Professional Documents
Culture Documents
NOTES - Succession
NOTES - Succession
Concept of Succession - Manresa - It is in this sense that it is understood in the New Civil Code.
Consequently, Art. 774 defines it as a mode of acquisition by virtue of which the property, rights and
obligations to the extent of the value of inheritance, of a person are transmitted through his death to
another or others either by his will or by operation of law.
This definition, as can be seen, is in conformity with the general provision of Art. 712 which enumerates
the different modes of acquiring ownership and other real rights.
In addition to the above-requirements, there are also specified solemnities which are prescribed by the
NCC in case the testator is deaf, or a deaf-mute or in case he is blind.
Failure to state the number of the witness in the attestation clause is not FATAL to the due execution of
the will.
It may nonetheless be answered at the face of the will itself. Extrinsic evidence.
SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE,
Case: Abangan vs. Abangan 40 Phil 476
Failure to sign in the left margin, reiterates the doctrine of Substantial Compliance.
Case: Icasiano vs. Icasiano 11 SCRA 422
Note: THOSE ACTS WHICH ARE MENTAL failure to comply will render Fatal.
There is no other means to prove the same. It can supply with anything that can be found in the face of the
will itself, that omission is not Fatal, means it will not invalidate the will, but if that omission is
MENTAL the omission will be fatal hence it can invalidate the will.
HOLOGRAPHIC WILL
A holographic will is one entirely written, dated and signed by the hand of the testator.
XPN: Although generally the date should be the true one, an incorrect date, as long as it was made in
good faith, does not invalidate the will.
Case: Roxas vs. De Jesus, GR No. 38338
IF there is no appearance of fraud, bad faith, undue influence and pressure and the authenticity of the will
is established.
Requisites for the annulment of institution base on a false cause (Base on the provision):
(1) The cause for the institution must be stated in the will;
(2) The cause must be shown to be false
(3) It must appear from the face of the will that the testator would have not made the institution if he had
known the falsity of the cause.
PRETERITION, consists in the omission of the testator's will of the compulsory heirs in the direct line
or anyone of them either because they are not mentioned therein, or though mentioned they are neither
instituted as each or expressly disinherited.
Preterition according to Manresa, The omission of the heirs in the will either by not naming him at all
or while mentioning him as father, son etc by not instituting him as heir without disinheriting him
expressly nor assigning to him some part of the properties.
Preterition consists of the silence of the testator with regards to a compulsory heir omitting him in the
testament by not mentioning him or by not giving him at all in the hereditary property, but without
expressly disinheriting him.
Case: JLP Agro Incorporation vs Balansag, Don Julian did not execute a will, partition inter vivos
properties, transferring ownership of his properties during his lifetime. Preteritated wife 2nd marriage
SC Held: It is Premature if it is not irrelevant to speak of pretirition prior to the Death of Don Julian in
the absence of a will depriving a legitime.
Art. 1080 Authorized partition inter vivos does not require that a will must first be made. What is the
remedy which is not given in the estate of a person? Always remember your right over the property of
your parents inchoate (mere expectancy).
Petitioner for the settlement of estate. Demand legitime from her siblings. Cannot file yet an action while
the testator is alive. When the succession opens, you already have the personality to file an action for the
purpose of claiming your legitimes. Although the law allowas distribution inter vivos such distribution
may only take effect after the death of the testator.
SUBSTITUTION OF HEIRS
Q: Define Substitution
Ate Nabua: It is the appointment of another heir, so that he may enter into the inheritance in default of the
heir's original institution.
Substitution is the designation by the testator of a person or persons to take the place of heir or heirs after
the first heir is instituted. Under substitution in general, the testator may either provide for the designation
of another heir to whom the property shall pass in case the original heir should die before him or her,
repudiate or incapacity. Or leave the property to one person with the express . . . that the property be
transmitted subsequently to another or other as a fideicommissary substitution.
