VII. Succession

VII. WILLS AND SUCCESSION

A. General Provisions (Civil Code, arts. 774-782)

B. Testamentary Succession

C. Intestate Succession

D. Provisions Common to Testate and Intestate Succession (Civil Code, arts. 1015- 1105)

2. Elements of Succession

a. Death b. Inheritance i. Property ii. Rights iii. Obligations iv. Extent of a Person’s Liability for an Inherited Obligation c. Successors

i. Heirs ii. Voluntary Heirs iii. Compulsory Heirs iv. Intestate Heirs v. Legatees and Devisees

Acceptance is an heir’s act concerning an inheritance already transmitted upon death; it is not an element of succession (Civil Code, Arts. 774 and 777).

DEFINITION

Succession – mode of acquisition by virtue of which the property, rights and obligations to the extent of the value of the inheritance, of a person are transmitted through his death to another or others either by his will or by operation of law. (Art. 774)

ELEMENTS OF SUCCESSION

• Subjective Element
• Decedent — person whose property is transmitted through succession (Art. 775); also called testator in testate succession.
• Successors/Heirs – those who are called to succession to the whole or to an aliquot portion of the inheritance either by will or by operation of law. (Art. 782)

SUCCESSION OCCURS AT THE MOMENT OF DEATH

• Causal Element

Death of the Person – The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent. (Art. 777)

Thus, the capacity of the heir is determined as of the time the decedent died (Art. 1034); the legitime is to be computed as of the same moment (Art. 908), and so is the inofficiousness of the donation inter vivos (Art. 771). Similarly, the legacies of credit and remission are valid only in the amount due and outstanding at the death of the testator (Art. 935), and the fruits accruing after that are deemed to pertain to the legatee. (Art. 948; Calalang-Parulan v. Calalang-Garcia, G.R. No. 184148)

In addition, the law in force at the time of the decedent’s death will determine who the heirs should be [Uson v. Del Rosario, 92 Phil. 530)] and ownership passes to the heir at the very moment of death, therefore, from that moment: (a) the heir acquires the right to dispose of his share [De Borja v. Vda. De Borja, 46 SCRA 577] and; (b) the heir’s interest in the estate may be attached for purposes of execution of his creditor [Reganon v. Imperial, 22 SCRA 80]

However, a person may be presumed dead for the purpose of opening his succession. (see rules on presumptive death, Art. 390-391) In this case, succession is only of provisional character because there is always the chance that the absentee may be alive.

Future inheritance cannot be the subject of a contract of sale because the seller owns no inheritance while his predecessor lives. (Art. 1347 in relation to Art. 777)

• Objective Element (Art. 776)

Inheritance – is the subject matter of succession and includes all the transmissible property, rights, and obligations of a person, which are not extinguished by his death.

NOTE: If the right or obligation is strictly personal, it is not transmissible, hence, it is extinguished by death. (Balane, supra, p.2)

Succession Distinguished From Inheritance

Succession refers to the legal mode by which inheritance is transmitted to the persons entitled to it; while inheritance refers to the universality or entirety of the property, rights and obligations of a person who died.

KINDS OF SUCCESSORS

• Compulsory heirs succeed by operation of law and are entitled to a legitime fixed by law. The testator cannot deprive them of it except through valid disinheritance.
• Voluntary or testamentary heirs are instituted in a will to succeed to the portion the testator may freely dispose of.
• Devisees receive gifts of real property under a will (Art. 782).
• Legatees receive gifts of personal property under a will (Art. 782).
• Legal or intestate heirs succeed when the decedent leaves no valid will, or as to property not disposed of by will.
• Mixed succession takes place partly by will and partly by operation of law (Art. 780).

Note: The distinction between heirs and devisees or legatees matters in the following situations:

• Preterition: Omission of a compulsory heir in the direct line annuls the institution of heirs, but devises and legacies remain valid insofar as they are not inofficious (Art. 854).
• Imperfect or ineffective disinheritance: The institution of heirs is annulled only insofar as it prejudices the disinherited person.
• After-acquired property.
• Acceptance or non-repudiation of successional rights.

Effect of death on civil personality

Death extinguishes civil personality. However, the rights and obligations of the deceased are not necessarily extinguished by his death. (Pineda, 2009)

Proof of Death – Civil Code, art. 43; Rules of Court, Rule 131, sec. 3 (jj)

> Article 43. If there is a doubt, as between two or more persons who are called to succeed each other, as to which of them died first, whoever alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall prove the same; in the absence of proof, it is presumed that they died at the same time and there shall be no transmission of rights from one to the other. (33)

> SEC. 3. Disputable presumptions.— The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence: (jj) That except for purposes of succession, when two persons perish in the same calamity, such as wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is not shown who died first, and there are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is determined from the probabilities resulting from the strength and age of the sexes, according to the following rules:

• If both were under the age of fifteen years, the older is deemed to have survived;
• If both were above the age of sixty, the younger is deemed to have survived;
• If one is under fifteen and the other above sixty, the former is deemed to have survived;
• If both be over fifteen and under sixty, and the sex be different, the male is deemed to have survived; if the sex be the same, the older;
• If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the other between those ages, the latter is deemed to have survived.

