GAAS ET AL vs FORTICH, G.R. No.

L-31454, December 28, 1929

FACTS:

On January 23, 1926, Francisco Arquiza, of Cebu, made his last will and testament in which, subject to certain devises,
he bequeathed all of his property to Pilar Fortich his then wife. Later, upon his death, this will was admitted to probate
as his last will and testament. Pending the adminisrration of his estate, Isidra Gaas filed a petition alleging among
others that he was previously married to Federico Arquiza during the year 1908 and as a result of said marriage there
were born to said Federico Arquiza and this petitioner three children namely Felicisimo Arquiza, Dioscoro Arquiza
deceased, and Soledad Arquiza.; That the deceased Francisco Arquiza is survived by his widow, Pilar Fortich but left
no legitimate children or descendants nor did the said deceased leave legitimate parents or ascendants; and that the
minors, Felicisimo Arquiza and Soledad Arquiza are therefore the legitimate children of the deceased, Federico Arquiza
and the petitioner herein, Isidra Gaas and as such are by representation the duly constituted legal heirs of the deceased
Don Francisco Arquiza as provided by the Civil Code. Isidra as natural guardian of the minors, Felicisimo Arquiza and
Soledad Arquiza, respectfully prays this honorable court to declare said minors to be the legal heirs of the deceased
Francisco Arquiza and for such other and further relief to which they may be entitled.

To which the executrix made a general and specific denial, and alleged the following special defences:

1. That the petitioners Soledad and Felicisimo, surnamed Arquiza, alleged acknowledged natural children of the
deceased Francisco Arquiza, represented by their guardian ad litem Isidra Gaas, have no right to succeed in
the properties of the herein deceased Francisco Arquiza;
2. That assuming that there is merit in the petition which is objected to by this pleading, the action to acknowledge
the aforesaid minors Soledad and Felicisimo, surnamed Arquiza, as natural children, has prescribed.

The lower court sustained the petition and found that all of the legal rights of Federico Arquiza was vested in the
petitioners, who were his legitimate children, and that, as such, they were entitled to one-third of the estate left by
Francisco Arquiza.

ISSUE: Whether or not the lower court erred in declaring them entitled to one-third of the estate left by
Francisco Arquiza, and in not dismissing the petition of the appellees.

HELD:

As to the fifth assignment of error, the lower court cites and relies upon the case of Larena and Larena vs. Rubio (43
Phil., 1017), and says:

This is not an action to compel the recognition of Federico Arquiza under the provisions of the Civil Code. Such an
action is barred. This is a proceeding to obtain a declaration of the rights of the petitioners as the legitimate children of
Federico Arquiza to inherit in representation of their father from their grandfather. It was not necessary for Federico
Arquiza to bring an action for recognition because he had acquired the status of a recognized natural child under Law
11 of Toro by the tacit recognition of his father. His vested rights were transmitted to his legitimate children, and they
had no need to bring an action against Francisco Arquiza or his heirs to compel the recognition of their father, Federico
Arquiza, as the natural son of Francisco Arquiza.

If Federico Arquiza were still living, he could intervene in these proceedings for the distribution of the estate of his
natural father, without the necessity of a proceeding to compel his recognition, as is required by the Civil Code; and
Francisco Arquiza having left no legitimate descendants, or ascendants, Federico Arquiza, if he had survived his father,
would have been entitled to one-third of the latter's estate.

Article 842 of the Civil Code provides:

If the testator leaves no legitimate ascendants or descendants, the acknowledged natural children shall be entitled to
a third of the estate.

And article 843 provides:

The rights granted natural children by the preceding articles are transmitted on their death to their legitimate
descendants.

The facts found by the trial court and sustained by the evidence bring the appellees within those provisions.