IMPORTANT BASIC PRINCIPLE IN SUCCESSION: Primacy of the will of the decedent.

While generally speaking, testator has the right to give his property to do anything he wants, to a
certain extent that right is mitigated by law of legitimes (for ie if there are compulsory heirs, the law
reserves a certain part of esttae for compulsory heirs)
Testacy is preferred over intestate succession. This is somehow related as to the theories of
succession
Chapter I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Art. 774 - Succession is a mode of acquisition by virtue of which the property, rights and obligations to the
extent of value of the inheritance, of a person are transmitted through his death to another or others either
by will or by operation of law.
DEFINITION (as defined by Art. 774) and / CONCEPT
BROADEST
JURIDICAL
SENSE
(mortis causa & inter
vivos)
Signifies
the
substitution or
subrogation of
a person in the
transmissible
rights
and
obligations of
another.

STRICT
JURIDICAL
SENSE (mortis causa
only)
-

Signifies
the
substitution
or
subrogation of a
person in the
transmissible
rights
and
obligations of a
deceased
person.

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

succession therefore by itself, is a separate mode of acquiring ownership; it is sufficient ot transfer

and convey and vests ownership in a person, it is itself a mode.
There is transmission through his death (whether testate or intestate, you only have succession if
and when there has already been death. Death is essential either for testate or intestate
succession;
When is a person considered DEAD? A: A person is considered dead, when there is total,
permanent and irreversible cessation of essential bodily functions. From the point of view of the
law, theres no such thing as temporary death, DEATH IS PERMANENT ONLY under the law. (for
i.e the story about the the person who died from heart attack and was proclaimed by two doctors as
DOA and suddenly rose from his deathbed, Q: Was there succession from the monet when the
person appeared to be dead? A: NO! No such thing as temporary dead, youre either dead or not. )

THEORIES OF SUCCESSION
1) Extension of the right of ownership
if youre the owner of the property, you have the right not only during your lifetime but also after
your death to the disposition of your properties;
2)
-

Family Co-ownership
Family co-ownership; as we go thorugh life, and acquire properties, we have our families with us.

3)

Mixed

Art. 775 In this title decedent is the general term applied to the person whose property is transmitted
through succession, whether or not he left a will. If he left a will, he is also called the testator.
SUBJECTIVE ELEMENTS:
1. The person who died
2. Those of succeed him: heirs (person called to the whole or an aliquot portion of the inheritance either by
will or by operation of law), legatees (a person given a gift of personal property by virtue of a will),
devisees (a person given a gift of real property by virtue of a will)
Art. 776 The inheritance includes ALL the property, rights and obligations of a person which are not
extinguished by his death.
OBJECTIVE ELEMENT:
1. Inheritance
INHERITANCE
Universality of ALL the property, rights and
obligations constituting the patrimony of the
decedent which ARE NOT extinguished by
his death.

SUCCESSION
LEGAL MODE by which such property,
rights and obligations are TRANSMITTED.

Art 777
The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the
decedent.
If a person dies at 7pm, from that very moment, successional rights are already transmitted;
It is form that moment when there is a transmission of rights.
Limjoco vs Intestate Estate of Pedro Fragante it is the estate or mass of property, rights and assets left
by the decedent, instead of the heirs directly, that becomes vested and charged with his rights and
obligations which survive after his demise.
Art. 777 The rights of succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent.
LORENZO VS POSADAS In determining of the tax due is the value of the property at the time of death
because it is at the moment of death that there is transmission of rights.
FACTS: Thomas Hanley died, leaving a will and a considerable amount of real and personal properties to
his nephew Matthew Hanley. However, it was stated that these properties will be transferred onl y after the
expiration of 10 years. A certain Moore was appointed as trustee until he resigned and the plaintiff Lorenzo
herein was appointed in his stead. During the incumbency of the plaintiff as trustee, the defendant Collector
of Internal Revenue (Posadas) assessed against the estate an inheritance tax, together with the penalties
for deliquency in payment. Lorenzo paid said amount under protest contending that the inheritance tax shall
be based upon the transfer of the properties to Matthew or after the 10-yr period.
Issue: WoN the value of the inheritance tax be based upon the death of the testator
Held: Yes. Art. 777. Upon the death of the decedent, the right of succession takes place. Hence, the right of
the state to tax vests instantly. The tax should be measured by the value of the estate as it stood at the time
of the testators death, notwithstanding the postponement or enjoyment of possession of the beneficiary.
LOCSIN VS. COURT OF APPEALSALL NEPHEWS AND NIECES WERE THE SURVIVORS: the nephews and nieces
are only entitled to such estate as existed at the moment of death of the decedent because only in that
moment that there is transmission of succession rights.
FACTS: Mariano Locsin (a haciendero), inherited some of vast properties of his father. He was married to
Catalina. However, they were not blessed with any child. In the last will of Mariano, he instituted his wife as
the sole and universal heir of all his properties. The SPS agreed that in case of their death, their properties
would revert back to their respective sides of family. Meanwhile, Mariano died and 9 years after his death,

