will of the decedent should be property relations of the property relations of the
submitted to the same court, either in a separate subsequent marriage. subsequent marriage.
proceeding or in an appropriate motion for said
purpose in the intestate proceedings.7 Ledesma vs Intestate Estate of Cipriano Pedrosa
G.R. No. 102126 March 12, 1993
Section 3. Process. — In the exercise of probate jurisdiction, Facts:
Courts of First Instance may issue warrants and process
necessary to compel the attendance of witnesses or to carry Petitioner’s marriage to Pedrosa was declared a
into effect theirs orders and judgments, and all other powers nullity by the RTC on 8 February 1984. The Court ordered that
granted them by law. If a person does not perform an order or that the properties acquired at the time they were living
judgment rendered by a court in the exercise of its probate together as common-law husband and wife are owned by them
jurisdiction, it may issue a warrant for the apprehension and as co-owners to be governed by the provisions on co-
imprisonment of such person until he performs such order or ownership of the civil code; that the properties acquired by
judgment, or is released. plaintiff and defendant after their marriage was solemnized on
March 25, 1965, which was annulled by this Court in the
7 above-entitled proceeding, forms part of the conjugal
Uriarte vs CFI of Negros, G.R. Nos. L-21938-39 May 29, 1970
21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

partnership and upon dissolution of the marriage, to be liquidated, but the offending spouse shall have no right to any
liquidated in accordance with the provision of the civil code.   share of the profits earned by the partnership or community,
Pending receipt by the court of the ordered inventory, Pedrosa without prejudice to the provisions of Article 176;
died. A separate petition for the probate of his last will and
testament was filed before Branch 43.   Nelson Jimena was The aforequoted provision mandates the dissolution and
named executor and substituted Pedrosa in the partition liquidation of the property regime of the spouses upon finality
proceedings before Branch 51. of the decree of legal separation. Such dissolution and
liquidation are necessary consequences of the final decree. This
The respondent judge in a partition proceeding (Branch 51) legal effect of the decree of legal separation ipso facto or
declared as follows: automatically follows, as an inevitable incident of, the
judgment decreeing legal separation for the purpose of
With all these informations, and considering the nature of the action, determining the share of each spouse in the conjugal assets.
the Court finds the substitution of the original plaintiff improper, as
the defendant herein can pursue her claim over the properties before
the intestate proceedings being instituted. Action for intervention in EXTENT OF JURISDICTION OF THE PROBATE COURT
order that the judgment in this particular proceeding can be
implemented, can be raised in the intestate Court. In view of the What is the Nature of the Court’s Jurisdiction in Settlement
above, without prejudice to the defendant's right to file as intervenor Cases
in the intestate proceedings with the judgment annulling the  It has limited jurisdiction
marriage, the proceedings becomes moot and academic with the
pendency of the intestate proceeding before Branch 43. This case is  Extrinsic validity of a will and the testamentary
therefore deemed TERMINATED. capacity of the testator, if there is a will.

Hence, this special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65.  If there is no and there is a petition for letters of
administration, the court can determine if the
ISSUE: WON the termination of the supplemental action for petitioner is viable to be an administrator.
partition on account of the death of one of the spouses and the
pendency of intestate proceeding of the deceased spouse’s  As a general rule, questions of ownership cannot
estate PROPER. be passed upon. They are limited to the
inventory of the estate – what are to be included
RULING: NO. The rules on dissolution and liquidation of the and what are to be excluded.
conjugal partnership of gains under the aforecited provisions
of the Civil Code would be applied effective January 4, 1973  Thus, court cannot also determine whether
when the decree of legal separation became final. Upon the properties are conjugal or separate property but
liquidation and distribution conformably with the law as an exception to the general rule, it may pass
governing the effects of the final decree of legal separation, the upon and decide provisionally.
law on intestate succession should take over in the
disposition of whatever remaining properties have been General Rule: The probate court’s authority is limited only to
allocated to petitioner. This procedure involves details which the extrinsic validity of the will, the due execution thereof, the
properly pertain to the lower court. The properties that may be testator’s testamentary capacity and the compliance with the
allocated to the deceased petitioner by virtue of the liquidation requisites or solemnities prescribed by law.
of the conjugal assets, shall be distributed in accordance with
the laws of intestate succession in Special Proceedings No. 134. Exception:
1. When on the face of the will, it appears to be
The law explicitly and clearly provides for the dissolution and intrinsically void;
liquidation of the conjugal partnership of gains or the absolute 2. Where practical considerations demand that
community of property as among the effects of the final decree the intrinsic validity of the will be passed upon.
of legal separation.
When the settlement court decides the issues of ownership,
Article 106 of the Civil Code thus reads: The decree of legal what is the nature of the finding?
separation shall have the following effects:
Provisional – if it is not by virtue of any kind of inheritance but
Xxx 2) The conjugal partnership of gains or the absolute title adverse to that of the deceased or his estate.
conjugal community of property shall be dissolved and

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

Permanent – if the heirs agree and there are no 3rd persons or so submitted, said probate court may definitely pass judgment
creditors who will be prejudiced (Bernardo vs CA) thereon; and that with the consent of the parties, matters
Bernardo vs CA affecting property under judicial administration may be taken
GR No. L-18148 February 28, 1963 cognizance of by the court in the course of intestate
Facts: proceeding, provided interests of third persons are not
Eusebio Capili and Hermogena Reyes were husband and wife. prejudiced.
The first died on July 27, 1958 and a testate proceeding for the
settlement of his estate was instituted in the Court of the First In the case now before us, the matter in controversy is the
Instance of Bulacan. His will was admitted to probate, question of ownership of certain of the properties involved —
disposing of his properties in favor of his widow and his whether they belong to the conjugal partnership or to the
cousins; and Arturo, Deogracias and Eduardo, all surnamed husband exclusively. This is a matter properly within the
Bernardo. Hermogena Reyes herself died on April 24, 1959. jurisdiction of the probate court which necessarily has to
Upon petition of Deogracias Bernardo, executor of the estate of liquidate the conjugal partnership in order to determine the
the deceased Eusebio Capili, she was substituted by her estate of the decedent which is to be distributed among his
collateral relatives and intestate heirs, all surnamed Isidoro. heirs who are all parties to the proceedings, including, of
course, the widow, now represented because of her death, by
The executor filed a project of partition in the estate her heirs who have been substituted upon petition of the
proceedings in accordance with the terms of the will, executor himself and who have appeared voluntarily. There
adjudicating the estate of Capili among the testamentary heirs are no third parties whose rights may be affected. It is true that
with the exception of Reyes, whose share was allotted to her the heirs of the deceased widow are not heirs of the testator-
collateral relatives. These relatives filed an opposition to the husband, but the widow is, in addition to her own right to the
executor’s project of partition and submitted a counter- conjugal property. And it is this right that is being sought to be
projection of their own claiming ½ of the properties mentioned enforced by her substitutes. Therefore, the claim that is being
in the will of the deceased Capili on the theory that they belong asserted is one belonging to an heir to the testator and,
not to the latter alone but to the conjugal partnership of the consequently, it complies with the requirement of the
spouses. exception that the parties interested (the petitioners and the
The probate court issued an order declaring the donation void widow, represented by dents) are all heirs claiming title under
for the reason that it falls under Article 133 of the Civil Code the testator.
which prohibits donation between spouses during the
marriage. In the same order, the court disapproved both Rufina Luy Lim vs CA
project of partitions and directed the executor to file another, G.R. No. 124715  January 24, 2000
dividing the property mentioned in the last will and testament Facts:
of Capili and the properties mentioned in the deed of donation, On 11 June 1994, Pastor Y. Lim died intestate. Herein
between the instituted heirs of Capili and Reyes, upon the petitioner, as surviving spouse and duly represented by her
basis that the said properties were conjugal properties of the nephew George Luy, fried on 17 March 1995, a joint petition for
deceased spouses. the administration of the estate of Pastor Y. Lim before the
Regional Trial Court of Quezon City.
Issue: Whether or not a probate court in a special proceeding Private respondent corporations, whose properties were
had jurisdiction to determine the validity of the deed of included in the inventory of the estate of Pastor Y. Lim, then
donation in question and pass upon the question of title or filed a motion6 for the lifting of lis pendens and motion for
ownership of the properties mentioned in the will. exclusion of certain properties from the estate of the decedent.
Issue: May the court decide on the matter whether or not a
Ruling: Yes property is to be included or not in the estate of decedent.
Court consistently held that as a general rule, question as to Ruling: Yes, but the determination is only provisional in
title to property cannot be passed upon on testate or intestate character, not conclusive, and is subject to the final decision in
proceedings," except where one of the parties prays merely for a separate action which may be instituted by the parties.
the inclusion or exclusion from the inventory of the property, Issue: Can an estate include a corporation?
in which case the probate court may pass provisionally upon Ruling: Inasmuch as the real properties included in the
the question without prejudice to its final determination in a inventory of the estate of the late Pastor Lim are in the
separate action. possession of and are registered in the name of private
respondent corporations, which under the law possess a
However, we have also held that when the parties interested personality separate and distinct from their stockholders, and
are all heirs of the deceased, it is optional to them to submit to in the absence of any cogency to shred the veil of corporate
the probate court a question as to title to property, and when

