Disinheritance On Succession
Disinheritance On Succession
Disinheritance On Succession
Purpose: Retribution to punish the act of the heir. Preterition may be with cause or without cause while Disinheritance
must be true and legal and be stated in the will.
Implications from the definition:
1. It can be made only in testamentary succession Preterition annuls the institution of heirs therefore the omitted heir
2. Only compulsory heirs can be disinherited inherits while Disinheritance, the disinherited heir gets nothing either by
3. The courts may properly inquire into the validity of the legitime or free portion.
disinheritance
4. The heir is excluded from the legitime as well as the free Preterition may exists with or without a will while Disinheritance
portion. must be made in a will
Other ways of depriving heir of legitime: Preterition the institution is always void except when the preterited
1. Predecease, incapacity or repudiation but here their heir predecease the testator while Disinheritance it may be valid when
representatives can get the heir’s share thru right of all the requirements are followed.
representation
2. Incase the liabilities equal or exceed the value of the estate. Preterition vs. Invalid Disinheritance
In preterition, the institution of heirs completely annulled while in
Requisites of a valid disinheritance: disinheritance, the institution is not annulled but the shares of other
1. It must be made in a will. heirs must be reduced insofar as the legitime of the invalidly
2. It must be express and cannot be presumed disinherited heir is concerned.
3. It must be for a legal cause stated in the law
4. It must be for a true cause Article 919. The following shall be sufficient causes for the
5. It must be for an existing cause and not conditional or disinheritance of children and descendants, legitimate as well
preventive as illegitimate:
6. It must be total and complete not partial
7. The cause must be stated in the will itself (1) When a child or descendant has been found guilty of an
8. The disinherited heir must be clearly identified attempt against the life of the testator, his or her spouse,
9. The will must not have been revoked. descendants, or ascendants;
Keyword – (WELTE – TCIR) (2) When a child or descendant has accused the testator of a
crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment for six years
Article 915. A compulsory heir may, in consequence of or more, if the accusation has been found groundless;
disinheritance, be deprived of his legitime, for causes
expressly stated by law. (848a) (3) When a child or descendant has been convicted of adultery
or concubinage with the spouse of the testator;
Article 916. Disinheritance can be effected only through a will
wherein the legal cause therefor shall be specified. (849) (4) When a child or descendant by fraud, violence, intimidation,
or undue influence causes the testator to make a will or to
Article 917. The burden of proving the truth of the cause for change one already made;
disinheritance shall rest upon the other heirs of the testator, if
the disinherited heir should deny it. (850) (5) A refusal without justifiable cause to support the parent or
ascendant who disinherits such child or descendant;
Burden of proof:
If the disinheritance is denied by the heir the other heirs of the (6) Maltreatment of the testator by word or deed, by the child or
testator must prove the same. descendant;
Article 918. Disinheritance without a specification of the cause, (7) When a child or descendant leads a dishonorable or
or for a cause the truth of which, if contradicted, is not proved, disgraceful life;
or which is not one of those set forth in this Code, shall annul
the institution of heirs insofar as it may prejudice the person (8) Conviction of a crime which carries with it the penalty of
disinherited; but the devises and legacies and other civil interdiction. (756, 853, 674a)
testamentary dispositions shall be valid to such extent as will
not impair the legitime. (851a) This article speaks of disinheritance of children and descendants,
When disinheritance is invalid or without effect: whether legitimate or illegitimate.
1. The will goes not give the cause or no cause was stated in
the will. 1. Attempt against the life must be found guilty by final
2. When the cause was denied by the heir concerned and not judgment. There must be intent to kill. The attempt to kill
proved by the instituted heir must be made against a person within the line of the testator
3. The cause given in the will is not a cause provided for in the (ascendant/descendant niya).
law.
4. When there is a subsequent reconciliation between the Effect of pardon Still the disinheritance stands unless the pardon
offender and the offended party came from the heir’s innocence.
Effect of an invalid or ineffective disinheritance It shall annul the 2. Groundless accusation of a crime of imprisonment for 6
institution of heirs insofar as it may prejudice the person disinherited years or more the said crime alleged can be committed
but the devises and legacies shall remain valid to such extent as will against anybody even against the child or descendant. If the
not impair the legitime. But if the free portion is not disposed of yet, the testator is acquitted on the ground of lack of proof beyond
heir also gets his share in the free portion. reasonable doubt or lack of criminal intent does not
necessarily mean that the accusation is groundless, the
It means that the institution is not annulled when the shares of the testator would not have the right to disinherit the accusing
other heirs can be reduced to give the invalidly disinherited heir his heir. The heir may even only elaborate the crime as a
share. But the rule is different in case of a preterition since here the witness.
whole institution of heir shall be annulled.
Elements under this paragraph:
a. The act of accusing Par. 6: Loss of parental authority Art. 920 does not refer to Art.
b. The accusation was found groundless 228 of the Family code since this would lead to absurdity. It refers
c. The penalty for the crime charged is at least 6 years of to the following; Art 230 of the Civil code – the parental authority
imprisonment. is suspended when a parent is convicted of a criminal case which
imposes a penalty of civil interdiction, Art 231 – parental authority
3. Guilty of adultery or concubinage with the spouse of the is suspended by the court, Art. 238 – mother who contracts a
testator Final judgment is needed. subsequent marriage loses parental authority over the children
4. FVIUF by the child caused the testator to make a will or unless the husband expressly allows his widow to marry again in
change one there must be an old will made under fviuf his will and that she can keep and exercise the parental authority,
and a new one must be made with the disinheritance being Art. 332 – the court may suspend parental authority if parents
present. treat their children with excessive harshness or give corrupting
5. Refusal to give support to the testator who disinherits No orders or abandon them.
judicial demand is needed since the law does not require
this. But if support was given only because of judicial Loss of parental authority to be ground for disinheritance only if
compulsion (napugos lang) this would still be a valid ground. there is FAULT on the part of the heir such as in Art. 330 and 332 of
6. Maltreatment by word or deed This covers slanderous the Civil Code and not when there is no such fault.
words or offensive language or maltreatment by deed. The
maltreatment must be made intentionally. It is not necessary Parental authority lost and subsequently regained, the
that a judgment convicting the child must be made. It is disinheritance become ineffective and invalid. What is important is that
immaterial whether physical injuries are produced by the before the death of the child-testator, parental authority has been
maltreatment. regained and therefore no new cause for disinheritance exists.
But maltreatment by an ascendant to a descendant does not constitute Par. 8 applies when the attempt is made against the life of the
ground for disinheritance for while there is abuse, it is generally an parents only and not to the life of other persons. The reconciliation
exercise of power. (ex. Pag hapak sa apo by the lola, the lola cannot between the parents deprives the child the right to disinherit the
be disinherited from the apo’s will incase the lola is the only heir) offending parent because the child should not be more severe than the
spouse who has been offended.
7. Leading a dishonorable or disgraceful life Judgment or
conviction is not necessary, it is enough that the act brings Effect of reconciliation: Implies mutual restoration of feelings to the
dishonor or disgrace to the family but the acts must be made status quo which is the relationship prior to the commission of the act
in continuity not a single act. which strained the relationship. Thus, a general pardon without
8. Conviction of a crime with civil interdiction Final conviction removal of hurt feelings is not the reconciliation spoken of by law.
is needed. Civil interdiction is an accessory penalty to death, Implied reconciliation exists when the parents live together again after.
reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal.
Art. 921 – Sufficient causes for disinheriting a spouse
Article 920. The following shall be sufficient causes for the
disinheritance of parents or ascendants, whether legitimate or Par. 4 A decree of legal separation is not essential nor is a final
illegitimate: judgment in a criminal case is required.
(1) When the parents have abandoned their children or induced Art. 922 – A subsequent reconciliation between the offender
their daughters to live a corrupt or immoral life, or attempted and the offended person deprives the latter (offender) of the
against their virtue; right to disinherit, and renders ineffectual any disinheritance
that may have been made.
(2) When the parent or ascendant has been convicted of an
attempt against the life of the testator, his or her spouse, Reconciliation The mutual restoration oof feelings to the status quo.
descendants, or ascendants; It is the resumption of friendly relations.
(3) When the parent or ascendant has accused the testator of a Characteristics of Reconciliation:
crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment for six years 1. It requires no special form, thus it may be express or implied.
or more, if the accusation has been found to be false; Implied reconciliation exists when the parties live again
together.
(4) When the parent or ascendant has been convicted of 2. There is no reconciliation in the following;
adultery or concubinage with the spouse of the testator; a. General pardon given at the hour of death unless there
is really removal of hurt feelings
(5) When the parent or ascendant by fraud, violence, b. Pardon not accepted by the disinherited heir
intimidation, or undue influence causes the testator to make a c. Pardon which does not specify the heir concerned or
will or to change one already made; the act pardoned
d. Pardon given in the very same will providing for the
(6) The loss of parental authority for causes specified in this disinheritance. No reconciliation can be said to have
Code; occurred here since there is only a sort of moral force
or spiritual influence which forgives in the name of
(7) The refusal to support the children or descendants without morality. (murag nay conciliation pero char ra diay to
justifiable cause; kay the offended did not really mean it and there was
no removal of hurt feelings)
(8) An attempt by one of the parents against the life of the
other, unless there has been a reconciliation between them. Effects of Reconciliation:
(756, 854, 674a) 1. If no disinheritance has been made yet, no disinheritance
can no be done (kay nag reconcile naman)
This article speaks of disinheritance of a parent or ascendant, whether 2. Disinheritance already made is rendered ineffectual; it is as if
legitimate or illegitimate. no disinheritance made at all.
1. Parents who abandon their child or induce their daughter to Rule in case the cause of disinheritance is also the cause of
live a corrupt life or attempted against their virtue unworthiness in Reconciliation:
abandonment here means a mere failure to give due care or If the cause of unworthiness was made a ground for disinheritance
attention. The attempt against the virtue does not have to be and there was reconciliation, Art. 922 will govern and not Art. 1033.
in a final judgment.
Effect: The mere fact of reconciliation extinguishes the unworthiness
and no written document is necessary for condonation.
Reason: the law presumed this to be the will of the testator and this
presumed will cannot prevail over the express will of a person shown
by his act of reconciliation.
If the cause of unworthiness is not made a ground for disinheritance
or there is no disinheritance at all, Art. 1033 will apply.
Art. 1033: The causes of unworthiness shall be without effect if the
testator had knowledge thereof at the time, he made the will or if he
having known them subsequently, he should condone them in writing.
NOTE:
Art. 922 the reconciliation need not be in writing thus it may be oral or it
may be express or implied.
Thus, ma notice nimo that even shares in the free portion cannot go
the disinherited heir.
As to administration: The general rule is that the parent has the right to
administer and right to use the usufruct of a child under his parental
authority, the exception is Art. 923 that is when the child inherits the
property by right of representation by reason of the disinheritance of
his parents.
Reason for allowing such law: The fault of the heir is not the fault of
the representative and it would be unjust to punish them.
Take note also that the law refers only to a disinherited child and
descendants of the disinherited heir and does not include the spouse
or parent.
INSTITUTION OF HEIR If there are two persons having the same name and they cannot be
identified with the use of proof because of similarity of circumstances,
Art. 840 the person instituted cannot be an heir.
Art. 841
Art. 842
Rule on Freedom of Disposition of Estate. There exist two scenarios in
this article.
Art. 843
How designation of the heir should be made. As a rule, the testator
should designate the heir by his name and surname.
When there are two persons having the same name – the testator
shall indicate some circumstance by which the instituted heir may be
known.
When the testator has omitted a name of the heir – the institution
shall still be deemed valid if he should designate him in such a manner
that there can be no doubt as to who has been omitted.
Why not give to the both person the estate? This would frustrate the
will of the testator since then the estate would be given to someone he
never really intended to institute.
Art. 844
Effects of error in the name, surname or circumstance.