De la Cerna vs.
Potot, 12 SCRA 576
DOCTRINE: Probate decree of joint will of husband and wife affects only the share of the deceased
spouse. In addition, error of law committed in admitting a joint will to probate does not affect the probate
court’s jurisdiction nor the conclusive effect of its final decision.
FACTS:
1. Bernabe de la Cerna and Gervasia Rebaca, childless, executed a joint last will and testament in
the local dialect where they willed that:
Their two parcels of land acquired during their marriage together with all improvements
thereon shall be given to Manuela Rebaca, their niece, whom they have nurtured since
childhood;
‘While each of the testator is yet living, he or she will continue to enjoy the fruits of said
two lands.’
2. Husband, Bernabe de la Cerna died on August 30, 1939, and the said will was submitted to
probate by said Gervasia and Manuela before the Court of First Instance of Cebu which heard the
evidence in a Special Proceeding.
3. Upon the death of the wife, Gervasia Rebaca, another petition for the probate of the same will
insofar as Gervasia was concerned was filed.
Petition was dismissed due to Manuela’s failure to appear.
4. The Court of First Instance ordered the petition heard and declared the testament null and void
for being executed contrary to the prohibition of joint wills in the Civil Code.
5. On appeal by the testamentary heir, CA reversed on the ground that the decree of probate in 1939
was issued by a court of probate jurisdiction and conclusive on the due execution of the
testament. Hence, this appeal by the heirs intestate of the deceased husband, Bernabe de la Cerna.
ISSUES:
(1) Whether the probate decree of joint will affects only the share of deceased spouse (YES)
(2) Whether errors committed by the probate court affect its jurisdiction (NO)
RULING
(1) Yes, the probate decree of joint will affects only the share of the deceased spouse.
A final probate decree of a joint will of husband and wife affects only the share of the deceased spouse
and cannot include the disposition of the share of the surviving spouse. The validity of said joint will, in
so far as the estate of the latter spouse is concerned, must be, on her death, reexamined and adjudicated de
novo.
This is considering that a joint will is a separate will of each testator, and a joint will being prohibited by
law, the estate of the wife should pass upon her death to her intestate heirs and not to the testamentary
heirs, unless some other valid will is shown to exist in favor of the latter or unless the testamentary heir is
the only heir intestate of said wife.
In this case, the probate decree in 1939 could only affect the share of the deceased husband, Bernabe de la
Cerna. It could not include the disposition of the share of the wife, Gervasia Rebaca, who was then still
alive, and over whose interest in the conjugal properties the probate court acquired no jurisdiction,
precisely because her estate could not then be in issue. Be it remembered that prior to the Civil Code, a
will could not be probated during the testator's lifetime.
Therefore, the undivided interest of Gervasia Rebaca should pass upon her death to her heirs’ intestate,
and not exclusively to the testamentary heir, unless some other valid will in her favor is shown to exist, or
unless she be the only heir intestate of said Gervasia.
(2) No, errors committed by the probate court does not affect its jurisdiction (NO)
An error of law committed in admitting a joint will to probate does not affect the jurisdiction of the
probate court nor the conclusive effect of its final decision.
A final judgment rendered on a petition for the probate of a will is binding upon the whole world; and
public policy and sound practice demand that at the risk of occasional errors, judgment of courts should
become final at some definite date fixed by law.