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

fiction, the presumption of conclusiveness of said titles in favor testator was already very sick and that petitioner having
of private respondents should stand undisturbed. admitted her living in concubinage with the testator.

Piercing the veil of corporate entity requires the court to see The lower court denied the probate of the Will on the ground
through the protective shroud which exempts its stockholders that as the testator admitted in his Will to cohabiting with the
from liabilities that ordinarily, they could be subject to, or petitioner. Petitioner appealed to CA. On June 2, 1982, the
distinguishes one corporation from a seemingly separate one, respondent court set aside the decision of the Court of First
were it not for the existing corporate fiction. Instance of Rizal denying the probate of the will. The
respondent court declared the Will to be valid except that
The corporate mask may be lifted and the corporate veil may the devise in favor of the petitioner is null and void.
be pierced when:
(a) A corporation is just but the alter ego of a person or of Issue: W/N the CA acted in excess of its jurisdiction when after
another corporation; declaring the last Will and Testament of the deceased Martin
(b) Where badges of fraud exist; Jugo validly drawn, it went on to pass upon
(c) Where public convenience is defeated; the intrinsic validity of the testamentary provision.
(d) Where a wrong is sought to be justified thereby.
Ruling: NO.
Test to determine the applicability of the doctrine of piercing The respondent court acted within its jurisdiction when after
the veil of corporate fiction: declaring the Will to be validly drawn, it went on to pass upon
1. Control, not mere majority or complete stock control, the intrinsic validity of the Will and declared the devise in
but complete domination; favor of the petitioner null and void. The general rule is that in
2. Such control must have been used by the defendant to probate proceedings, the court’s area of inquiry is limited to
commit fraud or wrong; an examination and resolution of the extrinsic validity of the
3. Such control or breach of duty must proximately Will.
cause the injury or unjust loss complained of.
The rule, however, is not inflexible and absolute. Given
 Probate jurisdiction covers all matters relating to: exceptional circumstances, the probate court is not powerless
1. the settlement of estates (Rule 74 and 86-91) and to do what the situation constrains it to do and pass upon
the probate of wills (Rules 75-77) of deceases certain provisions of the Will.
persons, including the appointment and removal
of administrators and executors (Rule 78-85). The probate of a will might become an idle ceremony if on its
2. It also extends to matters incidental and collateral face it appears to be intrinsically void. Where practical
to the exercise of a probate court’s recognized considerations demand that the intrinsic validity of the will be
powers such as selling, mortgaging or otherwise passed upon, even before it is probated, the court should meet
encumbering realty belonging to the estate.8 the issue (Nuguid v. Nuguid)

Nepomuceno vs CA The Will is void under Article 739. The following donations
GR No. L-62952 October 9, 1985 shall be void: (1) Those made between persons who were
Facts: guilty of adultery or concubinage at the time of the donation;
Martin Jugo left a duly executed and notarized Last and Article 1028. The prohibitions mentioned in Article 739,
Will and Testament before he died. Petitioner was named as concerning donations inter vivos shall apply to testamentary
sole executor. It is clearly stated in the Will that he was legally provisions.
married to a certain Rufina Gomez by whom he had two
legitimate children, but he had been estranged from his lawful There is no question from the records about the fact of a prior
wife. In fact, the testator Martin Jugo and the petitioner were existing marriage when Martin Jugo executed his Will. The
married despite the subsisting first marriage. The testator very wordings of the Will invalidate the legacy because the
devised the free portion of his estate to petitioner. On August testator admitted he was disposing the properties to a person
21, 1974, the petitioner filed a petition for probate. On May 13, with whom he had been living in concubinage.
1975, Rufina Gomez and her children filed an opposition
alleging undue and improper influence on the part of the Anita Reyes-Mesugas vs Alejandro Aquino Reyes
petitioner; that at the time of the execution of the Will, the GR. No. 174835 March 22, 2010
Facts:
Lourdes Aquino Reyes, mother of petitioner and respondent,
8
Heirs of Spouses Sandejas vs Alex Lina, GR No. 141634 died intestate, leaving to her heirs, among others, three parcels
February 5 2001.
21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