Fideicommissary substitution,
takes place when the fiduciary, 1st heir is entrusted with the obligation to preserve and to transmit to
second heir, the whole or part of the inheritance, the substitution does not go beyond 1 degree from the
original heir instituted, provided that the 1st heir and 2nd heir are living at the time of the death of the
testator. There must be an obligation clearly imposed upon the first heir to preserve and transmit to the
2nd heir.
"Go beyond one degree from the heir originally instituted" The word one degree means one generation
hence if the 2nd heir, can only be either a parent or a child of the 1st heir.
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
LEGITIME
Ate Marcial: Part of the decedent property, the testator cannot dispose of the law and made a reservation
to compulsory heirs.
ATTY.: It is part of the testator's hereditary estate which he cannot dispose of because the law has
reserved it for compulsory heirs.
As a rule the testator cannot prejudice the right of the compulsory heirs, to their legitime. The testator
cannot deprived his compulsory heirs of their legitimes, except in case of disinheritance legally made and
the testator cannot impose any condition any burden, charge, encumbrance or substitution of any kind
upon the legitime and there are only two instances where the testator may validly affect the legitime of
the compulsory heir.
Adopted child enjoys the right of a legitimate child; the presence of an adopted child will exclude the
legitimate parents and descendants of a deceased parent.
Q: Will the adopted child continue to be the compulsory heir of his natural parent?
A: Family Code, the adopted remain as legal heirs of his/her parents or other relatives is also a
compulsory heir of the adopter.
Domestic Adoption Law, an adopted child is considered as the legitimate child of the adopter for all
intents and purposes. The implication of that the adopted child once legally adopted ceases to be a
compulsory heir of his natural parent. No longer considered as compulsory heir of his natural parents.
Q: What if the parents of the adopted child predeceases his parents, can the adopted child inherit
by right of representation from the parent of the adopter?
A: NO. He cannot inherit from the parents of his adopter. The relationship in case of adoption under the
law is only between the adopter and the adopted. The adopted child has no relationship with the blood
relatives or parents of the adopter.
Legitimated children conceived and born of parents, who are at the time of their conception, parents are
not disqualified by any impediment. Prior to marriage, child status is an illegitimate child. Upon marriage
of the parents, the child will be legitimated automatically.
How about illegitimate children? Are they considered primary compulsory heirs? When may
illegitimate children become primary compulsory heirs?
Illegitimate children may become primary compulsory heirs of their illegitimate parents only if they do
not concur with the legitimate children or descendants of their illegitimate parents.
Illegitimate parents shall be considered compulsory heirs if their illegitimate children have no children of
their own whether legitimate or illegitimate and legitimate descendants. The existence of children and
descendants or illegitimate children of the deceased shall exclude the illegitimate parents from the
legitime.
Even in default of the legitimate children or descendants or illegitimate children of the deceased . ONLY
THE PARENTS OF THE ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN ARE ENTITLED TO LEGITIME other
ascendants are excluded.
Exception: In the case however of the surviving spouse, when the marriage was solemnized in articulo
mortis, and the deceased died within three months from the time of the marriage, the legitime of the
surviving spouse as the sole heir is only ONE-THIRD of the hereditary estate. That rule applies only
when the deceased spouse is at a point of death when at the time of marriage.
Exception to the the exception: When the parties have been living as husband and wife for more than 5
years prior to the marriage (articulo mortis) , in that case the legitime of the surviving spouse shall be
one-half of the hereditary estate.
When the primary compulsory heirs concurs with the concurring compulsory heirs, or concurs
with other heirs who are entitled of legitime, what would be the sharing?
RESERVA TRONCAL
Execute a document that would show that you are a reservatarios and that the property is a reservable
property
If the property involved is covered by a torrens title and the same is transmitted to a buyer in good faith,
even if you have the right under the law to recover the same if it was already transmitted to a buyer in
good faith, the reservatorio could no longer recover it from the third person who is a buyer in good faith.
In order to avoid the situation, what you should do is to annotate in the title or register with the registry of
deeds a document that would show that the property is reservable in nature and that you are a
reservatorio.
In reserva troncal, the reservista or the reserva property subject of reserva troncal is conditionally owned
by the reservista, who may use or even alienate the property subject to the rights of the reservatarios.
If there are no living reservatarios at the time of reservista’s death, what will happen to the property,
which is subject of reserva troncal? It will be a part of the reservista’s estate. The property will be treated
as if there is no reserva troncal but if there are, at the time of the death of the reservista, there are
surviving or living reservatarios then the property should be conveyed to them and any earlier disposition
of the property should be considered conditional.
Reserva troncal merely determines the proof of relatives, reservatarios to whom the property should be
returned, but within that group the reservatarios, the individual right to the property should be decided by
the applicable rules of ordinary intestate succession since, ART. 891 does not specify otherwise. Hence,
among the reservatarios, the rules on intestacy shall apply, hence, the direct line of the propositus is
preferred over the collateral line. The nearer relatives exclude the further ones.
(1) Rule that prohibits the renunciation or compromise of future legitimes. Any renunciation or
compromise over a future legitimes is VOID. Hence, the compulsory heir may still claim the
same notwithstanding such renunciation or compromise.
Reason: A future inheritance is nothing but an expectancy over which the heir does not acquire any right
until the death of the testator. Hence, juridically and legally, there is nothing to renounce and nothing to
which to compromise. Because you have no right yet over the property.
While Art. 905 of the New Civil Code declared void only the compromise of future legitimes made by the
descendants and compulsory heirs, ANY AND ALL SUCH COMPROMISE IS PROHIBITED under Art.
1347 of the NCC. Which prohibits any contracts involving future inheritance
(2) The right to demand the completion of legitimes, if there is a total omission of a compulsory heir
in the direct line from the inheritance - PRETERITION. In that case if there is preterition, the
institution of heir be annulled, but the devises and legatee shall be valid insofar as they are not
inofficious.
When the heir omitted is not a compulsory heir in the direct line, in the case of a surviving spouse
or when the omission is not total. There is no preterition. Remedy heir omitted, remedy for the
ask for the delivery of his/her share from the inheritance.Completion of legitime.
Inofficious testamentary dispositions and donations, insofar as the legitime is concern
The testamentary disposition which impairs or diminished the legitime of the compulsory heir is
inofficious and shall be reduced upon the petition by those who have a right to the legitime.
How do you compute the legitime? What are the procedures to be followed?
PROCEDURE:
(1) The value of the property which remains at the time of the decedent's death shall be determined
(2) All debts and charges which are not imposed in the will shall be deducted, if the debt or charge
arises for the first time from the will itself, as a unilateral act of the testator it is non-deductible.
The difference between the assets and the liabilities shall then constitute the net hereditary
estate.
(3) To the net value of the hereditary estate shall be added the value of all donations by the testator
that are subject to the collation at the time he made them. The value of the donation subject to
collation is determined as of the time when the donations were made, not at the time of his death.
It includes donations not only those in favor of compulsory heirs but also those made in favor of
strangers and involves the imaginary adding of the value of all the donations to the value of the
net hereditary estate. COLLATION.
DISINHERITANCE
General Rule: The testator cannot deprived his compulsory heirs of their legitimes
XPN: A compulsory heir may in consequence of a valid disinheritance be deprived of his legitime.
Disinheritance as distinguished by Pretirition
Disinheritance is the deprivation of a compulsory heir of his legitime by the testator done in an express
manner ; there is some legal cause ; in case of an invalid disinheritance the compulsory heir is
merely restored to his legitime
Pretirition on the other hand is the deprivation of a compulsory heir of his legitime by the testator done
in an implied manner
There are two wills, in the first will, the cause of the disinheritance has been stated and the
disinheritance is made in another will, the requirement is satisfied. Provided that, the necessary
connection between the cause and the disinheritance is clearly established.