Catalina began transferring some of their properties either by sale/donation or assignment. (Locsin
nephews) Her properties to her nephews. When Catalina died, her Jaucian family file a complaint against
Locsin nephews to recover those properties already disposed of.
Contention: Inofficious/ without consideration
Issue: WoN the disposition to the Lcosins is valid.
Held: YES. Properties disposed of more than 10 years before Catalinas death didnt form part of the
hereditary estate of the nephews since there was no successional rights to speak of. i.e existing at the time
of decedents death
Dean: However, that if the survivors had been compulsory heirs entitled to legitimes, you would then have to
go to the process of collation at least in so far as gratuitous dispositions are concerned.
RABADILLA vs CA
Facts: A certain Aleja Belleza died but he instituted in his will Dr. Jorge Rabadilla as a devisee to a 511, 855
hectare land. A condition was however imposed to the effect that:
1. the naked ownership shall transfer to Dr. Rabadilla;
2. he shall deliver the fruits of said land to Maria Belleza, sister of Aleja, during the lifetime of said Maria
Belleza;
3. that in case Dr. Rabadilla shall die before Maria Belleza, the near descendants, shall continue delivering
the fruits to Maria Belleza;
4. that the said land may only be encumbered, mortgaged, or sold only to a relative of Belleza.
When Dr. Rabadilla died, he was survived by Johnny Rabadilla. Then, Maria Belleza sued Johnny Rabadilla
in order to compel Johnny to reconvey the said land to the estate of Aleja Belleza because it is alleged that
Johnny failed to comply with the terms of the will; that since 1985, Johnny failed to deliver the fruits; and that
the the land was mortgaged to the Philippine National Bank, which is a violation of the will. In his defense,
Johnny avers that the term near descendants in the will of Aleja pertains to the near descendants of Aleja
and not to the near descendants of Dr. Rabadilla, hence, since Aleja had no near descendants at the time of
his death, no can substitute Dr. Rabadilla on the obligation to deliver the fruits of the devised land.
ISSUE: Whether or not Johnny Rabadilla is not obliged to comply with the terms of the Will left by Aleja
Belleza.
HELD: No. The contention of Johnny Rabadilla is bereft of merit. The near descendants being referred to
in the will are the heirs of Dr. Rabadilla. Ownership over the devised property was already transferred to Dr.
Rabadilla when Aleja died. Hence, when Dr. Rabadilla himself died, ownership over the same property was
transmitted to Johnny Rabadilla by virtue of succession. Art. 776 provides that inheritance includes all the
property, rights and obligations of a person, not extinguished by his death. Conformably, whatever rights Dr.
Rabadilla had by virtue of the Will were transmitted to his forced heirs, at the time of his death. And since
obligations not extinguished by death also form part of the estate of the decedent; corollarily, the obligations
imposed by the Will on the deceased Dr. Jorge Rabadilla, were likewise transmitted to his compulsory heirs
upon his death. It is clear therefore, that Johnny should have continued complying with the terms of the Will.
His failure to do so shall give rise to an obligation for him to reconvey the property to the estate of Aleja.
It is not necessary that you must see a person lying in their deathbed for there to be succession, there are
cases of presumptive death
RULES IN CASE OF PRESUMPTIVE DEATH
1)