of land, including a lot covered by Transfer Certificate of Title 5. Orders payment of lawful debts;
(TCT) No. 24475. A compromise agreement was entered into 6. Authorizes sale, mortgage or any encumbrance of real
by the parties whereby the estate of Lourdes was partitioned. estate;
A decision was rendered by the RTC pursuant to the said 7. Directs delivery of the estate to those entitled thereto.
compromise agreement.
RULE 75
Petitioner filed a motion to cancel lis pendens annotation for PRODUCTION OF WILL. ALLOWANCE OF WILL
TCT No. 24475 arguing that the settlement of the estate NECESSARY
proceeding had terminated; hence, the annotation
of lis pendens could already be cancelled since it had served its Section 1. Allowance necessary. Conclusive as to execution. —
purpose. Respondent opposed the motion and claimed that the No will shall pass either real or personal estate unless it is
parties, in addition to the compromise agreement, executed proved and allowed in the proper court. Subject to the right of
side agreements which had yet to be fulfilled. One such appeal, such allowance of the will shall be conclusive as to its
agreement was executed between petitioner and respondent due execution.
granting respondent a one-meter right of way on the lot
covered by TCT No. 24475. Section 2. Custodian of will to deliver. — The person who has
custody of a will shall, within twenty (20) days after he knows
The RTC denied the motion to cancel the notice of the death of the testator, deliver the will to the court having
of lis pendens annotation for lack of sufficient merit but was jurisdiction, or to the executor named in the will.
denied.
Section 3. Executor to present will and accept or refuse trust.
Issue: Whether the RTC, sitting as probate court, has — A person named as executor in a will shall, within twenty
jurisdiction over the issue of right of way. (20) days after he knows of the death of the testate, or within
twenty (20) days after he knows that he is named executor if he
Ruling: None obtained such knowledge after the death of the testator,
In this instance, the case filed with the RTC was a special present such will to the court having jurisdiction, unless the
proceeding for the settlement of the estate of Lourdes. The RTC will has reached the court in any other manner, and shall,
therefore took cognizance of the case as a probate court. within such period, signify to the court in writing his
  acceptance of the trust or his refusal to accept it.
Settled is the rule that a probate court is a tribunal of limited
jurisdiction. It acts on matters pertaining to the estate but never Section 4. Custodian and executor subject to fine for neglect. —
on the rights to property arising from the contract. It approves A person who neglects any of the duties required in the two
contracts entered into for and on behalf of the estate or the last preceding sections without excused satisfactory to the
heirs to it but this is by fiat of the Rules of Court. It is apparent court shall be fined not exceeding two thousand pesos.
therefore that when the RTC approved the compromise
agreement, the settlement of the estate proceeding came to an Section 5. Person retaining will may be committed. — A
end. person having custody of a will after the death of the testator
who neglects without reasonable cause to deliver the same,
Moreover, judgment rendered in accordance with a when ordered so to do, to the court having jurisdiction, may be
compromise agreement is immediately executory as there is no committed to prison and there kept until he delivers the will.
appeal from such judgment. When both parties enter into an
agreement to end a pending litigation and request that a  Probate of a will is a proceeding in rem. Thus it
decision be rendered approving said agreement, such action requires publication to bind the whole world.
constitutes an implied waiver of the right to appeal against the  Probate of a will is imprescriptible – because it is
said decision. required by public policy and the State could not
defeat the same by applying the rule on prescription.
POWERS AND DUTIES OF PROBATE COURT  Probate of a will is Mandatory – No will shall pass
either real or personal property unless it is proved
General powers and duties of a probate court and allowed in the proper court (Sec. 1 Rule 75).
1. Orders the probate of the will of the decedent;  The doctrine of estoppel does not apply – the
2. Grants letters of administration; presentation and probate of a will are requirements of
3. Supervises and controls all acts of administration public policy.
4. Hears and approves claims against the estate of the
deceased; Scope of Inquiry in probate of wills

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

1. Extrinsic validity of the will; How jurisdiction acquired?

2. The testamentary capacity of the testator; 1. Attachment of a copy of the will to the petition; or
3. Compliance with the requisites or solemnities by law. 2. Delivery of the will to the court

May the court rule on the intrinsic validity of the will? Note: Submission of the original will is not a jurisdictional
 General rule: NO requirement.
 Exception: Nuguid vs Nuguid – the Court held that in
a proceeding for the probate of a will, the court’s area Who is “ANY OTHER PERSON INTERESTED IN THE
of inquiry is limited to an examination of, and ESTATE”?
resolution on, the extrinsic validity of the will: the due In order that a person may be allowed to intervene in
execution thereof; the testatrix’s testamentary a probate proceeding he must have an interest in the estate, or
capacity; and the compliance with the requisites or in the will, or in the property to be affected by it either as
solemnities prescribed by the law. executor or as a claimant of the estate and an interested party
is one who would be benefited by the estate such as an heir or
The issue in the case of Nuguid is preterition, which is one who has a claim against the estate like a creditor.9
dealing with intrinsic validity. If the will is
intrinsically void, there is no point in ruling its IF the testator himself petition the court for the allowance of
extrinsic validity. The will on its face is intrinsically his will
void.  It is easier for the courts to determine the mental
condition of a testator during his lifetime than after
EFFECT OF PROBATE his death. Fraud, intimidation, and undue influence is
minimized.
The probate of a will is only with respect to the extrinsic  Once a will is probated during the lifetime of the
validity. Thus, when a will is probated the decree of probate is testator, the only questions that may remain for the
conclusive as to its due execution of the will and testamentary courts to decide after the testator’s death will refer to
capacity of the testator BUT NOT as to the validity of any of the intrinsic validity of the testamentary
its testamentary provision. dispositions.10
 There is no requirement for newspaper publication.11
Can a will that has passed probate be annulled?  Individual notices shall be sent only to his
No, the basic ground for annulling a document is vitiated compulsory heirs.12
consent. If a will has passed probate, there is now a conclusive
finding as to the voluntariness of the execution of the will. Section 2. Contents of petition. — A petition for the allowance
What is the effect of the non-probate of the will? of a will must show, so far as known to the petitioner:
ANS: The will shall be inoperative. It cannot be enforced, (a) The jurisdictional facts;
because it did not pass probate. Section 1, Rule 75 provides
that only probated will can be validly enforced. (b) The names, ages, and residences of the heirs,
legatees, and devisees of the testator or decedent;
RULE 76
ALLOWANCE OR DISALLOWANCE OF WILL (c) The probable value and character of the property
of the estate;
Section 1. Who may petition for the allowance of will.
(d) The name of the person for whom letters are
1. Any executor, devisee, or legatee named in a will, or prayed;

(e) If the will has not been delivered to the court, the
2. any other person interested in the estate,
name of the person having custody of it.

may, at any time after the death of the testator, petition the
But no defect in the petition shall render void the allowance of
court having jurisdiction to have the will allowed, whether the
the will, or the issuance of letters testamentary or of
same be in his possession or not, or is lost or destroyed.

9
3. The testator himself may, during his lifetime, petition Acain vs CA, GR No. 72706 October 27, 1987.
10
the court for the allowance of his will. Maloles vs Philipps GR No. 129505 January 31, 2000.
11
Section 3(2) Rule 76 of the Rules of Court.
12
Section 4(2) Rule 76 of the Rules of Court.
21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

allowance thereof, and shall cause notice of such time and

administration with the will annexed. place to be published three (3) weeks successively, previous
to the time appointed, in a newspaper of general circulation in
JURISDICTIONAL FACTS is the allegations that: the province.
a. A person died leaving a will;
b. That he died as a resident of the Philippines and of But no newspaper publication shall be made where the petition
this place (e.g. Davao City) or if he died abroad, he for probate has been filed by the testator himself.
has estate in this place for purposes of jurisdiction
and venue. Section 4. Heirs, devisees, legatees, and executors to be
notified by mail or personally. — The court shall also cause
Palaganas vs Palaganas copies of the notice of the time and place fixed for proving the
GR No. 169144 January 26, 2011 will to be addressed to the designated or other known heirs,
Facts: legatees, and devisees of the testator resident in the
Ruperta Palaganas, a Filipino who became a naturalized US Philippines at their places of residence, and deposited in the
citizen, died single and childless. In her last will and testament post office with the postage thereon prepaid at least twenty
executed in US, she designated her brother Serio Palaganas, as (20) days before the hearing, if such places of residence be
the executor of will for she had left proeprties in the known.
Philippines and U.S.
A copy of the notice must in like manner be mailed to the
On May 19, 2003, Ernesto Palaganas, another brother of person named as executor, if he be not the petitioner; also, to
Ruperta, filed with the RTC of Malolos, Bulacan, a petition for any person named as co-executor not petitioning, if their places
the probate of Ruperta’s will. Manuel and Benjamin, nephews of residence be known. Personal service of copies of the notice
of Ruperta opposed the petition on the ground that Ruperta’s at least (10) days before the day of hearing shall be equivalent
will should not be probated in the PH but in the US. to mailing.

Issue: Whether or not Ruperta’s will can be probated in the If the testator asks for the allowance of his own will, notice
PH. shall be sent only to his compulsory heirs.