It depends on whether the parties are called to succeed each other.

• If successional rights are involved - Art. 43 of the NCC: Survivorship Rule Sec. 3(kk), Rule 131 of the ROC: Presumption of simultaneous deaths between persons called to succeed each other, applies.
• If no successional rights are involved - Sec. 3(jj), Rule 131 of the ROC applies (Presumption of Survivorship). Survivorship is determined from the probabilities resulting the strength and the age of the sexes, according to the following rules:
• If both were under the age of 15 years, the older is deemed to have survived;
• If both were above the age of 60, the younger is deemed to have survived;
• If one is under 15 and the other above 60, the former is deemed to have survived;
• If both be over 15 and under 60 and the sex be different, the male is deemed to have survived, if the sex be the same, the older; and
• If one be under 15 or over 60, and the other between those ages, the latter is deemed to have survived. (Sec. 3(jj), Rule 131, ROC)

NOTE: Both are to be applied only in the absence of facts.

Q: Jaime, who is 65, and his son, Willy, who is 25, died in a plane crash. There is no proof as to who died first. Jaime’s only surviving heir is his wife, Julia, who is also Willy’s mother. Willy’s surviving heirs are his mother, Julia, and his wife, Wilma. In the settlement of Jaime’s estate, can Wilma successfully claim that her late husband, Willy, had a hereditary share since he was much younger than his father and therefore, should be presumed to have survived longer?

A: NO. Wilma cannot successfully claim that Willy had a hereditary share in his father’s estate. The presumption of simultaneous deaths applies in cases involving the question of succession as between the two who died, who in this case, are mutual heirs, being father and son.

Q: Suppose, Jaime had a life insurance policy with his wife Julia and his son Willy as the beneficiaries. Can Wilma successfully claim that one-half of the proceeds should belong to Willy’s estate? (1998 BAR)

A: YES. Wilma can invoke the presumption of survivorship and claim that one-half of the proceeds should belong to Willy’s estate, under Sec. 3(jj)(5), Rule 131, of the ROC, as the dispute does not involve succession.

Under this presumption, the person between the ages of 15 and 60 is deemed to have survived one whose age was over 60 at the time of their deaths. If Willy is deemed to have survived Jaime, Willy’s share of the insurance proceeds forms part of his estate and may be claimed through its proper representative (Civil Code, Art. 777; Rules of Evidence, Rule 131, Sec. 3(jj)(5)).

NOTE: The statutory rules in the determination of sequence of death do not absolutely apply in a case where indirect and/or inferential evidence surrounding the circumstances of the deaths exists.

Where there are facts, known or knowable, from which a rational conclusion can be made, the presumption does not step in, and the rule of preponderance of evidence controls. It is the “particular circumstances from which survivorship can be inferred” that are required to be certain as tested by the rules of evidence. (Joaquin v. Navarro, G.R. No. L-5426, 29 May 1953) statutory rules in the determination of sequence of death do not absolutely apply in a case where indirect and/or inferential evidence surrounding the circumstances of the deaths exists.

Q: At the age of 18, Marian found out that she was pregnant. She insured her own life and named her unborn child as her sole beneficiary. When she was already due to give birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, the father of her unborn child, were kidnapped in a resort in Bataan. The military gave chase and after one week, they were found in abandoned hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro were hacked with bolos. Marian and the baby she delivered were both found dead, with the baby’s umbilical cord already cut. Pietro survived.

Can Marian’s baby be the beneficiary of the insurance taken on the life of the mother?

A. YES. An unborn. child may be designated as the beneficiary in the insurance policy of the mother. An unborn child shall be considered a person for purposes favorable to it provided it is born later in accordance with the NCC. There is no doubt that the designation of the unborn child as a beneficiary is favorable to the child.

Q: Between Marian and the baby, who is presumed to have died ahead?

A: If the baby was not alive when completely delivered from the mother’s womb, it was not born as a person, then the question of whom between two persons survived will not be an issue. The baby had an intra-uterine life of more than 7 months; thus, it would be considered born if it was alive at the time of its complete delivery from the mother’s womb. We can gather from the facts that the baby was completely delivered. But whether it was alive has to be proven by evidence.

Q: Will Pietro, as the surviving biological father of the baby, be entitled to claim the proceeds of the life insurance on the life of Marian? (2008 BAR)

A: Pietro cannot claim as Marian’s named beneficiary. Whether he can inherit proceeds through the baby depends on proof that the baby was born alive, survived Marian, and acquired the beneficiary’s right (Civil Code, Arts. 40–43 and 777). Pietro is not married to Marian neither was he named as the beneficiary of the insurance.

Obligations of the Disqualified Heir in Possession of the Hereditary Property

Any person incapable of succession, who, disregarding the prohibition stated in the preceding articles, entered into the possession of the hereditary property, shall be obliged to return it together with its accessions. (Art. 1038)