Ordinary Absence GR: must have been absent for period of 10 years, absentee is presumed
dead for purposes of succession (pwede nang paghati-hatian ang pag aari), it being unknown
whether or not he still lives.
EXCEPTION(s): (1) if the absentee is 75 y/o, an absence of 5 years is sufficient for succession; (2)
absence falls under Art.391, an absence of 4 years is sufficient for succession;
2)
-

Extraodinary Absence when a person disappears under great danger or risk of death;
absentee falls under Art. 391

i.
ii.
iii.

A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an airplane which is missing, who has
not been heard of for 4 years since the loss of the vessel or aeroplane;
A person in the armed forces who has taken part of the war, and has been missing for four
years;
A person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances1 and his existence has
not been known for 4 years;

Q: When or what precise moment therell be transmission of successional rights under presumption of
death?
A: If ordinary absence, death is deemed to have occurred at the end of expiration period (10 or 5 years). If
extraordinary, death is deemed to have died at or about time when he disappeared. (once, the fourth year
has arise, presumed dead but when he is deemed to have died? at the start)
Note: Death transfers the rights of succession only if the ff. conditions are met:
i.
Theres death (actual/presumed);
ii.
Rights/properties are indeed transmissible;
iii.
That the transferee is: alive, willing, capacitated to inherit.
Art. 778 Succession may be: T-L-M
(1) Testamentary;
(2) Legal or Intestate;
(3) Mixed;
Art. 779 Testamentary succession is that which results from the designation of an heir, made in a will
executed in the form prescribed by law.
Art. 780 Mixed succession is that effected partly by will and partly by law.
KINDS OF SUCCESSION
1. Testamentary Succession succession must be effected through the testators will executed in the
form prescribed by law.
2. Intestate Succession which is effected by operation of law , in default of a will. (presumed will by
the law)
3. Mixed Succession e.g if the testator makes a will which does not dispose all of his property, =
mixed succession. To illustrate, in the distribution of the hereditary estate of the testator after his
death. Testamentary succession will take place with respect to property disposed by virtue of will
while legal succession will take place to that part which he has not disposed of.
Note: There is no more contractual succession2. With the advent of the Family Code, theres no more
contractual succession. It is called contractual succession because before it allowed spouses to give
properties mortis causa through marriage settlement. (Marriage Settlement is a contract) WALA NA
NGAYON YAN!
Art. 781 The inheritance of a person includes not only the property and the transmissible rights and
obligations existing at the time of his death, but also those which have accrued thereto since the opening of
the succession.
Extent of Inheritance
1. All properties existing at the time of his death;
2. Transmissible rights and obligations exisiting at the time of his death;
RULES:
i. Rights relative to persons and family/ purely personal rights by their very nature
INTRANSMISSIBLE in character. Hence, not included in the inheritance.
ii. Rights relative to property or patrimonial rights generally, transmissible. Hence, may be
included in the inheritance. EXCEPTION: to which made intransmissible by operation of law e.g
personal and legal usufructs and personal easements.
1

For instance, a miner (minero) that can possibly qualify if he was missing
Under Art 130 of CC The future spouses may in their ___ give to their spouse 1/5th of their properties
and with respect to their future property
2

iii. Rights arising from obligations or rights of obligations, whetehr contractual or otherwise =

3.

generally transmissible. EXCEPTION: those arising from contracts from which their nature is
intransmissible, made intransmissible by agreement of the parties, expressly made
intransmissible by operation of law.
Property and rights which may have accrued to the hereditary estate since the opening of the
succession.

