ALSUA-BETTS VS CA

FACTS: (1)Don Jesus Alsua and his wife, Doa Tinay, together with all their living children, entered into a duly notarized
agreement, (escritura de particion extrajudicial/extra judicial partition) for the inventory and partition of all the spouses
present and existing properties. In the provision of said extra judicial partition, each of the four children was allotted with the
properties considered as their share in the estate or as inheritance left by the deceased where they will be the absolute owner
of the properties assigned in case of death of one of the spouses. (2)Don Jesus and Doa Tinay also separately executed
holographic will with exactly the same terms and conditions in conformity with the executed extra judicial partition naming
each other as an executor without having to post any bond. That in case new properties be acquired same shall be
partitioned one half to the surviving spouse and the other half to children of equal parts.
(3).Spouses subsequently executed separately a codicil of exactly the same terms and conditions, amending and
supplementing their holographic wills stating that they reserved for themselves the other half not disposed of to their
legitimate heirs under the agreement of partition and mutually and reciprocally bequeathed each other their participation as
well all properties which might be acquired subsequently. Doa Tinay died in effect Don Jesus by order of the probate court
was name as executor.
Before Don Jesus died he cancelled his holographic will in the presence of his bookkeeper and secretary and instructed his
lawyer to draft a new will. This was a notarial will and testament of 3 essential features as follows;
1. It expressly cancelled revoked and annulled all the provisions of his holographic will and codicil.
2. It provided for the collation of all his properties donated to his four living children by virtue of the Escritura de Partition
Extra judicial.
3. It instituted his children as legatees / devisees of specific properties, and as to the rest of the properties and whatever
may be subsequently acquired in the future, before his death, were to be given to Francisca and Pablo naming Francisca as
executor to serve without a bond.

ISSUE:
1.W/N oppositors to the probate of the will, are in estoppel to question the competence of testator Don Jesus Alsua.
2.Whether testator Don Jesus can or cannot revoke his previous will.
HELD: 1.The principle of estoppel is not applicable in probate proceedings ( case of Testate Estate of the Late Procopia
Apostol Benedicta Obispo, et al vs. Remedios Obispo, Probate proceedings involve public interest, and the application
therein of the rule of estoppel, when it will block the ascertainment of the truth as to the circumstances surrounding the
execution of a testament, would seem inimical to public policy. Over and above the interest of private parties is that of the
state to see that testamentary dispositions be carried out if, and only if, executed conformably to law.
2. We rule that Don Jesus was not forever bound of his previous holographic will and codicil as such, would remain revokable
at his discretion. Art. 828 of the new Civil Code is clear: "A will may be revoked by the testator at any time before his death.
Any waiver or restriction of this right is void." There can be no restriction that may be made on his absolute freedom to
revoke his holographic will and codicil previously made. This would still hold true even if such previous will had as in the case
at bar already been probated (Palacios v. Palacios, 106 Phil. 739). For in the first place, probate only authenticates the will
and does not pass upon the efficacy of the dispositions therein. And secondly, the rights to the succession are transmitted
only from the moment of the death of the decedent (Article 777, New Civil Code). In fine, Don Jesus retained the liberty of
disposing of his property before his death to whomsoever he chose, provided the legitime of the forced heirs are not
prejudiced, which is not herein claimed for it is undisputed that only the free portion of the whole Alsua estate is being
contested.