Spec Pro Notes.docx

7/25/2019 Spec Pro Notes.docx

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/spec-pro-notesdocx 1/5

Probate – It is a special proceeding mandatorily required for the purpose of establishing the

validity of a will. No will shall pass either real or personal property unless it is proved and

allowed in accordance with the Rules of Court. (rt. !"!#

$egacy – a gift of property% especially personal property% as money% by will& a bequest

'evisee – the act of giving or disposing of real property by will

estate – refers to situations where the person dies leaving a last will. he person who e)ecutes

a last will is called the *testator+

Intestate – refers to situations where the person died without a last will& the share in the

inheritance is called *intestate share+

,scheat – the reversion of property to the crown in ,ngland or to the state in the -nited tates

when there are no legal heirs

rust – legal relationship between one person having an equitable ownership in property and

another person owing the legal title to such property% the equitable ownership of the former

entitling him to the performance of certain duties and the e)ercise of certain powers by the latter

/abeas corpus – */abeas corpus+ is a $atin phrase which literally means *you have the body+.

0asically% it is a writ directed to the person detaining another% commanding him to produce the

body of the prisoner at a designated time and place% with the day and cause of his capture and

detention% to do% submit to% and receive whatsoever the court or 1udge awarding the writ shall

consider in that behalf.

doption – is defined as the process of ma2ing a child% whether related or not to the adopter%possess in general% the rights accorded to a legitimate child.

bsentee – 3ne who has left% either temporarily or permanently% his or her domicile or usual

place of residence or business.

Note: *,)tra1udicial settlement of estate+ is a voluntary agreement among the heirs partitioning

the estate (free of debts#% e)ecuted before a notary public% and published once a wee2 for three

wee2s in a newspaper of general circulation.

Note: sole heir claiming the whole estate can file an *ffidavit of ad1udication by sole heir+ with

the Register of 'eeds (if real property is involved# or with the 0IR.

4III.

5ohnny% a naturali6ed citi6en of the -nited tates of merica (-# but formerly a 7ilipino

citi6en% e)ecuted a notarial will in accordance with the laws of the tate of California% -.

5ohnny% at the time of his death% was survived by his niece nastacia% an merican citi6en



residing at the condominium unit of 5ohnny located at 7ort 0onifacio% aguig City& a younger

brother% 0artolome% who manages 5ohnny8s fish pond in $ingayen% Pangasinan& and a younger

sister% Christina% who manages 5ohnny8s rental condominium units in 9a2ati City. 5ohnny8s

entire estate which he inherited from his parents is valued at P:;; million. 5ohnny appointed

nastacia as e)ecutri) of his will. (<=#

(# Can 5ohnny8s notarial will be probated before the proper court in the Philippines>

(0# Is nastacia qualified to be the e)ecutri) of 5ohnny8s notarial will>

# ?es. rt. !@A% NCC. he will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if

made with the formalities prescribed by the law of the place in which he resides% or according to

the formalities observed in his country% or in conformity with those which this Code prescribes.

0ut our laws do not prohibit the probate of wills e)ecuted by foreigners abroad although the

same have not as yet been probated and allowed in the countries of their e)ecution. foreign

will can be given legal effects in our 1urisdiction. rticle !@A of the Civil Code states that the will

of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if made in accordance with theformalities prescribed by the law of the place where he resides% or according to the formalities

observed in his country. (In ReB ill of Palaganas% DR @AE@<<#

0# ?es. he choice of his e)ecutor is a precious prerogative of a testator% a necessary

concomitant of his right to dispose of his property in the manner he wishes. It is natural that the

testator should desire to appoint one of his confidence% one who can be trusted to carry out his

wishes in the disposal of the estate. he curtailment of this right may be considered as a

curtailment of the right to dispose. (Republic v 9arcos% D.R. Nos. @";"F@ G@";!HH#

nastacia has none of the disqualifications.

R-$, F! ec @

ho are incompetent to serve as e)ecutors or administrators. No person in competent to

serve as e)ecutor or administrator whoB

(a# Is a minor&

(b# Is not a resident of the Philippines& and

(c# Is in the opinion of the court unfit to e)ecute the duties of the trust by reason of drun2enness%

improvidence% or want of understanding or integrity% or by reason of conviction of an offense

involving moral turpitude.

None of the disqualifications of minority or unfitness were alleged% and nastacia is a resident of

the Philippines.

JII. 9ary 5ane met hiela 9ay at the recruitment agency where they both applied for overseas

employment. hey e)changed pleasantries% including details of their personal circumstances.

7ortunately% 9ary 5ane was deployed to wor2 as front des2 receptionist at a hotel in bu 'habi



where she met ultan hmed who proposed marriage% to which she readily accepted.

-nfortunately for hiela 9ay% she was not deployed to wor2 abroad% and this made her envious

of 9ary 5ane. 9ary 5ane returned to the Philippines to prepare for her wedding. he secured

from the National tatistics 3ffice (N3# a Certificate of No 9arriage. It turned out from the

N3 records that 9ary 5ane had previously contracted marriage with 5ohn tarr% a 0ritish

citi6en% which she never did. he purported marriage between 9ary 5ane and 5ohn tarr contained all the required pertinent details on 9ary 5ane. 9ary 5ane later on learned that hiela

9ay is the best friend of 5ohn tarr. s a lawyer% 9ary 5ane see2s your advice on her

predicament. hat legal remedy will you avail to enable 9ary 5ane to contract marriage with

ultan hmed> (<=#

I will advise 9ary 5ane to file a Petition for Cancellation of ,ntries in the 9arriage Contract

under Rule @;!. In such remedy% 9ary 5ane will be see2ing% not the nullification of marriage as

there was no marriage to spea2 of% but the correction of the record of such marriage to reflect

the truth as set forth by the evidence. his will be the most e)peditious and efficient remedy to

be able to contract marriage with ultan hmed in the soonest time. (Republic v. 3laybar% D.R.