Q: What if the disinheritance imposed or provided for in the will is invalid, what would be the
effect of an invalid disinheritance?
A: The effect of an invalid disinheritance is the annulment of institution of heirs insofar as it may
prejudice the legitime of the person disinherited. But the devisees and legacies and other testamentary
disposition shall be valid to such extent as it will not impair said legitime. Hence, the legitime of the
disinherited heir, shall simply be restored.
Except when, the testator did not dispose of the free portion in his will. So if the testator did not dispose
of the free portion in his will to others and the disinherited will is also an intestate heir. The intestate heir
shall receive not only his legitime but also his share in intestate succession.
For disinheritance of children and descendants the unjustifiable refusal to support a parent of
ascendant to disinherit such child or descendant
For disinheritance of spouse, unjustifiable refusal to support the children or the other spouse.
Grounds for disinheritance which are also causes for incapacity by reason of unworthiness under
Art. 1032 of the NCC:
In case of unworthiness the rule is that if the testator has the knowledge of the cause of unworthiness at
the time he made his will but nonetheless instituted the unworthy heir, the cause shall be without effect.
The testator subsequently learns of a cause of unworthiness but condones it in writing
Q: What is the effect of subsequent reconciliation if the disinheritance has already been made by
any of the grounds which are also causes for unworthiness?
A: The moment the testator uses one of these causes for unworthiness as a ground for disinheritance, he
thereby submit it to the rule of on disinheritance among which is that reconciliation rendered the
disinheritance ineffective
Art. 923. of the NCC must be read in conjunction with Art. 970 of the NICC
Art.923, limits the right of representation only to the legitime such representation however should extend
to everything that would have passed to the disinherited heir by operation of law including the amount
that pertains to him as an intestate heir.
This is supported by Art. 970 which states that the representative acquires the rights which the person
represented would have if he were living or if he could have inherited
Q: Who will be liable in case of loss or destruction of the thing devised or bequeathed? Who will
bear the loss
A: If the thing devised or bequeathed is lost or destroyed through the fault or negligence of an heir. The
heir shall be liable. If two or more heirs take possession of the estate they shall be solidarily liable for the
loss or destruction of the thing devised or bequeathed even though only one of them should have been
negligent.
Q: What if the legacy is partly owned by the testator and partly owned by a third person? What
rule should be followed?
A: The rule is this, If the testator, heir or legatee owns only a part of an interest in the thing bequeathed
the legacy of devise shall be understood to be limited to such part or interest only, and this rule applies
whether or not the testator knew that the thing was partly owned by a third person/stranger.
Exception:
(1) Unless it clearly appears from the will that the testator intended to convey a less interest
(2) When the testator expressly declares that he bequeaths or devises the thing in each entirety,
before this applies there must:
(a) Be an express declaration to that effect appearing in the will itself. There is a express
declaration that the testator is bequeathing or devising the thing in its entirety, it must
appear in the will itself.
(b) There must be knowledge on the part of the testator that the thing belongs partly to a third
person. That knowledge must appear either in the will itself or be proved by competent
evidence. Who has the burden of proving the same? The burden being upon the devisee
or legatee favored with such property. Such knowledge on the part of the testator of his
limited right is essential, because the legacy or devise would be void under Art. 930 of
the NCC.
If the property bequeathed belongs to the testator and a third person and the same has been partition or
has been physically divided. Apply the rule that only the interest of the testator shall go to the legatee or
devise.
Problem: If the property is not capable of being divided or it is indivisible or not capable of
physically indivisible
So in that case, there are rules that we should observe.
If the thing is physically indivisible or inconvenient of division, the rules applicable shall depend upon
whether the thing is finally adjudicated to the testator or to the other owner
The Rules:
(1) If the entire property is adjudicated to the testator the subsequent acquisition does not affect the
legacy or devisee, The rules stated in Art. 920 and Art. 930 of the NCC are still applicable
(2) If the property is adjudicated to a third person, and the testator has not expressly declared that
he/she bequeaths or devises the property in its entirety, the legacy or devise shall be without
effect, applying the provisions of Art. 957 (2) of the NCC which declares that the alienation of
the thing bequeathed or devise shall result in the legal revocation of the legacy or devise.