Ruling: Yes, Our laws do not prohibit the probate of wills When can the court take jurisdiction over probate proceedings?
executed by foreigners abroad although the same have not as (The Court will set the date for the probate of the will when:
yet been probated and allowed in the countries of their
execution. 1. A petition for probate has been filed; or
2. Even if there is no petition for probate, when the will
Section 1, Rule 73 of the 1997 Rules of Procedure, provides that has been delivered to the court having jurisdiction.
if a decedent is an inhabitant of a foreign country, the RTC of
the province where he has an estate may take cognizance of the Requirements for probate of will:
settlement case. a. Notice of hearing must be published setting the time
and place for proving the will (3) weeks successively
Our rules require merely that the petition for the allowance of in a newspaper of general circulation.
a will must show so far as known to the petitioner: b. Individual notices (notice of hearing) will be sent one
a. Jurisdictional facts; by one to all known heirs, legatees, or devisees, either
b. The names, ages and residences of the heirs, legatees personally or by registered mail.
and devisees of the testator or decedent.
c. The probable value and character of the property of  By personal service – notice must be given at
the estate; least 10 days before the day of hearing.
d. The name of the person for whom letters are prayed;  By registered mail – notice must be deposited in
e. If the will has not been delivered to the curt, the name the post office with the postage thereon prepaid
of the person. at least twenty (20) days before the hearing.

Section 3. Court to appoint time for proving will. Notice Parties entitled to notice in a probate hearing:
thereof to be published. — When a will is delivered to, or a 1. Designated or known compulsory heirs, legatees and
petition for the allowance of a will is filed in, the court having devisees of the testator resident in the PH at their
jurisdiction, such court shall fix a time and place for proving places of residence, at least 20 days before hearing, if
the will when all concerned may appear to contest the such places of residence be known;

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

2. Person named executor, if he be not the petitioner. 3. If the allowance of the will is uncontested, the court
may grant allowance thereof on the testimony of one
Cynthia Alaban vs CA subscribing witness (notarial will);
GR No. 156021 September 23, 2005
Ruling: 4. One witness who knows the handwriting and
According to the Rules, notice is required to be signature of the testator (holographic will) – if none,
personally given to known heirs, legatees and devisees of the expert testimony is allowed (Rules on Evidence).
testator. A perusal of the will shows that respondent was
instituted as the sole heir of the decedent. Petitioners, as nepws Section 11. Subscribing witnesses produced or accounted for
and nieces of the decedent, are neither compulsory nor testate where will contested. — If the will is contested, all the
heirs who are entitled to be notified of the probate proceedings subscribing witnesses, and the notary in the case of wills
under the Rules. Respondent had no legal obligation to executed under the Civil Code of the Philippines, if present in
mention petitioners in the petition for probate, or to personally the Philippines and not insane, must be produced and
notify them of the same. examined, and the death, absence, or insanity of any of them
must be satisfactorily shown to the court.
Besides, assuming arguendo that petitioners are entitled ro be
so notified, the purported infirmity is cured by the publication If all or some of such witnesses are present in the Philippines
of the notice. Aafter all, personal notice upon the heirs is a but outside the province where the will has been filed, their
matter of procedural convenience and not a jurisdictional deposition must be taken.
requisite.
If any or all of them testify against the due execution of the
The non-inclusion of petitioners’ names in the petition and the will, or do not remember having attested to it, or are otherwise
alleged failure to personally notify them of the proceedings do of doubtful credibility, the will may nevertheless, be allowed if
not constitute extrinsic fraud. Petitioners were not prevented the court is satisfied from the testimony of other witnesses and
from participating in the proceedings and presenting their case from all the evidence presented that the will was executed and
before the probate court. attested in the manner required by law.

Section 5. Proof at hearing. What sufficient in absence of If a holographic will is contested, the same shall be allowed if
contest. — At the hearing compliance with the provisions of at least three (3) witnesses who know the handwriting of the
the last two preceding sections must be shown before the testator explicitly declare that the will and the signature are in
introduction of testimony in support of the will. All such the handwriting of the testator; in the absence of any
testimony shall be taken under oath and reduced to writing. competent witnesses, and if the court deem it necessary, expert
testimony may be resorted to.
If no person appears to contest the allowance of the will, the
court may grant allowance thereof on the testimony of one of Suppose there is opposition?
the subscribing witnesses only, if such witness testify that the
will was executed as is required by law. Notarial wills
1. All the subscribing witness and notary public;
In the case of a holographic will, it shall be necessary that at 2. If all or some of such witnesses is in the Philippines
least one witness who knows the handwriting and signature of but outside the province where the will has been filed,
the testator explicitly declare that the will and the signature are their deposition must be taken.
in the handwriting of the testator. In the absence of any such
competent witness, and if the court deem it necessary, expert  The court may allow testimony of other witnesses for
testimony may be resorted to. purposes of the allowance of the will when;
a. If any or all of the attesting witnesses testify against
What will be presented in court? its due execution; or
b. If any or all of the attesting witnesses are of doubtful
1. The petitioner must show compliance with the credibility.
requirements under Section 3 and 4;
Holographic will
2. Presentation of testimony taken under oath and 1. at least three (3) witnesses who know the
reduced to writing in support of the will; handwriting of the testator explicitly declare that the
will and the signature are in the handwriting of the
testator.

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

2. In the absence of witness, expert testimony may be  But if someone other than the testator destroyed it
resorted to. without the knowledge of the testator, there is no
revocation.
Instances when the court may admit the testimony of
witnesses other than the subscribing witnesses: In a lost or destroyed will, how can the provisions be given
Proof required effect?
Witness do not reside in the the court may, on motion,  Assuming that the will was proven to exist and
province (Sec. 7) direct the taking of the validly executed, the provisions will be by
deposition and may authorize recollection or memory in accordance with the Rules
a photographic copy of the on Evidence.
will to be made and to be
presented to the witness on Rodelas vs Aranza
his examination. G.R. No. L-58509 December 7, 1982
Facts:
Witness is dead or insane or The court will admit the Rodelas filed a petition with the CFI of Rizal for the probate of
do not reside in the testimony of other witnesses the holographic will of Ricardo B. Bonilla and the issuance of
Philippines to prove: letters testamentary in her favor. Aranza, et al. filed a MTD on
a. The sanity of the the grounds of:
testator; a. Rodelas was estopped from claiming that
b. Due execution of the the deceased left a will by failing to produce the will
will. within twenty days of the death of the testator as
c. The signature are the required by Rule 75, section 2 of the Rules of Court;
testator’s b. the copy of the alleged holographic will did not
handwritng contain a disposition of property after death and was
not intended to take effect after death, and therefore it
Section 6. Proof of lost or destroyed will. Certificate was not a will, it was merely an instruction as to the
thereupon. — No will shall be proved as a lost or destroyed management and improvement of the schools and
will unless the execution and validity of the same be colleges founded by the decedent;
established, and the will is proved to have been in existence at c. the hollographic will itself, and not an alleged copy
the time of the death of the testator, or is shown to have been thereof, must be produced, otherwise it would
fraudulently or accidentally destroyed in the lifetime of the produce no effect because lost or destroyed
testator without his knowledge, nor unless its provisions are holographic wills cannot be proved by secondary
clearly and distinctly proved by at least two (2) credible evidence unlike ordinary wills.
witnesses. d. the deceased did not leave any will, holographic or
otherwise, executed and attested as required by law.
When a lost will is proved, the provisions thereof must be
distinctly stated and certified by the judge, under the seal of MTD was denied. Aranza et al. filed an MR, Rodelas filed an
the court, and the certificate must be filed and recorded as opposition.
other wills are filed and recorded. The CFI set aside its order and dismissed the petition for the
probate of the will stating that “in the case of Gam vs. Yap, 104
When the original is lost or destroyed, secondary evidence Phil. 509, 522, the Supreme Court held that ‘in the matter of
may be presented provided it is proved that: holographic wills the law, it is reasonable to suppose, regards
a. There was a will which was validly executed; the document itself as the material proof of authenticity of said
b. It was in existence at the time of the death of the wills.”
testator;
c. When he died it was still intact; And that the alleged holographic will was executed on January
d. That it was destroyed fraudulently or accidentally 25, 1962 while Ricardo B. Bonilla died on May 13, 1976. The
during during the lifetime of the testator without his lapse of more than 14 years from the time of the execution of
knowledge; the will to the death of the decedent and the fact that the
original of the will could not be located shows to that the
Remember the concept of revocation: decedent had discarded the alleged holographic will before his
 Under the Civil code, when the testator destroys his death.
own will, that is an act of revocation.

