Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
proceeding. It is only when the decedent is a nonresident of the Philippines at the time of his death
that venue lies in any province in which he had
estate.
CAN A PROBATE COURT ISSUE WRITS OF
EXECUTION? As a rule, the probate court cannot
issue writs of execution. The exceptions are the
following: 1. To satisfy the contributive shares of
the devisees, legatees and heirs on possession of
the decedents assets as laid down in Rule 88 Sec.6;
2. To enforce payment of the expenses of partition
under Rule 90 Sec.3; 3. To satisfy the cost when a
person is cited for examination in probate
proceedings under Rule 142 Sec. 13.
RULE 74-SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF ESTATES
The general rule is: when a person dies
leaving property, the same should be judicially
administered and the competent court should
appoint a qualified administrator, in the order
established in Section 6, Rule 78, in case the
deceased left no will, or in case he had left one,
should he fail to name an executor therein. This
Rule provides exceptions, namely:(1) Extrajudicial
settlement (Sec.1);(2) Summary settlement of
estates of small value (Sec. 2).
DISTINCTION BETWEEN EXTRAJUDICIAL
SETTLEMENT AND SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF
ESTATES OF SMALL VALUE.
EXTRAJUDICIAL
SETTLEMENT
1. Requires no court
intervention.
3. Allowed only in
intestate succession.
4. Proper when there are
no outstanding debts of
the estate at the time of
the settlement.
5. Instituted by
agreement of all heirs.
SUMMARY
SETTLEMENT
Requires court
intervention by
summary
proceedings
Applicable where the
gross value of the
estate is P10,000.00.
The amount is
jurisdictional.
Allowed in both
testate and intestate
estates.
available even if there
are debts.
Instituted by any
interested party and
even by a creditor of
the estate, without the
consent of all the heirs.
1 | 13
2 | 13
SC Ruling:
Under Section 6 (a), Rule 78 of the Rules of Court,
the letters of administration may be granted at the discretion
of the court to the surviving spouse, who is competent and
willing to serve when the person dies intestate. Upon issuing
the letters of administration to the surviving spouse, the RTC
becomes duty-bound to direct the preparation and submission
of the inventory of the properties of the estate, and the
surviving spouse, as the administrator, has the duty and
responsibility to submit the inventory within three months
from the issuance of letters of administration pursuant to Rule
83 of the Rules of Court, viz.:
RECENT CASES:
ARANAS, Petitioner, vs. MERCADO, ET. AL, Respondents.
G.R. No. 156407
January 15, 2014.
3 | 13
4 | 13
GUARDIANSHIP
5 | 13
6 | 13
3.
4.
GOVERNI
NG LAW
DEFINITI
ON
REMEDY
FOR
EFFECTI
VI-TY
PETITIO
N-ER
VENUE
EXTENT
OF
ENFORC
HABEAS
CORPUS
The Rule was
drafted
pursuant to the
Supreme Courts
constitutional
power to
promulgate
rules for the
protection and
enforcement of
constitutional
rights
(Constitution,
Art. VIII, Sec.
5[5]).
Rule 102
AMPARO
HABEAS DATA
Same
Same
A.M.
No.
07-9-12-SC
It is a
remedy
available to
any person
whose
right to life,
liberty, and
security
has been
violated or
is
threatened
with
violation
by an
unlawful
act or
omission of
a public
official or
employee,
or of a
private
individual
or entity.
The writ
covers
extralegal
killings and
enforced
disappeara
nces or
threats
thereof.
Sec 1
To any person
whose right to
life, liberty and
security is
violated or
threatened
with violation
by an unlawful
act or
omission of a
public official
or employee,
or of a private
individual or
entity
The Rule
took effect
on
24
October
2007
Sec 2
By the
aggrieved
party, or by
any qualified
person or
entity in the
order
provided in
Sec. 2
Rule 4 Sec 2
Where the
plaintiff resides
or where the
defendant
resides, or in the
case of nonresident
defendant,
where he may
be found, at the
election of the
plaintiff.
