Documents

4C CIV REV 3RD SET

Description
civil law
Categories
Published
of 28
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
Share
Transcript
  ATTY. MARCIANO DELSON -4C CIV REV 3RD SET OF DIGESTS   1   1. Alvarez vs. IAC G.R. No. L-68053. May 7, 1990 Aguila ISSUE: W/N the liability of Rosendo Alvarez arising from the sale of Lots Nos. 773-A and 773-B could be legally passed or transmitted by operation of law to the petitioners without violation of law and due process. RULING: The doctrine obtaining in this jurisdiction is on the general transmissibility of the rights and obligations of the deceased to his legitimate children and heirs. The binding effect of contracts upon the heirs of the deceased party is not altered by the provision of our Rules of Court that money debts of a deceased must be liquidated and paid from his estate before the residue is distributed among said heirs. The reason is that whatever payment is thus made from the estate is ultimately a payment by the heirs or distributees, since the amount of the paid claim in fact diminishes or reduces the shares that the heirs would have been entitled to receive. “Under our law, therefore, the general rule is that a party’s contractual rights and obligations are transmissible to the successors. The rule is a consequence of the progressive ‘depersonalization’ of patrimonial rights and duties.  Petitioners being the heirs of the late Rosendo Alvarez, they cannot escape the legal consequences of their father’s transaction, which gave rise to the present claim for damages. 2.   GEVERO vs. IAC G.R. No. 77029. August 30, 1990 Alconaba ISSUE: Whether or not the ½ share of interest of Teodorica in one of the litigated lots is included in the deed of sale. RULING: YES. The hereditary share in a decedents' estate is transmitted or vested immediately from the moment of the death of the causante or predecessor in interest (Civil Code of the Philippines, Art. 777), and there is no legal bar to a successor (with requisite contracting capacity) disposing of his hereditary share immediately after such death, even if the actual extent of such share is not determined until the subsequent liquidation of the estate (De Borja v. Vda. de Borja, 46 SCRA 577 [1972]).Teodorica Babangha died long before World War II, hence, the rights to the succession were transmitted from the moment of her death. It is therefore incorrect to state that it was only in 1966, the date of extrajudicial partition, when Ricardo received his share in the lot as inheritance from his mother Teodorica. Thus, when Ricardo sold his share over lot 2476 that share which he inherited from Teodorica was also included unless expressly excluded in the deed of sale. 3. Locsin vs CA GR No. 89783 February 19, 1992 Apostol ISSUE: WON the nephews and neices are entitled to inherit the properties which Dona Catalina already disposed of more than 10 years before her death. HELD: NO, for those properties did not form part of her hereditary estate, i.e., the property and transmissible rights and obligations existing at the time of (the decedent's) death and  ATTY. MARCIANO DELSON -4C CIV REV 3RD SET OF DIGESTS   2   those which have accrued thereto since the opening of the succession. The rights to a person's succession are transmitted from the moment of his death, and do not vest in his heirs until such time. Property which Doña Catalina had transferred or conveyed to other persons during her lifetime no longer formed part of her estate at the time of her death to which her heirs may lay claim. 4.Opulencia vs. Court of Appeals GR No. 125385 July 30, 1998   Ayo ISSUE:  Whether or not a contract to sell executed after the death of the decedent is valid even withouth probate court approval? HELD: We emphasize that hereditary rights are vested in the heir or heirs from the mom ent of the decedent’s death.[14] Petitioner, therefore, became the owner of her hereditary share the moment her father died. Thus, the lack of judicial approval does not invalidate the Contract to Sell, because the petitioner has the substantive right to sell the whole or a part of her share in the estate of her late father. 5.Emnace vs. CA G.R. No. 126334 Balicas ISSUE:  Whether or not the heirs of Vicente Tabanao has the capacity to sue Emnace HELD: Yes. The surviving spouse does not need to be appointed as executrix or administratrix of the estate before she can file the action. She and her children are complainants in their own right as successors of Vicente Tabanao. From the very moment of Vicente Tabanao's death, his rights insofar as the partnership was concerned were transmitted to his heirs, for rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of death of the decedent. Whatever claims and rights Vicente Tabanao had against the partnership and petitioner were transmitted to respondents by operation of law, more particularly by succession, which is a mode of acquisition by virtue of which the property, rights and obligations to the extent of the value of the inheritance of a person are transmitted. Moreover, respondents became owners of their respective hereditary shares from the moment Vicente Tabanao died 6.   Rabadilla vs. CA ISSUE: WON there is substitution in the given case HELD: Substitution is the designation by the testator of a person or persons to take the place of the heir or heirs first instituted. Under substitutions in general, the testator may either (1) provide for the designation of another heir to whom the property shall pass in case the srcinal heir should die before him/her, renounce the inheritance or be incapacitated to inherit, as in a simple substitution, or (2) leave his/her property to one person with the express charge that it be transmitted subsequently to another or others, as in a fideicommissary substitution. The Codicil sued upon contemplates neither of the two. In simple substitutions, the second heir takes the inheritance in default of the first heir by reason of incapacity, predecease or renunciation. In the case under consideration, the provisions of subject Codicil do not provide that should Dr.  