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

Rodelas filed an MR which was denied. Rodelas appealed to

the CA. Aranza et al. moved to forward the case to the SC as it disallowed in any of the following cases:
involves a question of law not of fact.
(a) If not executed and attested as required by law;
Issue: W/N a holographic will which was lost or cannot be
found can be proved by means of a photostatic copy.
(b) If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally
incapable to make a will, at the time of its execution;
Ruling: If the holographic will has been lost or destroyed and
no other copy is available, the will cannot be probated because
the best and only evidence is the handwriting of the testator in (c) If it was executed under duress, or the influence of fear,
said will. It is necessary that there be a comparison between or threats;
sample handwritten statements of the testator and the
handwritten will. (d) If it was procured by undue and improper pressure
and influence, on the part of the beneficiary, or of some
But, a photostatic copy or xerox copy of the holographic will other person for his benefit;
may be allowed because comparison can be made by the
probate court with the standard writings of the testator. The (e) If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud or
probate court would be able to determine the authenticity of trick, and he did not intend that the instrument should be
the handwriting of the testator. his will at the time of fixing his signature thereto.

In the case of Gam vs. Yap, 104 PHIL. 509, the Court ruled that
“the execution and the contents of a lost or destroyed Grounds for Disallowing a will:
holographic will may not be proved by the bare testimony of 1. Non-compliance with legal formalities – if not
witnesses who have seen and/or read such will. The will itself executed and attested as required by law;
must be presented; otherwise, it shall produce no effect. The 2. Lack of testamentary capacity – If the testator was
law regards the document itself as material proof of insane, or otherwise mentally incapable to make a
authenticity.” But, in Footnote 8 of said decision, it says that will, at the time of its execution; and
“Perhaps it may be proved by a photographic or photostatic 3. Will was not duly executed:
copy. Even a mimeographed or carbon copy; or by other a. If it was executed under duress, influence of fear,
similar means, if any, whereby the authenticity of the or threats;
handwriting of the deceased may be exhibited and tested b. If it was procured by undue and improper
before the probate court,” pressure or influence, on the part of the
beneficiary, or of some other person for his
Section 12. Proof where testator petitions for allowance of benefit;
holographic will. — Where the testator himself petitions for c. If the signature of the testator was procured by
the probate of his holographic will and no contest is filed, the fraud or trick, and he did not intend that the
fact that the affirms that the holographic will and the signature instrument should be his will at the time of fixing
are in his own handwriting, shall be sufficient evidence of the his signature thereto.
genuineness and due execution thereof. If the holographic will Rule: In probate proceedings, the issue is the EXTRINSIC
is contested, the burden of disproving the genuineness and VALIDITY OF THE WILL.
due execution thereof shall be on the contestant. The testator to  Formalities required by law;
rebut the evidence for the contestant.  Testamentary capacity of the testator.

 In cases of holographic will, if the testator himself Does the dismissal due failure to appear constitute res
petitions’ for its probate, the burden of disproving its judicata?
genuineness and due execution shall be on the  NO, it can be refiled because the probate of the will is
contestant. mandatory. The dismissal is merely based on
technicality.
Section 10. Contestant to file grounds of contest. — Anyone
appearing to contest the will must state in writing his grounds General rule: You cannot oppose the probate of a will simply
for opposing its allowance, and serve a copy thereof on the because its provisions are illegal. (Intrinsic validity)
petitioner and other parties interested in the estate.
Exceptions:
Section 9. Grounds for disallowing will. — The will shall be 1. Practical considerations;

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

2. The probate of the will might be an idle ceremony, if province once a week for three consecutive weeks. (Sec. 1
on its face, it appears to be intrinsically void. of Rule 74, Rules of Court)
 The will consist of provisions which are dubious (b) Whenever the gross value of the estate of a deceased
legality. (Balanay vs Martinez). person, whether he died testate or intestate, does not
 There is preterition (Nuguid vs Nuguid). exceed ten thousand pesos, and that fact is made to appear
to the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction of the estate
Section 13. Certificate of allowance attached to prove will. To by the petition of an interested person and upon hearing,
be recorded in the Office of Register of Deeds. — If the court is which shall be held not less than one (1) month nor more
satisfied, upon proof taken and filed, that the will was duly than three (3) months from the date of the last publication
executed, and that the testator at the time of its execution was of a notice which shall be published once a week for three
of sound and disposing mind, and not acting under duress, consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in
menace, and undue influence, or fraud, a certificate of its the province, and after such other notice to interested
allowance, signed by the judge, and attested by the seal of the persons as the court may direct, the court may proceed
court shall be attached to the will and the will and certificate summarily, without the appointment of an executor or
filed and recorded by the clerk. Attested copies of the will administrator, to settle the estate. (Sec. 2 of Rule 74, Rules
devising real estate and of certificate of allowance thereof, shall of Court)
be recorded in the register of deeds of the province in which
the lands lie.

1. Extrajudicial Settlement – if the decedent left no will

RULE 74 and no debts, and the heirs are all of age, or the
SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF ESTATES minors are represented by their judicial or legal
representatives duly authorized for the purpose (Sec.
BAR QUESTION: 1, Rule 74).

Q: The rules on special proceedings ordinarily require that the 2. Judicial Settlement – where proceedings in court are
estate of the deceased should be judicially administered thru necessary, and includes the following:
an administrator or executor.
a. Summary settlement of estate of small value –
What are the two exceptions to said requirement? (5%) (2001 Whenever the gross value of the estate of a
Bar Question) deceased person, whether he died testate or
intestate, does not exceed P10,000.00, the court
may proceed summarily, without the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
appointment of an executor or administrator (Sec.
2, Rule 74).
The two exceptions to the requirement are:
(a) Where the decedent left no will and no debts and the heirs
b. Testate Proceedings – when the decedent left a
are all of age, or the minors are represented by their
last will and testament (Rules 75-79).
judicial or legal representatives duly authorized for the
purpose, the parties may without securing letters of
administration, divide the estate among themselves by c. Intestate Proceedings – When the decedent died
means of a public instrument filed in the office of the without a will, or died with a will but was found
register of deeds, or should they disagree, they may do so invalid and thereafter disallowed (Rule 79).
in an ordinary action of partition. If there is only one heir, d. Partition – When there is no will and the parties
he may adjudicate to himself the entire estate by means of entitled to the estate would agree on the project
an affidavit filed in the office of the register of deeds. The of partition (Rule 69).
parties or the sole heir shall file simultaneously a bond
with the register of deeds, in an amount equivalent to the Section 1. Extrajudicial settlement by agreement between
value of the personal property as certified to under oath heirs. — If the decedent left no will and no debts and the heirs
by the parties and conditioned upon the payment of any are all of age, or the minors are represented by their judicial or
just claim that may be filed later. The fact of the legal representatives duly authorized for the purpose, the
extrajudicial settlement or administration shall be parties may without securing letters of administration, divide
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the the estate among themselves as they see fit by means of a
public instrument filed in the office of the register of deeds,

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

and should they disagree, they may do so in an ordinary action b. Self-Adjudication – when there is only one heir thru
of partition. an affidavit filed in the Registry of Deeds.

If there is only one heir, he may adjudicate to himself the entire If the heirs could not meet an agreement, they can go to
estate by means of an affidavit filled in the office of the register partition under Rule 69. However, judicial partition is not
of deeds. feasible if there are debts left by the decedent. If there are
debts, then file for a settlement case.
The parties to an extrajudicial settlement, whether by public
instrument or by stipulation in a pending action for partition, PRESUMPTION OF NO DEBT - It shall be presumed that the
or the sole heir who adjudicates the entire estate to himself by decedent left no debts if no creditor files a petition for letters of
means of an affidavit shall file, simultaneously with and as a administration within two (2) years after the death of the
condition precedent to the filing of the public instrument, or decedent.
stipulation in the action for partition, or of the affidavit in the
office of the register of deeds, a bond with the said register of Pereira vs CA
deeds, in an amount equivalent to the value of the personal G.R. No. L-81147 June 20, 1989
property involved as certified to under oath by the parties Facts:
concerned and conditioned upon the payment of any just claim
that may be filed under section 4 of this rule. Andres de Guzman Pereira, an employee of Philippine Air
Lines, passed away without a will. He was survived by his
It shall be presumed that the decedent left no debts if no legitimate spouse of 10 months, herein petitioner Victoria
creditor files a petition for letters of administration within two Bringas Pereira, and his sister Rita Pereira Nagac, herein
(2) years after the death of the decedent. private respondent.

The fact of the extrajudicial settlement or administration shall On March 1, 1983, private respondent (sister) instituted before
be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Branch 19 of the RTC of Bacoor, Cavite, a Special
manner provided in the nest succeeding section; but no
extrajudicial settlement shall be binding upon any person who
Proceeding for the issuance of letters of administration in her
has not participated therein or had no notice thereof.
favor pertaining to the estate of the deceased Andres de
Guzman Pereira.
Requisites for extrajudicial settlement

In her verified petition, private respondent alleged that:

1. Decedent died intestate;

 she and Victoria Bringas Pereira are the only

2. No outstanding debts at the time of settlement; surviving heirs of the deceased; that the deceased left
no will;
3. Heirs are all of legal age or minors represented by
judicial guardians or legal representatives;  there are no creditors of the deceased

4. Settlement is made in a public instrument or by

 the deceased left several properties, namely: death
means of an affidavit, in case of sole heir, duly filed benefits from the Philippine Air Lines (PAL), the PAL
with the RD;
Employees Association (PALEA), the PAL Employees
Savings and Loan Association, Inc. (PESALA) and the
5. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation in Social Security System (SSS), as well as savings
the province once a week for 3 consecutive weeks; deposits with the Philippine National Bank (PNB) and
and the Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank
(PCIB), and a 300 square meter lot located at Barangay
6. Filing of bond equivalent to the value of personal Pamplona, Las Pinas, Rizal; and
property (APPLIES ONLY TO PERSONAL
PROPERTIES).  and finally, that the spouse of the deceased (herein
petitioner) had been working in London as an
KINDS OF EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT auxiliary nurse and as such, one-half of her salary
a. Extrajudicial – when there are 2 or more heirs; thru a forms part of the estate of the deceased.
public instrument registered in the Registry of Deeds.

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

On March 23, 1983, petitioner filed an opposition and a motion the estate should not be burdened with an administration
to dismiss the petition of private respondent, alleging that proceeding without good and compelling reasons.
there exists no estate of the deceased for purposes of
administration and praying in the alternative, that if an estate In the case at bar, there are only two surviving heirs, a wife of
does exist, the letters of administration relating to the said 10 months and a sister, both of age. The parties admit that
estate be issued in her favor as the surviving spouse. there are no debts of the deceased to be paid. What is at once
apparent is that these two heirs are not in good terms. The
The Regional Trial Court, appointed private respondent Rita only conceivable reason why private respondent seeks
Pereira Nagac administratrix of the intestate estate of Andres appointment as administratrix is for her to obtain possession of
de Guzman Pereira upon a bond posted by her in the amount the alleged properties of the deceased for her own purposes,
of P 1,000.00. The trial court ordered her to take custody of all since these properties are presently in the hands of petitioner
the real and personal properties of the deceased and to file an who supposedly disposed of them fraudulently.
inventory thereof within 3 months after receipt of the order.
We are of the opinion that this is not a compelling reason
Not satisfied with the resolution of the lower court, petitioner which will necessitate a judicial administration of the estate of
brought the case to the CA and the latter affirmed the the deceased. To subject the estate of Andres de Guzman
appointment of private respondent as administratrix of the Pereira, which does not appear to be substantial especially
estate in question. since the only real property left has been extrajudicially settled,
to an administration proceeding for no useful purpose would
Issue: Whether or not a judicial administration proceeding is only unnecessarily expose it to the risk of being wasted or
necessary when the decedent dies intestate without leaving squandered.
any debts?
The court below before which the administration proceedings
Ruling: are pending was not justified in issuing letters of
administration, there being no good reason for burdening the
The general rule is that when a person dies leaving property, estate of the deceased Andres de Guzman Pereira with the
the same should be judicially administered and the competent costs and expenses of an administration proceeding.
court should appoint a qualified administrator, in the order
established in Section 6, Rule 78, in case the deceased left no Is an oral partition of inherited property by the heirs valid?
will, or in case he had left one, should he fail to name an
executor therein. YES, oral partition is valid. The requirement in section 1, Rule
74 that a partition be put in a public instrument or document
An exception to this rule is established in Section 1 of Rule and is to be registered has for its purpose the protection of
74.Under this exception, when all the heirs are of lawful age creditors and at the same time the protection of heirs
and there are no debts due from the estate, they may agree in themselves, against tardy claims.
writing to partition the property without instituting the
judicial administration or applying for the appointment of an The object of registration is to serve as constructive notice to
administrator. others.