No. @!EH"!% 7ebruary @;% :;@<#

was adopted by 0 and C when was only a toddler. $ater on in life% filed with the Regional

rial Court (RC# a petition for change of name under Rule @;" of the Rules of Court% as he

wanted to reassume the surname of his natural parents because the surname of his adoptive

parents sounded offensive and was seriously affecting his business and social life. he adoptive

parents gave their consent to the petition for change of name. 9ay file a petition for change of

name> If the RC grants the petition for change of name% what% if any% will be the effect on the

respective relations of with his adoptive parents and with his natural parents> 'iscuss. (<=#

Republic vs. Court of ppeals and 9a)imo ong D.R. No. EFE;A 9ay :@% @EE:

9oreover% worthy of note is the fact that private respondentKs adoptive mother emphasi6ed that she

e)ecuted the above affidavit Lwithout affecting the legal adoption granted by the Court on eptember

E% @EAF% ma2ing him as one of my legal and compulsory heir(s#.L his is incontrovertible proof that

she never entertained any misgivings or reservations with respect to her consent to his petition. his

li2ewise dispels any possible confusion as to private respondentKs legal status or adoptive paternity

and his successional rights. Concordantly% we have heretofore held that a change of name does not

define or effect a change in oneKs e)isting family relations or in the rights and duties flowing

therefrom. It does not alter oneKs legal capacity% civil status or citi6enship& what is altered is only the

name.



pecial Proceedings

ENCARNACION LOPEZ VDA. DE BALUYUT v. HON. JUDGE LEONOR INES LUCIANO

MG.R. No. L-42215. July 13, 1976

PonenteB quino% 5.

FACTSB

In the Court of 7irst Instance of Oue6on City% probate proceeding for the settlement of the estate of the deceased otero 0aluyut was instituted by his alleged nephew% lfredo 0aluyutclaiming mental incapacity of the surviving widow% ,ncarnacion 4da. de 0aluyut% to administer her affairs and that of the decedentKs estate. /e prayed for appointment as administrator./owever% upon a counter petition% the widow was appointed administratri) and qualified as such.his appointment% was set aside by the upreme Court in 0aluyut vs. 5udge Pao% etc.% D.R. $Q

<:;!!% 9ay F% @EFA% because the persons contesting her capacity to act were not given anadequate opportunity to be heard and to present evidence.

9eantime% in the 5uvenile and 'omestic Relations Court of Oue6on City% two successivepetitions were filed to declare 9rs. 0aluyut an incompetent and to place her under guardianship.he first petition% which was filed by lfredo 0aluyut% was dismissed. he second% which wasfiled by her sisters% were given due course. cting on the latter petition% the court summarilydeclared the widow as incompetent on the basis of a report of a psychiatrist who was not crossQe)amined% and without hearing the evidence of the parties% particularly 9rs. 0aluyut. he courtdenied a motion for reconsideration of the order ma2ing such declaration. /ence% this petition.

ISSUESB

@. hether the resolution in the guardianship proceeding of the question as to 9rs. 0aluyutKsalleged incompetency should await the ad1udication in the administration proceeding (pending inthe probate court# of the issue as to her competency to act as administratri).

:. hether 9rs. 0aluyot was denied due process of law when the guardianship court summarilyannounced its verdict on her incompetency notwithstanding that her lawyer had not crossQe)amined the psychiatrist.

RULINGB

@. ?es. In consonance with the last sentence of section :EQ of the Charter of Oue6on City

which divests the 5uvenile and 'omestic Relation Court of 1urisdiction or authority to resolvequestions already in issue as an incident in any case pending in the ordinary court% theguardianship proceeding should be suspended and should await the 1urisdiction of the issue of petitionerKs competency to act as administratri) pending with the probate court.

:. ?es. finding that a person is incompetent should be anchored on clear% positive and definiteevidence (?angco vs. Court of 7irst Instance of 9anila% :E Phil. @!"% @E;#. hat 2ind of proof has



not yet been presented to the guardianship court to 1ustify its precipitate conclusion that 9rs.0aluyut is an incompetent.

In the nature of things% the guardianship court should have first set for hearing the psychiatristKsreport and e)amined 9rs. 0aluyut before prematurely ad1udging that she is an incompetent. Itshasty and premature pronouncement% with its derogatory implications% was not the offspring of

fundamental fairness which is the essence of due process.

9oreover% the lower court should have adhered strictly to the procedure laid down inRule E" of the Rules of Court for appointment of guardians. Rule E" provides that after the filingof the petition% the court should fi) a time and place for hearing and give the proper notices. tthe hearing% Lthe alleged incompetent must be present if able to attend% and it must be shownthat the required notice has been given. hereupon% the court shall hear the evidence of theparties in support of their respective allegationsL (ec. H% Rule E"% Rules of Court#.

Spec Pro Notes.docx

Documents

Transcript of Spec Pro Notes.docx