CONDE VS ABAYA
NOTE: Know the differences of heirs,d evisees and legatees. Why? Bevause under CC, theyre treated
differently, sometimes theyre treated in the same way. Kailangan lagi alam natin is he an heir, devisee or
legatee?
PROVISIONS WHERE THEY ARE TREATED DIFFERENTLY:
Under Art 854, re provisions on Preterition. The preterition or omission of one, some or all of the
compulsory heirs in the direct line, whether living at the time of the execution of the will or born after
death of the testator, shall annul the institution of heir, but the devisees and legacies shall be valid insofar as
they are not inofficious.
If the omitted compulsory heirs should die before the testator, the institution shall be effectual, without
prejudice to the right of representation.
-

it will resolve to the annulment of institution of heirs but devisees and legacies shal be valid insofar
as not inofficious;
So if you happened to be an heir and theres preterition, youll end up with zero, wala kang
mahihita, wala kang mamanahin. But if you happened to be mere legatee or devisee, meron ka pa
din makukuha.
For i.e, lets assume Mr X has one child, S. He dies with a will with only two provisions 1) I give
my friend F, 10k pesos 2)I give the rest of my estate to my friend G. X dies leaving total hereditary
estate of 120k with a will. Lets assume wala nabigay by way of donation to S. S was not mentioned
in the will. How do we distribute the estate? Since theres preterition, lets apply Art. 854. First
determine whether youre an heir, devisee or legatee. F, as legatee, will be respected. May sobra
pang 50k (120k/2 = 60k * 60k legitime) Kanino mapupunta 50k? To G or S? Once theres preterition
it would result to institution of heirs, the institution of G as heir has no basis. He ends up with zero.
Dean: In such case, I rather should be devisee or legatee than an heir
Having said that, it doesnt necessarily follows it is always in favor of them. When is it better to be
an heir? In case of after-acquired properties ( these are properties referred to in Art. 793 Property
acquired after the making of the will shall only pass thereby, as if the testator had possessed it at
the time of making the will, should it expressly appear by the will that such was his intention.
GR: IN SO FAR AS ACQUIRED-PROPERTIES: They do not go to testamentary beneficiaries
XPN: If there was an express intention that they should go to testamentary beneficiaries. For ie, In
the will of Mr. X he says I give my friend, F , all of my cars. At the time of his death, he had 5 cars.
How many cars will F get? A: 5 cars. Supposed after making of the will, testator, acquired 4, 999
cars. How many cars will F be entitled to? 5 cars pa din. Applying the general rule. But supposed
he says I give my friend my cars and all after acquired cars.. Ibang usapan yan. It appears in the
intention of the will that F will recive after-acquired cars.
NOTE: However, the above rule only applies to devisees and legatees. It does not apply to
instituted heirs. Therefore if he says in his will, the will was executed in 1985, I hereby give my
entire estate to my friend F. His entire estate consist of 5 cars. Later when he died , estate
constiting of 5,000 cars. How many cars F would receive? 5000 cars.

Art. 782 An heir is a person called to the succession either by the provision of a will or by operation of law.
Dean Navarro: As proposed by the Senate, Heir a person called to the whole or aliquot portion of the
inheritance either by the provision of a will or by operation of law.
-

When is a person considered as an heir? If he was given the entire estate or a fractional or aliquot
part of the estate.
I give my friend of my estate. He is an heir.
I give X 1/4th of my estate. He is an heir
I give him the rest of my estate

KINDS OF HEIRS
1. Voluntary an heir called to succed the whole or an aliquot part of the disposable free portion of
the hereditary estate by virtue of the will of testator.
2. Compulsory Heirs an heir called by law to succeed to a portion of the testators estate known as
LEGITIME.
Devisees and Legatees are persons to whom gifts of real and personal property are respectively given by
virtue of a will. (succeeds individual items of property)
Legatee - If he is given by will a specific or determinate item of personal property. I give my friend a car
Devisee - If he is given by will a specific or determinate item of personal property. I give my friend my farm
in Bulacan. I give A my house and lot in Quezon City
WHAT IS A WILL?
Art. 783 A will is an act whereby a person is permitted, with the formalities prescribed by law to control to a
certain degree the disposition of his estate, to take effect after his death
-

We can deduce certain fundamental characteristics of a will

CHARACTERISTICS OF WILL (PIV-DMAS)