Section 1, Rule 74 of the Revised Rules of Court, however, does In such case, is the statute of limitations violated?
not preclude the heirs from instituting administration
proceedings, even if the estate has no debts or obligations, if NO, the Statute of Frauds applies when there is a transmission
they do not desire to resort to an ordinary action for partition. of rights over the property from one person to another, like
While Section 1 allows the heirs to divide the estate among sale.
themselves as they may see fit, or to resort to an ordinary
action for partition, the said provision does not compel them to What is the nature of proceeding under Sec. 1 Rule 74?
do so if they have good reasons to take a different course of It is an ex parte proceeding. The persons who do not
action. participate or has no notice of an extrajudicial settlement will
not be bound thereby. Therefore, publication of the fact of
It should be noted that recourse to an administration extrajudicial settlement or administration is a requirement.
proceeding even if the estate has no debts is sanctioned only if
the heirs have good reasons for not resorting to an action for Cua vs Vargas
partition. Where partition is possible, either in or out of court, G.R. No. 156536 October 31, 2006

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

FACTS: The publication of the settlement does not constitute

A parcel of residential land was left behind by the late Paulina constructive notice to the heirs who had no knowledge or did
Vargas. A notarized Extra Judicial Settlement Among Heirs not take part in it because the same was notice after the fact of
was executed by and among the heirs, partitioning and execution.
adjudicating unto themselves the lot in question and was The requirement of publication is geared for the protection of
published for 3 weeks. creditors and was never intended to deprive heirs of their
An Extra Judicial Settlement Among Heirs with Sale was again lawful participation in the decedent’s estate.
executed by and among the same heirs over the same property Following Rule 74, these extrajudicial settlements do not bind
and also with the same sharings. Only 5 of the 9 heirs signed respondents, and the partition made without their knowledge
the document and their respective shares were sold to Joseph and consent is invalid insofar as they are concerned.
Cua, petitioner herein. This is not to say, though, that respondents’ co-heirs cannot
After knowing of such sale to petitioner, Gloria Vargas tried to validly sell their hereditary rights to third persons even before
redeem the property. the partition of the estate. The heirs who actually participated
When the offer to redeem was refused, Gloria Vargas and her in the execution of the extrajudicial settlements, which
children filed a case for annulment of Extra Judicial Settlement included the sale to petitioner of their pro indiviso  shares in the
and Legal Redemption of the lot with the MTC. subject property, are bound by the same.
The MTC dismissed the complaint, declaring the Deed of Extra Nevertheless, respondents are given the right to redeem these
Judicial Settlement Among Heirs with Sale valid and binding. shares pursuant to Article 1088 of the Civil Code. The right to
The RTC affirmed the MTC decision. redeem was never lost because respondents were never
The CA reversed the ruling of both lower courts, declaring that notified in writing of the actual sale by their co-heirs. Based on
the Extra Judicial Settlement Among Heirs and the Extra the provision, there is a need for written notice to start the
Judicial Settlement Among Heirs with Sale were void and period of redemption, thus:
without any legal effect. Should any of the heirs sell his hereditary rights to a stranger
The CA held that, pursuant to Section 1, Rule 74 of the Rules of before the partition, any or all of the co-heirs may be
Court, the extrajudicial settlement made by the other co-heirs is subrogated to the rights of the purchaser by reimbursing him
not binding upon respondents considering the latter never for the price of the sale, provided they do so within the period
participated in it nor did they ever signify their consent to the of one month from the time they were notified in writing of
same. the sale by the vendor.
Petitioner argued among others, that the acquisition by It bears emphasis that the period of one month shall be
petitioner of the subject property subsequent to the reckoned from the time that a co-heir is notified in writing by
extrajudicial partition was valid because the partition was duly the vendor of the actual sale. Written notice is indispensable
published. The publication of the same constitutes due notice and mandatory, actual knowledge of the sale acquired in some
to respondents and signifies their implied acquiescence other manner by the redemptioner notwithstanding. It cannot
thereon. Respondents are therefore estopped from denying the be counted from the time advance notice is given of an
validity of the partition and sale at this late stage. Considering impending or contemplated sale. The law gives the co-heir
that the partition was valid, respondents no longer have the thirty days from the time written notice of the actual sale
right to redeem the property. within which to make up his or her mind and decide to
 ISSUE: Whether heirs are deemed constructively notified and repurchase or effect the redemption.
bound, regardless of their failure to participate therein, by an It should be kept in mind that the obligation to serve written
extrajudicial settlement and partition of estate when the notice devolves upon the vendor co-heirs because the latter are
extrajudicial settlement and partition has been duly published. in the best position to know the other co-owners who, under
 RULING: the law, must be notified of the sale.
 The petition lacks merit. Considering, therefore, that respondents’ co-heirs failed to
The procedure outlined in Section 1 of Rule 74 is an ex comply with this requirement, there is no legal impediment to
parte  proceeding. The rule plainly states, however, that persons allowing respondents to redeem the shares sold to petitioner.
who do not participate or had no notice of an extrajudicial TWO-YEAR PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD
settlement will not be bound thereby. It contemplates a notice GR: After the expiration of 2 years from the extrajudicial
that has been sent out or issued before any deed of settlement partition, distributes or heirs are barred from objecting to an
and/or partition is agreed upon (i.e., a notice calling all extrajudicial partition.
interested parties to participate in the said deed of extrajudicial Provided, that the provision of Section 4 Rule 74 barring
settlement and partition), and not after such an agreement has distributes or heirs from objecting to an extrajudicial partition,
already been executed as what happened in the instant case is applicable only:
with the publication of the first deed of extrajudicial settlement 1. to persons who have participated or taken part or had
among heirs. notice of the extrajudicial partition; and

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

2. when all the persons or heirs of the decedent have It is conditioned upon the payment of just claim that
taken part in the extrajudicial settlement or are may be filed under Section 4. It is claimed by the excluded
represented by themselves or through their guardian. heirs, and an heir or other person who has been unduly
Exception: if on the date of the expiration of the period of deprived of his lawful participation in the estate.
2years, the person authorized to file a claim is a minor or
mentally incapacitated, or is in prison or outside the REGISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC INSTRUMENT WITH THE
Philippines, he may present his claim within 1year after such REGISTER OF DEEDS
disability is removed. - for the issuance of new title in the name of the heirs. If it
Section 3. Bond to be filed by distributees. — The court, before is not registered, there is o effect to the validity of the
allowing a partition in accordance with the provisions of the settlement agreement.
preceding section, may require the distributees, if property
other than real is to be distributed, to file a bond in an amount Against whom is registration considered a constructive
to be fixed by court, conditioned for the payment of any just notice? Creditors and participating heirs.
claim which may be filed under the next succeeding section.
SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF ESTATES OF SMALL
Section 4. Liability of distributees and estate. — If it shall appear VALUE WHEN ALLOWED
at any time within two (2) years after the settlement and
distribution of an estate in accordance with the provisions of Section 2. Summary settlement of estate of small value. —
either of the first two sections of this rule, that an heir or other Whenever the gross value of the estate of a deceased person,
person has been unduly deprived of his lawful participation in whether he died testate or intestate, does not exceed ten
the estate, such heir or such other person may compel the thousand pesos, and that fact is made to appear to the Court of
settlement of the estate in the courts in the manner hereinafter First Instance having jurisdiction of the estate by the petition of
provided for the purpose of satisfying such lawful an interested person and upon hearing, which shall be held not
participation. less than one (1) month nor more than three (3) months from
the date of the last publication of a notice which shall be
And if within the same time of two (2) years, it shall appear published once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in a
that there are debts outstanding against the estate which have newspaper of general circulation in the province, and after
not been paid, or that an heir or other person has been unduly such other notice to interest persons as the court may direct,
deprived of his lawful participation payable in money, the the court may proceed summarily, without the appointment of
court having jurisdiction of the estate may, by order for that an executor or administrator, and without delay, to grant, if
purpose, after hearing, settle the amount of such debts or proper, allowance of the will, if any there be, to determine who
lawful participation and order how much and in what manner are the persons legally entitled to participate in the estate, and
each distributee shall contribute in the payment thereof, and to apportion and divide it among them after the payment of
may issue execution, if circumstances require, against the bond such debts of the estate as the court shall then find to be due;
provided in the preceding section or against the real estate and such persons, in their own right, if they are of lawful age
belonging to the deceased, or both. and legal capacity, or by their guardians or trustees legally
appointed and qualified, if otherwise, shall thereupon be
Such bond and such real estate shall remain charged with a entitled to receive and enter into the possession of the portions
liability to creditors, heirs, or other persons for the full period of the estate so awarded to them respectively. The court shall
of two (2) years after such distribution, notwithstanding any make such order as may be just respecting the costs of the
transfers of real estate that may have been made. proceedings, and all orders and judgments made or rendered
in the course thereof shall be recorded in the office of the clerk,
Section 5. Period for claim of minor or incapacitated person. and the order of partition or award, if it involves real estate,
— If on the date of the expiration of the period of two (2) years shall be recorded in the proper register's office.
prescribed in the preceding section the person authorized to
file a claim is a minor or mentally incapacitated, or is in prison Summary settlement of estate may be chosen by the heirs
or outside the Philippines, he may present his claim within one regardless of whether the decedent died intestate or testate.
(1) year after such disability is removed.
Requisites:
a. The complaint must allege that the gross value of the
WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS OF THE BOND
estate of the deceased does not exceed P10,000.00;
REQUIREMENT?
b. A bond has been duly filed in an amount fixed by the
court; and