SC CA and SB:
anywhere in the
Philippines
Sec 3
SC, CA and SB:
Manila;
RTC of the
place where
the threat, act
or omission
was
committed or
any of its
elements
occurred
General rule:
The aggrieved party
Except:
In cases of extralegal killings
and enforced disappearances:
1. Immediate family;
2. In default of no.1, ascendant,
descendant or collateral relative
within the 4th civil degree of
consanguinity or affinity.
Sec 3
SC, CA and SB: Manila;
RTC:
1. where the petitioner resides;
2. where the respondent resides
3. which has jurisdiction over
the place where data or
information is gathered etc.
All at the option of the
petitioner
Habeas corpus
is a Latin phrase
which literally
means you
have the body.
Basically, 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 judge
awarding the
writ shall
consider in that
behalf.
Sec 1
To all cases of
illegal
confinement or
detention:
1. By which any
person is
deprived of his
liberty; or
2. By which the
rightful custody
of any person is
withheld from
the person
entitled thereto
The Rule took
effect on 1 July
1997
Sec 3
Anywhere
in
the
Philippines
It is a remedy available to
any person whose right to
privacy in life, liberty or
security is violated or
threatened by an unlawful
act or omission of a public
official or employee, or of a
private individual or entity
engaged in the gathering,
collecting or storing of data
or information regarding the
person, family, home and
correspondence of the
aggrieved party.
Sec 1
To any person whose right to
privacy in life, liberty and
security is violated or
threatened with violation by an
unlawful act or omission of a
public official or employee, or of
a private individual or entity
engaged in:
1.
Gathering
2.
Collecting
3.
Storing
of data or information regarding
the person family, home and
correspondence of the
aggrieved party.
The Rule took effect on 2
February 2008
Sec 2
7 | 13
EABILITY
INTERIM
RELIEFS
(d)Witness
Protection
Order.
Sec 14
(a)
Temporary
Protection
Order. The
court, justice
or judge, upon
motion or
motu proprio,
may order that
the petitioner
or the
aggrieved
party and any
member of the
immediate
family be
protected in a
government
agency or by
an accredited
person or
private
institution
capable of
keeping and
securing their
safety. If the
petitioner is
an
organization,
association or
institution
referred to in
Section 3(c) of
this Rule, the
protection
may be
extended to
the officers
involved.
(b)
Inspection
Order. The
court, justice
or judge, upon
verified
motion and
after due
hearing, may
order any
person in
possession or
control of a
designated
land or other
property, to
permit entry
for the
purpose of
inspecting,
measuring,
surveying, or
photographing
the property
or any
relevant object
or operation
thereon.
(c)
Production
Order. The
court, justice
or judge, upon
verified
motion and
after due
hearing, may
order any
person in
possession,
custody or
control of any
designated
documents,
papers, books,
accounts,
letters,
photographs,
objects or
tangible
things, or
objects in
digitized or
electronic
form, which
constitute or
contain
evidence
relevant to the
petition or the
return, to
produce and
permit their
inspection,
copying or
photographing
by or on behalf
of the movant.
8 | 13
A.
DISTINGUSH RULE 103 FROM RULE
108 AND R.A. 9048:
Name of Law
SC RULING:
Section 1 of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo provides
as follows:
Subject
Matter
Rule 103
Change of
Name
Change of full
name
(substantial
corrections)
Rule 108
Cancellation/Correction
of Entries in the Civil
Registry
Change or corrections
in the civil entries
(substantial
corrections)
R.A. 9048
Clerical Error
Act
Change of first
name and
nickname and
civil entries
(only
9 | 13
Venue
What kind of
proceeding:
A person
desiring to
change his
name. (Section
1)
RTC of the
province in
which
petitioner
resides for 3
years prior to
filing, or, in the
City of Manila,
to the Juvenile
and Domestic
Relations
Court.