(3) If the testator has expressly declare that he bequeaths or devises the property in its entirety, the
transfer of his interest in such property to the third person annuls the legacy or devise only to that
part which formerly belong to him, and which has pass to the third person but leaves effective the
legacy or devise with respect to the part belonging to the third person and which continues to so
belong to such third person.
Exemple: Boy Abunda - Property co-owned by Mr. Tulagan - in his will he bequeathed a devise
in favor of Mr. Rudio.
A: Mr. Rudio will ask the estate (heirs/administrator) of Mr. Boy Abunda to deliver to him the
value of the property given to him by way of devise. Reasonable value of the property. It is
determined by the Court.
Q: If at the time of the execution of the will, the testator erroneously believe that the thing
belongs to him and he gave it to Mr. Rudio? Is Mr. Rudio entitled to the devise?
A: That kind of legacy or devise is VOID. As a rule if at the time of the execution of the will . . . .
look at Art. 930 of the NCC.
Article 930. The legacy or devise of a thing belonging to another person is void, if the testator
erroneously believed that the thing pertained to him. But if the thing bequeathed, though not
belonging to the testator when he made the will, afterwards becomes his, by whatever title, the
disposition shall take effect.
If at the time of the execution of the will the testator erroneously believed that the thing belonged
to him, the legacy or devise is VOID.
But if afterwards, the thing is acquired by the testator by whatever title the devise or legacy
becomes valid.
Even if the thing belonging to another, the testator may in his will order that the thing be acquired
in order that it be given to the legatee or devisee.
Q: Who will acquire the thing bequeathed?
A: The obligation to acquire is being impose upon a particular heir, devisee or legatee. In the
absence of express designation of such obligation, such obligation will rest upon the executor or
administrator or if there is no executor or administrator the heirs of the testator.
If the thing cannot be acquired for whatever reason, the legacy or devise remains valid and the
heir or estate as the case may be shall be obliged to give the just value.
But if the testator knew that the thing belong to another but did not expressly order for its
acquisition, the devise or legacy is still VALID because it is presumed that his intention that such
thing which is bequeathed or devise must be acquired either by the executor or administrator of
the estate or by the heir devisee of legatee charged with such legacy or devise.
................
November 8, 2021
Q: What if at the time of the execution of the will the thing did not belong to the legatee or devisee
but the legatee or devisee subsequently acquired the thing, what are the rules that you should
apply?
The Rules that you should apply if at the time of the execution of the will the thing did not belong to the
legatee or devisee but he subsequently acquired it are:
(1) If the thing originally belonged to a third person at the time of the execution of the will and the
testator did not know of such fact the legacy or devise is VOID. and it continues to be void even
if the legatee or devisee subsequently acquires it by any title.
What if there is only an error? If there was an error and the thing was acquired erroneously by the
legatee or devisee, the legatee or devisee can demand reimbursement from the heir or the estate.
(2) If the thing acquired gratuitously by the devisee or legatee, the devisee or legatee can claim
nothing by virtue of legacy or devise.
(3) If the thing was owned by the testator at the time of the execution of the will but it was
subsequently acquired by the legatee or the devisee, what will be the rule that should be
followed?
(a) If acquired from the testator by the legatee or devisee, there is no intention to revoke on
the other hand the intention is clearly to comply with the legacy or devise especially if the
alienation is gratuitous, if the alienation is by gratuitous title since the law makes no
distinction the legatee or devisee should still be entitled to the price paid by him. If the
testator has not alienated the thing directly to the legatee or devisee but to the third person
from whom the legatee or devisee acquires the same, by onerous title, the devisee or
legatee is entitled to nothing. The alienation by the testator to a third person constitutes a
revocation of legacy or devise under Art. 957 of the NCC. So, the mere fact that the
legatee or devisee subsequently acquires it from the third person, even by onerous title
will not revive the legacy or devise.