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

c. A proper hearing is held not less than one month nor Compel the Should be brought within two (2) years
more than 3 months from date of last publication of settlement of after settlement and distribution of the
the notice. estate in court estate
If the order of closure has already become
EXTRAJUDICIAL
SUMMARY SETTLEMENT final and executory, the heir must file an
SETTLEMENT
independent civil action of accion
Requires summary reivindicatoria to recover his deprived
No court intervention adjudication filed with the share.
MTC
The value of the estate is Gross value of the estate must NOTE: It must be brought within 10 years
immaterial not exceed P10,000 from the time the right of action accrues
Allowed only in intestate Allowed in both testate and Ordinary Action
[Art. 1144(c)].
succession intestate succession but not against
Available even if there are the bond
There must be no outstanding After the lapse of two (2) years, an
debts. It is the court which ordinary action may be instituted against
debts of the estate at the time
will make provision for its the distributees within the statute of
of the settlement
payment. limitations but not against the bond.
May be instituted by any
Resorted at the instance and interested party even a NOTE: Also applicable in judicial
by agreement of all heirs. creditor of the estate without proceedings not covered by summary
the consent of all the heirs. settlement of estate of small value.
Amount of bond is equal to
If there is preterition of compulsory heir
the value of personal Amount of bond is to be
Action for tainted with bad faith (Art 1104, NCC).
property. determined by the court
Rescission
irrespective of whether the
(Applicable in It must be availed of within five (5) years
If it is a real property, it is estate consists of real or
both from the time the cause of action accrues
subject to a lien for a period of personal property
extrajudicial (Art. 1149, NCC).
two (2) years
settlement or
Publication of notice once a
summary NOTE: Also applicable in judicial
week for three consecutive
settlement) proceedings not covered by summary
weeks; court may likewise
settlement of estate of small value.
Publication of notice of the order that notice be given to
fact of extrajudicial settlement persons as the court may GR: It is based on an implied or
once a week for three direct. constructive trust due to fraud which
consecutive weeks in a prescribes in 10 years from the date of
newspaper of general There is also a hearing to be registration or date of issuance of
circulation held not less than one month certificate of title or from actual discovery
nor more than three months Action for of fraud if the registration was made in
from the date of last Reconveyance of bad faith.
publication of notice. Real Property
(Applicable in XPN: Within four (4) years from discovery
both extajudicial of fraud if the heir adversely held the
REMEDIES OF AGGRIEVED PARTIES AFTER
settlment or property such as obtaining a title and if
EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE
summary title is registered from date of registration.
settlement) If there is no adverse possession, then the
Grounds:
action is imprescriptible.
a. If there is undue deprivation of lawful
participation in the estate;
NOTE: Also applicable in judicial
b. Existence of debts against the estate.
Claim against proceedings not covered by summary
(Sec. 4, Rule 74)
the bond or real settlement of estate of small value.
Action to annul On the ground of fraud which should be
Should be brought within two (2) years
a deed of filed within four (4) years from the
after settlement and distribution of the
extrajudicial discovery of fraud.
estate
settlement or

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

judgment in 3. There has been undue deprivation of lawful

summary participation payable in money on the part of an heir
settlement or other interested person.
Upon motion of a person who either:
a. Has a legal interest in the matter in Q: May an order denying probate of will be overturned after
litigation; period to appeal has lapsed? Why? (2002 Bar)
b. Has such legal interest in the success of
either of the parties, or an interest against A: YES. A petition for relief may be filed on the grounds of
both; or fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence within a
Reopening of the
c. Is so situated as to be adversely affected period of 60 days after the petitioner learns of the judgment or
proceedings by
by the distribution of property in the final order and not more than 6 months after such judgment or
motion in
custody of the court or of an officer. final order was entered. (Secs. 1&3, Rule 38) An action for
summary
settlement annulment may also be filed on the ground of extrinsic fraud
May be availed of after judgment but within four (4) years from its discovery, and if based on lack of
before the finality of the closure order jurisdiction, before it is barred by laches or estoppels (Secs.
2&3, Rule 47).
NOTE: Also applicable in judicial
proceedings not covered by summary Recent Jurisprudence
settlement of estate of small value.
An interested heir who was able to participate either
If proceedings are already closed and the in extrajudicial or summary settlement of estate of the
Petition for heir is excluded, within a prescriptive decedent has a period of two years after settlement and
reopening of period of 10 years. distribution to assail its validity (Cua v. Vargas, G.R. No.
proceedings 156536, October 31, 2006).
(Summary NOTE: Also applicable in judicial
Settlement) proceedings not covered by summary The remedy of an heir who is deprived of one’s share
settlement of estate of small value. in estate because one did not participate, take part, or had no
Motion to If the heir is not excluded but failed to notice is to file an action for reconveyance within ten years,
deliver share receive his share which is based on implied or constructive trust.
(Extrajudicial
settlement and NOTE: Also applicable in judicial An exception carved out by jurisprudence that an
summary proceedings not covered by summary action for reconveyance is imprescriptible when plaintiff, the
settlement) settlement of estate of small value. legal owner, and not the defendant registered owner, is in
possession (Heirs of Saludares v. CA, G.R. No. 128254, January
On grounds of fraud, accident, mistake, 16, 2004).
and excusable negligencewithin 60 days
after petitionerlearns of the judgment, NOTE: Reconveyance can no longer be availed of once the
Petition for final orderor other proceeding to be property has passed to an innocent purchaser for value. The
Relief (Summary setaside, and not more than six (6) months aggrieved parties may sue for damages against co-heirs who
Settlement) after such judgment orfinal order was have perpetrated the fraud.
entered (Rule 38).
Although the word “reconveyance” may appear in
Also applicable in judicial proceedings. the title of the complaint, but it is clear from the allegations
that the complainants never intended to part with the
Three instances when an heir may be compelled to settle the property, as their signatures were forged, such complaint is
decedent’s estate in court one for annulment and not merely for reconveyance. It is,
therefore, imprescriptible (Macababbad Jr. v. Masirag, G.R. No.
1. There has been undue deprivation of lawful 161237, January 14, 2009).
participation in the estate on the part of an heir or
other interested person;

2. There exists debts against the estate; and

21
 Special Proceedings
Atty. Raia Angelie A. Tumanda 2nd Semester SY 2019-2020
Jose Maria College of Law

21