Judicial
Proceeding
Summary proceeding
This can be concerted
to an adversarial
proceeding if there are
substantial changes and
affect the status of an
individual
typographical or
clerical errors)
Any person
having direct
and personal
interest in the
correction of a
clerical or
typographical
error in an entry
and/or change
of first name or
nickname.
(Section 3)
1. Local civil
registry office of
the city or
municipality
where the
record being
sought to be
corrected or
changed is kept;
2. Local civil
registrar of the
place where the
interested party
is presently
residing or
domiciled;
3. Philippine
Consulates;
Administrative
Proceeding
as
legal
10 | 13
her signature was forged and she was not the one who
contracted marriage with the purported husband. In other
words, she claims that no such marriage was entered into or if
there was, she was not the one who entered into such contract.
It must be recalled that when respondent tried to obtain a
CENOMAR from the NSO, it appeared that she was married to a
certain Ye Son Sune. She then sought the cancellation of entries
in the wife portion of the marriage certificate.
In filing the petition for correction of entry under
Rule 108, respondent made the Local Civil Registrar of Cebu
City, as well as her alleged husband Ye Son Sune, as partiesrespondents. It is likewise undisputed that the procedural
requirements set forth in Rule 108 were complied with. The
Office of the Solicitor General was likewise notified of the
petition which, in turn, authorized the Office of the City
Prosecutor to participate in the proceedings. More importantly,
trial was conducted where respondent herself, the
stenographer of the court where the alleged marriage was
conducted, as well as a document examiner, testified. Several
documents were also considered as evidence. With the
testimonies and other evidence presented, the trial court found
that the signature appearing in the subject marriage certificate
was different from respondent's signature appearing in some
of her government issued identification cards. The court thus
made a categorical conclusion that respondent's signature in
the marriage certificate was not hers and, therefore, was
forged. Clearly, it was established that, as she claimed in her
petition, no such marriage was celebrated.
Indeed, the Court made a pronouncement in the
recent case of Minoru Fujiki v. Maria Paz Galela Marinay,
Shinichi Maekara, Local Civil Registrar of Quezon City, and the
Administrator and Civil Registrar General of the National
Statistics Office 24 that:
To be sure, a petition for correction or cancellation
of an entry in the civil registry cannot substitute for an action
to invalidate a marriage. A direct action is necessary to prevent
circumvention of the substantive and procedural safeguards of
marriage under the Family Code, A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC and
other related laws. Among these safeguards are the
requirement of proving the limited grounds for the dissolution
of marriage, support pendente lite of the spouses and children,
the liquidation, partition and distribution of the properties of
the spouses and the investigation of the public prosecutor to
determine collusion. A direct action for declaration of nullity or
annulment of marriage is also necessary to prevent
circumvention of the jurisdiction of the Family Courts under
the Family Courts Act of 1997 (Republic Act No. 8369), as a
petition for cancellation or correction of entries in the civil
registry may be filed in the Regional Trial Court where the
corresponding civil registry is located. In other words, a
Filipino citizen cannot dissolve his marriage by the mere
expedient of changing his entry of marriage in the civil registry.
Aside from the certificate of marriage, no such
evidence was presented to show the existence of marriage.
Rather, respondent showed by overwhelming evidence that no
marriage was entered into and that she was not even aware of
such existence. The testimonial and documentary evidence
clearly established that the only "evidence" of marriage which
is the marriage certificate was a forgery. While the Court
maintain that Rule 108 cannot be availed of to determine
the validity of marriage, the Court cannot nullify the
proceedings before the trial court where all the parties
had been given the opportunity to contest the allegations
of respondent; the procedures were followed, and all the
evidence of the parties had already been admitted and
examined. Respondent indeed sought, not the nullification
of marriage as there was no marriage to speak of, but the
correction of the record of such marriage to reflect the
truth as set forth by the evidence. Otherwise stated, in
11 | 13
and
(3) other documents which the petitioner or the
city or municipal civil registrar or the consul
general may consider relevant and necessary
for the approval of the petition.
12 | 13
13 | 13