ATTY. MARCIANO DELSON -4C CIV REV 3RD SET OF DIGESTS   3   Jorge Rabadilla default due to predecease, incapacity or renunciation, the testatrix’s near descendantswould substitute him. What the Codicil provides is that, should Dr. Jorge Rabadilla or his heirs not fulfill the conditions imposed in the Codicil, the property referred to shall be seized and turned over to the testatrix’s near descendants.   7.   Tanedo vs ca G.R. No. 104482. January 22, 1996 Basco Issue: whether or not there is a valid sale to respondents. Held: the supreme court ruled that a sale of future inheritance is void. However, These two documents of sale were executed after the death of Matias(faher of lazaro) (and his spouse) and after a deed of extra-judicial settlement of his (Matias') estate was executed, thus vesting in Lazaro actual title over said property. In other words, these dispositions, though conflicting, were no longer infected with the infirmities. -SC ruled in favour od respondents because they were the first to register land 8.   Santos vs Lumbao GR No. 169129; March 28, 2007 Baylon ISSUE:  WON a co-owner can alienate, mortgage, or assign his aliquot or undivided share in the property HELD: It is noteworthy that at the time of the execution of the documents denominated as Bilihan ng Lupa, the entire property owned by Maria, the mother of Rita, was not yet divided among her and her co-heirs and so the description of the entire estate is the only description that can be placed in the Bilihan ng Lupa, dated 17 August 1979 and 9 January 1981 because the exact metes and bounds of the subject property sold to respondents Spouses Lumbao could not be possibly determined at that time. Nevertheless, that does not make the contract of sale between Rita and respondents Spouses Lumbao invalid because both the law and jurisprudence have categorically held that even while an estate remains undivided, co-owners have each full ownership of their respective aliquots or undivided shares and may therefore alienate, assign or mortgage them. The co-owner, however, has no right to sell or alienate a specific or determinate part of the thing owned in common, because such right over the thing is represented by an aliquot or ideal portion without any physical division. In any case, the mere fact that the deed purports to transfer a concrete portion does not per se render the sale void. The sale is valid, but only with respect to the aliquot share of the selling co-owner. Furthermore, the sale is subject to the results of the partition upon the termination of the co-ownership. 9.   NHA vs. Almeida G.R. No. 162784 Beltran Issue: Whether or not the award of the subject lots by the NHA is arbitrary. Held: We are not impressed. When the petitioner received the Sinumpaang Salaysay, it should have noted that the effectivity  ATTY. MARCIANO DELSON -4C CIV REV 3RD SET OF DIGESTS   4   of the said document commences at the time of death of the author of the instrument; in her words sakaling ako'y bawian na ng Dios ng aking buhay… Hence, in such period, all the interests of the person should cease to be hers and shall be in the possession of her estate until they are transferred to her heirs by virtue of Article 774 of the Civil Code. When the srcinal buyer died (Margarita), the NHA should have considered the estate of the decedent as the next person likely to stand in to fulfill the obligation to pay the rest of the purchase price. The opposition of other heirs to the repurchase by Francisca Herrera should have put the NHA on guard as to the award of the lots. Further, the Decision in the said Civil Case No. B-1263 (questioning the Deed of Self-Adjudication) which rendered the deed therein null and void should have alerted the NHA that there are other heirs to the interests and properties of the decedent who may claim the property after a testate or intestate proceeding is concluded. The NHA therefore acted arbitrarily in the award of the lots. 10.   CONDE v. ABAYA GR No.L-4275, March 23, 1909 13 PHIL 249 Buenaventura ISSUE:  May the mother of a natural child now deceased, bring an action for the acknowledgment of the natural filiation in favor of such child in order to appear in his behalf to receive the inheritance from the deceased natural father. HELD: The right of action that devolves upon the child to claim his legitimacy lasts during his whole life, while the right to claim the acknowledgment of a natural child lasts only during the life of his presumed parents. An action for the acknowledgment of a natural child may, as an exception, be exercised against the heirs of the presumed parents in two cases: first, in the event of the death of the latter during the minority of the child, and second, upon the discovery of some instrument of express acknowledgment of the child, executed by the father or mother, the existence of which was unknown during the life of the latter. But such action for the acknowledgment of a natural child can only be exercised by him. It cannot be transmitted to his descendants, or his ascendants. 11. Pamplona vs Moreto GR no L-33187 Buhay Issue: Whether or not the spouses Pamplona are entitled to the full ownership of property or only to the one-half of the same. Ruling: The spouses Pamplona are entitled to the full ownership of the property. Equity commands that the private respondents, the successors of both the deceased spouses, Flaviano Moreto and Monica Maniega be not allowed to impugn the sale executed by Flaviano Moreto who indisputably received the consideration of P900.00 and which he, including his children, benefitted from the same. Under Article 776, New Civil Code, the inheritance which private respondents received from their deceased parents and/or predecessors-in-interest included all the property rights and obligations which were not extinguished by their parents' death. And under Art. 1311, paragraph 1, New Civil Code, the contract of sale executed by the deceased Flaviano Moreto took effect between the parties, their assigns and heirs, who are the private

SAP Module Pool

Jul 23, 2017
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks