BIG DADDY DIGEZTs of a piece of land.

Notwithstanding this, the

Testate of Estate of Ramirez v. Ramirez, et al.
GR No. L-27962, February 15, 1982
FACTS:
Court upholds the usufruct in favour of Wanda
because a usufruct does not vest title to the
land in the usufructuary and it is the vesting of
title to aliens which is proscribed by the
Constitution.

The court distributed the estate by: ½ to his

Jose Eugenio Ramirez died leaving as principal widow and ½ to the grandsons but the usufruct
beneficiaries his widow, MarcelleSemoron de of the second half shall go to Wanda.
Ramirez, a French woman; his two Jutic vs CA (NO DIGEST)
grandnephews Roberto and Jorge Ramirez; and
his companion Wanda de Wrobleski. His will was
admitted to probate by the Court of First
Instance. According to the will ½ shall go to
Marcelle in full ownership plus usufruct of the
1/3 of the whole estate; the grandsons shall have
the ½ of the whole estate; and a usufruct in
favour of Wanda.

ISSUE:

Is the partition according to the will valid?

RULING:

No. As to the usufruct granted to Marcelle, the

court ruled that to give Marcelle more than her
legitime will run counter to the testator’s
intention for his dispositions even impaired her
legitime and tended to favor Wanda.As to the
usufruct in favour of Wanda, the Court upheld
its validity. The Constitutional provision which
enables aliens to acquire private lands does not
extend to testamentary succession for
otherwise the prohibition will be for naught and
meaningless. Any alien would be able to
circumvent the prohibition by paying money to
a Philippine landowner in exchange for devise