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

It is a personal act; (we cannot delegate making of a will through our bestfriend or spa or an agent,
hindi pwede yung Hey attorney, gawa mo ko ng will total mas magaling ka naman)
It is an individual & unilateral act;
It voluntary;
An act of disposition of property;
An act mortis causa;
It is ambulatory & revocable during testators lifetime;
It is a formal and solemn act;

Art. 784 Personal character of wills. It cannot be left in whole or in part to the discretion of a third person or
accomplished through the instrumentality of an attorney.
Art. 786 The testator may entrust to a third person the distribution of specific property or sums of money
that hey may leave in general to specified classes or causes, and also the designation of the eprsons,
institutions or establishments to which such property or sums of money are to be given or applied
the testator is permitted by the law to give specific property or sums of money to a class or a
cause and he is allowed to delegate the actual distribution to a third person (for ie I leave the
amount of 300m for street children of Manila. I leave the distribution of that amount to my executor
But I cannot give my executor a blanket authority or I authorize my executor to get as much ast it
necessary and give it to street children of Manila. Di pwede yan. Kelangan specif sum of money or
property.)
The moment he refers by name to testamentary beneficiaries, forget about 786 and apply Art. 785
Art. 785 The duration and efficacy of the designation of heirs, devisees or legatees, or the determination of
the portions which they are to take when referred to by name, cannot be left to the discretion of a third
person.
-

REMEMBER, In Art 786, the beenfciaries are specified cause or class. In 785, the beneficiaries are
specific named institutions or individuals.
So, I canot say in my will I hereby bequeathed the amount of 100m to CEU, San Sebastian and
UST and I leave it to my executor to determine jhow much out of 100 to determine the portions.
Hindi pwede yan. You cannot leave to the discretion of a third person the 1) duration and efficacy of
designation..2) portions

No matter how carefully a will may be crafted, theres always a possibility of ambuguiy of a will
TYPES OF AMBIGUITY

1)

Patent Ambiguity ambiguity which is apparent, obvious and apparent from mere reading of
testamentary dispositions. I give to 2 of my 5 borthers, the house and lot in QC Basa pa alang
Malabo na, sino among these two brothers are. The principal rule in testamentary dispsoitons is the
acertainment of the intention of the testator. Obviously in this case, the intent is to give only

Solution: Intrinsic Evidence (evidence found in the will itself) and Extrinsic Evidence but excluding
the oral declarations of the testator. **hindi pwede yung sabi sabi, hearsay and fundamentally
dangerous and risky. Death would permanently sealed the lips of the testator. If it is not an oral
declaration, for ie may sualt saying dear procropio, I gave house and lot.. pwede yan.
2) Latent Ambiguity ambiguity which is not obvious. I give my 1st cousin, Jose Santos my house and
lot in Q.C reading the provison, it is clear as morning sunshine. Papano after the death of testator,
5 pala yung pangalan na Jose Santos.
Solution: Intrinsic Evidence, you read the other provisions of the will, clarified the ambiguity. Or you
may resort to Extrinsic Evidence but excluding the oral declarations of the testator.
You give the words of awill in their ordinary grammatical sense. Technical words, in their technical
sense. UNLESS, it is clear that the will is prepared by the tetstaor by himself and that he used
technical words without realzing the technical menaing of those words.
GR: TESTACY is to be preferred by intestacy. If there are two ways interpreting the provisions, you give way
to TESTACY.
Art 795
made.
-

The validity of the will as to is form depends upon the observance of the law in force at the time it is
If there are subsequent change sof the law, it will not affect the validity of will
XPN: If subsequent law provides for retroactivity
XPN to XPN: Even if the law specifically provides for retroactivity but prior the effect of such law,
the testator died, because Art. 777 rule this is already vested rights.

TESTAMENTARY CAPA CITY AND INTENT

Basic Requirements:
i.
at least 18 years of age; (must have already celebrated exactly after his 18th birthday)
ii.
must be of sound mind;
SOUNDNESS OF MIND Art 799 (2) It shall be sufficient if the testator was able at the time of making the
will to know the nature of the estate to be disposed of; the proper objects of his bounty, and the character
of the testamentary act.
-

To be of sound mind, all that the law requires is that the testator at the time of making his will shall
know : the nature of the estate to be disposed of , objects of his bounty, character It is not
necessary that the mind of testator must not be unwholy impaired. I other words, kahit may konting
topak, pwede pa din, so long as he satisfies the minimum reqts under par 2 of Art 799;
He must know the nature of the estate to be disposed of :testator must know in the general way the
properties to be disposed of, he remember that he has a house and lot in Q.C, he remembers that
he has substantial deposit in a certain bank (although not know the exact amount), he knows he
owns valuable paintings (for ie may Van Gogh, Rembrandt, Amorsolo)
The presumption is always of soundness of mind We can always invoke that we are presumed to
be of sound mind (Of course, disputable rebuttable presumption :D)
Under the Civil Code, sometimes the presumption is reversed and when would this be? (1) Art 800,
if the testator one month or less before making his will was publicly known to be insane, the
person who maintains the validity of the will must prove that the testator made it during a lucid
interval. (2) if placed under guardianship
Testator must know the proper objects of his bounty: that the time of the execution of will, tetstaor
knows the individuals who have the natural right to expect something from him, the people who
from ordinary course of law have the right to succeed properties from him (his closest relatives) if
at the time of making his will, testator cannot recognize his wife or his children, then he no longer
be capacitated to make a valid will

He must know the character of testamentary act: this simply means that he knows that the
document he is executing is his last will and testament, that this document will be used as basis for
distributing his estate when he dies. Supposing that a person belives in the existence of an unseen
beings? (dwarves, elves) and lets say they even talk to this creatures. Is he incapacitated to make
a will? NO. (Test in incapacity: Art 799 (2) ) Mere belief of this unseen spiritual beings will not
necessarily render a person incapacitated to make a will
Theres no maximum age of making a will, only minimum of 18 y/o; He may be suffering from
different diseases, name it he has it, that does not make him incapacitated to make a vlaid
testament. (As long as he pass test under Art. 799 (2)
How about drug addicts? Yes, capciated. Go back to the test! Same true with people who are
alcoholics.
The capacity to make a will must be possessed at the time of execution , so long as he is
capacitated even if he subsequently becomes incapacitated. If X makes a will at age of 22, of
sound mind, but 2 years after execution of will he became insane and die in a state of incapacity,
the will shall be allowed. So long as at the time of execution of the will, he is capacitated.
Conversely, at the time of the execution, the testator did not have capacity even if he subsequently
attain capacity, his will remains invalid. Because when he made his will he does not possess the
capacity.

FORMS OF WILLS
*Memorize Art 804-814
Art. 804 Every will must be in writing and executed in the language or dialect known to the testator.
We do not have oral wills, all wills must be in writing. The law does not specified the material to be
used. In case of holographic will, any material may be used: piece of paper, ceiling, wall, white
board, anythingyou can even write it sa balat ng pakwan. everything to so and so, date, sgd
Re language: the will itself must be in the language/dialect known to the testator. Therefore, if the
will is written in English but the testator does not know English but only Filipino but lawyer who
drafted the will translated it to the testator and fully explained everything, that remains an INVALID
WILL. Will must be in a language known to the testator. Ratio: No matter how the good the
interpreter/translator may be, certain nuances of language are lost in the process of
translation/interpretation.
It is not necessary however that the will itself shall contain a statement that it is in a language that
is known by the testator. So, if theres a dispute later on, people will say: this will is in English.
Testator doesnt know English. This necessitates evidence from the outside. The petitioners may
present witnesses that may testify that testator knew English, spoke English, especially when hes
a little bit drunk.
BASIC REQTS FOR VALID NOTARIAL WILL
Art 805 Every will other than a holographic will, must be subscribed at the end thereof by the testator
himself or by the testators name written by some other person in his presence, and by his express
direction, and attested and subscribed by three or more credible witnesses in the presence of the
testator and of one another.
-