There are also legacy or devise of things which are pledge or mortgage, of the thing given or bequeathed
is pledge or mortgaged. The rule is that the estate is obliged to pay the debt to remove the encumbrance
unless the contrary intention appears. That's the general rule and this same rule applies whether the thing
is pledge or mortgage after the execution of the will. As to any other charge, other than encumbrances
created by pledge or mortgage be it perpetual or temporary with which the thing bequeathed is burden
the same passes to the legatee or devisee.
If there are no descendants, ascendants, illegitimate children or surviving spouse, the collateral
relatives shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased. In default, descendants, ascendants,
illegitimate children or surviving spouse and collateral relatives within the 5th degree of
relationship the state shall inherit the whole estate.
How do you compute this degree? One degree per generation.
Start with the origin.
Degree from grandparents? 2 degrees
Degree from aunt/uncles? 3 degrees
Degree from 1st cousin? 4 degrees
2. The rule of proximity and rule of equal division, in legal succession the relative nearest in
degree excludes the more distant ones except when the right of representation properly takes
place. Hence, the order of preference between lines is first observe and within its line the rule of
proximity applies. Observe first the preference between line and within this line you apply the
rule of proximity
3. .This is the rule of equal division, Relatives in the same degree shall inherit in equal shares,
EXCEPT,
(1) If brother and sister in the full blood survives together with the brothers and sisters of a half blood
blood, the brothers and sisters of full blood inherits to a share double that of the brothers and sisters in the
half blood. Ratio that will be applied is two is to one 2-1.
(2) Should there be ascendants in both lines, one half of the inheritance shall go to the paternal and one
half shall go to the maternal line, and in each line, the division shall be made per capita.
(3) Whenever there is succession by representation, the division of the estate shall be made per stirpes in
such manner that the representative although in the same degree shall not inherit more than what the
person they represent would inherit if he were living or could inherit.
In case of predecease, the child who predeceased his parents left 10 children, he is entitled of 25% of the
estate of his parents. The 25% will be divided among his children equally. That’s what we call per stirpes.
Q: How do you compute degrees and how do you determine the lines?
A: Proximity of relationship is determined by the number of generations, each generation forms a
degree. A series of degrees forms a line which may be either direct or collateral. So a direct line is
constituted by the series of degrees among the descendants and ascendants. Example father and daughter
are within the direct line.
A collateral line is that constituted by the series of degrees among the persons who are not ascendants or
descendants but who come from a common ancestor. Example, brother and sister are collateral relative
and their common ancestor are their parents. The direct line is either descending or ascending, the
descending line unites the head of the family with those who descend from him, the ascending line finds a
person with those from who he descends.
Rule in repudiation and incapacity, In case of incapacity the share which is rendered vacant shall pass
to the co-heirs within the same degree, if the right of representation is not obtained. Example, Romero,
Rudio, Pulgar, Tulagan, Veloria are brothers, however Pulgar is incapacity to succeed the share of Pulgar
will accrue to Romero, Rudio, Tulagan, Veloria who will share to the same in equal division. However, if
Pulgar has a son, who has the right to represent him? The share of Pulgar will not accrue to his brothers,
but it shall be inherited by his son by virtue of the right of representation.
Take note that the right of representation takes place not only in case of incapacity to inherit but also in
case of predeceased and valid disinheritance. But it does not take place in case of repudiation.
In case of repudiation, where there is no right of representation, observe the following rules: (1) If not all
the of the heirs within the same degree repudiates but only some of them the share of those who did not
accept shall accrue to the co-heirs within the same degree, this is a case of ACCRETION. If all of the
heirs within the same degree repudiates their inheritance those of the next degree shall inherit in their own
right or per capita.