SUBSRIPTION: first important thing to remember in connection of par 1 of Art 805 is that it tells us
ina very clear language, one essential requirement for the validity of notarial will it must be
subscribed at the end thereof by the testator himself or by ___ the requirement thereof for
subscription is an essential requirement for its validity. If the will is a 5-page will, and the testator
sign all pages but does not sign at the end of the will, INVALID WILL for non compliance of the
subscription requirement;
Where is the end of the will? When the law mentions the end of the will, it refers not to the physical
end but to the logical end. AFTER THE LAST TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITION. For ie if there are
10 testamentary dispositions, the end of the will is after the 10 th disposition, that is where the
testator shall affix his signature.
The law allows the affixing of the testators name by a third person. That is permitted. BUT,
remember the two requirements; 1) must be done in the presence of testator 2)in his express
direction. BOTH requisites must concur. Otherwise, the will is void.
If the testator is Juan Santos and the person requested by the testator to write his name is Pedro
Santiago. How should Pedro Santiago comply with Art. 805? He should not forget to write the
testators name. For i.e Juan Santos by Pedro Santiago Supposing Pedro Santiago simply wrote,

by Pedro Snatiago, INVALID! Maliwanag ang batas, testators name. Supposing Juan Santos only?
VALID! As long as in the attestation clause, the fact that Pedro Santiago w rote the testators name
in his express direction is stated. Otherwise if the attestation clause does not state such fact, then
the will is void.
The testator is the one ordinarily required to sign his will. In signing his will, the testator may use his
usual signature, he can also use his initials (shortened version of signature) If testator has pen
name, he can use his pen name (for i.e Nick Joaquin, aka Quijano Manila; Rodolfo Quizon aka
Dolphy) PERMITTED! Can a testator use his nickname? For ie testator only has 9 fingers, can the
person sign his name as PUTOL YES. Signature is taken from the word Signum = mark = sign.
Can testator sign his will by thumbmark? YES! Even the mark of his big toe. Pwede din yan! How
about his lips? Kinuskos sa stamp pad and imprint in his will. Would that be valid? YES! So long as
it can be established that the testator intended to use that as his mark.
THREE OR MORE CREDIBLE WITNESSES: is necessary therefore during the probate of the will,
there must be preliminary proof that the witnesses are credible individuals, in the sense that they
enjoy a high degree of respectability, reputation of probity, honesty in the community? NO.
Supreme court has said, when the law says credible witness, it only means
QUALIFIED/COMPETENT WITNESS. There is no need for preliminary proof as to reputation,
probity and integrity of the witness.
Can there be more than 3 witnesses? YES! But it should not be less than three. If a notarial will
ahs only 2 witnesses, the will is INVALID.

The testator or the person requested by him to sign his name and the instrumental witnesses of the
will shall also sign, as aforesaid, each and every page thereof, except the last, on the left margin and all
the pages shall be numbered correlatively in letters placed on the upper part of each page.
-

The testator and the witnesses are required to sign each and every page of the will,e xcept the last,
on the left margin. Supposed they sign in the right margin instead of the left? Pwede ba yon. YES.
Bottom margin instead of the upper? Pwede yon. So long as there is signature at the marginal
portion.
Supposing it is a 5-page will, perfectly executed, exept on page 3 you dont find the signature of
tetstaor on any of the margins or any signature eof the witness on any margins, should the will be
allowed? ICASIANO vs ICASIANO: Case where opposior practically opposed everything. In the
will, page 3 there is missing signature. (Note: when you become a lawyer, kuha ka witnesses 1)
pare/pastor/madre 2) always try to get as another witness the attending physician 3) a lawyer ) In
Icasaino, kaya nagkagulo gulo kasi sa failure nung abogado. Oppositor opposed the probate
contending that the signature was forged and undue influence, there was fraud and failure to
comply the formalities. Petitioner then presented the duplicate original, and the duplicate original
was perfect. It was signed. SC: We have examined the testimony and we are not convinced that
the will is forgery, we are not inclined to believe the assertions made by the oppositors. The mere
fact that the oppositors alleged both fraud and undue influence in one opposition simply show how
weak their defense because fraud and undue influence are mutually exclusive. (fraud: deceipt;
undue influence: connotes coercion) The oppositors are faced with a dilemma, it would seem
under the circumstances that the failure to sign the page is mere to inadvertence.
If you are ask a problem: 5-page will, page 3 not signed by witnesses or testator, shall the will be
allowed? Dean: The ruling in Icasiano shall apply only to cases with same circumstances and the
most important thing to remember in Icasiano, in that case, there was a duplicate original. If on the
otherhand, you only have ONE original copy of the will and the single copy lacks 1 signature, the
WILL SHALL BE DISALLOWED. Icasiano ruling has not done away the rulings of previous cases
where the court invalidated wills where there are absences of one signature.
All pages shall be numbered correlatively in letters place don the upper part of its page: the precise
location of the numbering is not really essential for its validity, for ie if they placed on the lower part
or ight part , okay yon, as long as the pages are numbered correlatively in letters meaning you
spelled out. (for i.e ONE) eh kung tinatamad I, II, III? OKAY LANG
Supposing it is 5-page will, pages 2,3,4 and 5 is numbered, page 1 not numbered, shall it be
allowed? YES. Because even if number 1 is not numbered, there is no doubt that it is page number
1. That should not affect the validity of a will.
The witnesses are required to sign among other things on the left margin of the will, just like the
etsttaor, the witnesses can also sign with their pen names, screen names, thumbarks, as logn as in
reality they know how to read and write. Because th erequriement is tjat they know how to read and
write.
Would it make any difference if the witnesses signed the will ahead of the testator? (for ie Mauna
na kayo pumirma sabi ni testator) Only after the witnesses have signed, the tetstaor signed the will.

As long as theres no interruption, everyone signed in ONE SINGLE CONTINIOUS OCCASION,

THE WILL SHALL BE VALID. Dean: The better view and this is merely obiter but the Supreme
OCurt said in Caneda vs CA, as long aas everyone signed uninterrupted occasion, the will shall be
valid. If however, the testator invited the witnesses to his residnec on Jan 1 and he told them this
is my last wil and tetsmane, I want you to sign. Witnesses signed but the testator did not. Then
tetstaor said, lets meet again on January 6. I will still have to think about this. In this case, WILL
SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED. It is clear that the witnesses are attesting into falsehood.
If a third person ahs been asked by the testator to write his name on his will, the mere silence of
the testator or his failure to object to the signining of a person is not the express direction
contemplated by law. For ie, testator is very sick, and his lawyer told the testator I dont think your
in the osition to sign this will yourseld, unless you have an objection, I will sign this will for you
Nakatingin lang si testator. NOT VALID WILL. MERE SILENCE IS NOT EXPRESS DIRECTION.
Express direction however need not be done verbally. For ie If lawyer ask testator, Mr. testator
do you want me to sign this will. Tumango. He nodded Okay nay un, pwede nay un. That is
already an express direction. IT must be done in the presenc of the testator. If tetstaor orders
lawyers, attorney ipirma mo nako dyan, but it is too crowded and the witnesses went in the other
room. NOT A VALID WILL.
Supposing the testator is very sick Atty. I want to make a will. He dictated the provisions. Testtaor I
want you to sign the will. Lawyer takbo sa opisina. Pagdating nya s ahos[ital, tetstaor alrwady
unconscious. Sabi lawyer, We all ehard his earlier instructions NOT A VALID WILL. While it is
done with proximity of witnesses, reqt not satisfied, testator was no longer conscious, tetstaor not
aware. WILL SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED.

The attestation shall state the number of pages used upon which the will is written, and the fact
that the testator signed the will and every page thereof, or caused some other person to write his name,
under his express direction, in the presence of instrumental witnesses, and that the latter witnessed and
signed the will and all the pages thereof in the presence of the testator and of one another
If the attestation clause is in a language not known to the witnesses, it shall be interpreted to
them.