Remember that representation takes place only with respect to inheritance conferred by law thus
representation takes place only in the following kinds of succession: (1) Legal or Intestate succession ; (2)
Or in testamentary succession but only with respect to the legitime. There is no right of representation
with respect to a voluntary heir, who succeeds only by virtue of a will.
The representation obtains degree by degree and no jump is made. Thus, a son represents his father, the
father, the grandfather and so on. Consequently, when the father repudiates the inheritance from great
grandfather, the son cannot inherit from the great grandfather by representing the grandfather, who is not
the relative immediately preceding him in degree of relation. The representative is called to the
succession by law and not by the person represented, so the representative does not succeed the person
represented but the one whom the person represented would have succeeded.
The representative merely steps into the shoes of the person represented. If you are the representative you
can only inherit the portion in which the person you are representing should rightfully received.
Example, Mr. Boy Abunda repudiated his inheritance from his father, his father predeceased the
grandfather of Mr. Boy Abunda. May Mr. Abunda represents his father in the inheritance of his
grandfather? YES. Right of representation will not apply only if it is the father who repudiates his
inheritance from his father, in this case it is Mr. Abunda who repudiated his inheritance from his father,
and the father of Boy Abunda, decided to die ahead of his father?
A son who repudiates his inheritance from his father does not lose the right to represent to represent his
father from the inheritance of his grandfather. A great grandson, may be called to the inheritance of his
great grandfather even if the grandfather should die ahead or should die before the great grandson has
been conceived.
A son who cannot inherit from his father on the ground of unworthiness can still inherit from his
grandfather by representing his father provided that he himself is not unworthy with regard to the
grandfather. SInce, the representative inherits from the decedent and not from the person represented, his
capacity and right to succeed must be determined in relation to the decedent and not the person
represented, this principle is stated under Art. 973 of the NCC.
ORDER OF SUCCESSION
(1) Order of Succession to a legitimate child. In general and without prejudice to the
concurrent right of other heirs, the order of succession (intestate) to a legitimate child:
(a) Legitimate children and descendants
(b) Legitimate parent and ascendants
(c) Illegitimate children
(d) Surviving spouse
(e) Collaterals up to the 5th degree
(f) State
Legitimate children and the descendants, exclude legitimate and ascendants, the collateral relatives and
the state. An adopted child succeeds to the property of the adopting parents in the same manner as a
legitimate child. Under Sec. 18 of the Domestic Adoption Act, the adopter and the adoptee shall have
reciprocal rights of succession without distinction from legitimate filiation in legal and intestate
succession. Hence, the adopted child is likewise exclude the legitimate parents and ascendants in legal
succession. However illegitimate children and surviving spouse concur with the legitimate children and
descendants in legal succession. If illegitimate children survive with legitimate children the shares of
illegitimate children shall be in proportion prescribed under Art. 176 of the FC under which the share of
each illegitimate children is ½ (one-half) of the share of each legitimate child.
In determining the share of each, the respective legitimes must first be determined and the disposable
portion distributed among them in the proportion established in the Art. 176. Their shares in the
disposable portion should then be added to their respective legitimes to find their total shares in the
intestate succession.
Example, estate 140k - One legitimate child and One illegitimate child. Always remember the ration. 2 is
to 1
Formula x=140k = 2x+x=140k. 140k divided by 3 = 46.67K. Legitimate child entitled of times two of
share = 93.34K while illegitimate child is entitled of 46.67K. Apply the ratio under Art. 176 of the civil
code.
If there is one legitimate child and three illegitimate children = Legitime of the legitimate child is 70k =
estate 140k. 35k is the share of each illegitimate child, since the entire estate cannot cover the same; the
remaining 70k will just be divided equally among the illegitimate child. 23.3k each of the illegitimate
child.
If there are 2 legitimate children and one illegitimate child = 140K estate.
2x+2x+x=140k = 56k for each legitimate child and 28k for the illegitimate child