66.

Testate Estate of Suntay (1954)

Facts: In 1934, Jose Suntay, a Filipino citizen and a resident of the Philippines, died
in Amoy, China. He left real and personal properties in the Philippines and a house in
Amoy. During his lifetime, he married twice. The first wife was Manuela Cruz, with whom he
had several children. The second marriage was with Maria Natividad Lim Brillian, with whom
he had a son, petitioner Silvino Suntay.

Intestate proceedings were instituted by the heirs from the first marriage. While
the second wife, the surviving widow who remained in Amoy, China, filed a petition for
the probate of the last will and testament of the deceased which was claimed to have
been executed and signed in the Philippines on November 1929. The petition was
denied due to the loss of the will before the hearing thereof. After the pacific war,
Silvino claimed to have found among the records of his father, a last will and testament
in Chinese characters executed and signed by the deceased on January 1931 and
probated in the Amoy District Court. He filed a petition in the intestate proceedings for
the probate of the will executed in the Philippines on November 1929 or the will
executed in Amoy, China on November 1931.

Issue: Whether or the will executed in Amoy, China can still be validly probated in the
Philippines?

Ruling: The fact that the municipal district court of Amoy, China is a probate court must
be proved. The law of China on procedure in the probate or allowance of wills must also
be proved. The legal requirements for the execution of the will in China in 1931 should
also be established by competent evidence. There is no proof on these points.

Moreover, it appears that all the proceedings had in the municipal district court of
Amoy were for the purpose of taking the testimony of two (2) attesting witnesses to the will
and that the order of the municipal district court of Amoy does not purport to probate the will.

The order of the municipal district court of Amoy, China does not purport to
probate or allow the will which was the subject of the proceedings. In view thereof, the
will and the alleged probate thereof cannot be said to have been done in accordance
with the accepted basic and fundamental concepts and principles followed in the
probate and allowance of wills. Consequently, the authenticated transcript of
proceedings held in the municipal district court of Amoy, China cannot be deemed and
accepted as proceedings leading to the probate of allowance of a will and therefore, the
will referred to therein cannot be allowed, filed and recorded by a competent court of
this country.

Article 16 of the New Civil Code states that:

Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is
stipulated.
 However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to the order of
succession and to the amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of
testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose
succession is under consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property and
regardless of the country wherein said property may be found.

This case made no mention of Art. 16.

67. Dorotheo vs. CA (1999)

Facts: Aniceta Reyes died in 1969 without her estate being settled. Thereafter, her
husband Alejandro also died. In 1977, Lourdes Dorotheo filed a special proceeding for the
probate of Alejandro’s last will and testament. The children of the spouses filed their opposition.
The RTC ruled that the will is intrinsically void as Lourdes is not the wife of Alejandro; the
oppositors are the only heirs entitled to the estate. Lourdes filed a Motion for Consideration
arguing that she is entitled to some compensation since she took care of Alejandro prior to his
death although they were not legally married to each other. This was again denied by the trial
court. The CA dismissed her appeal for her failure to file the appellant’s brief within the
extended period granted.

Issue: May a last will and testament admitted to probate but declared intrinsically void in an
order that has become final and executory still be given effect?

Ruling: No. A final and executory decision or order can no longer be disturbed or reopened no
matter how erroneous it may be. The SC ruled that the will of Alejandro was extrinsically valid
but the intrinsic provisions thereof are void. Alejandro gave all the property to the concubine.
Such is invalid because one cannot dispose what he does not own. In this case, the whole
property is the conjugal property of Alejandro and Aniceta. Such has become final
and executory. The only instance where a party interested in probate proceeding may have a final
liquidation set aside is when he is left out by reason of circumstances beyond his control or
through mistake or inadvertence not imputable to negligence with circumstances do not concur
herein.

Under the Civil Code, due execution includes a determination of whether the testator was of
sound and disposing mind at the time of its execution, that he had freely executed the will and
was not acting under duress, fraud, menace or undue influence and that the will is genuine and
not a forgery, that he was of the proper testamentary age and that he is a person not expressly
prohibited by law from making a will.

68. Bagtas vs. Paguio (1912)

Facts: Pioquinto Paguio died on September 28, 1909. Fourteen (14) or fifteen (15) years prior to
the time of his death, he suffered from a paralysis of the left side of his body. A few years prior
to his death, his hearing became impaired and that he lost the power of speech. He retained the
use of his right hand and was able to write fairly well. Through the medium of signs he was able
to indicate his wishes to his wife and to other members of his family. The testator wrote out on
several pieces of paper the disposition of his property. The same was in turn delivered to one
Señor Marco who transcribed and put them in form. The pieces of paper were then delivered to a
lawyer who read them to the testator asking if they were his dispositions. The testator assented
each time with an affirmative movement of his head. The widow of the decedent Juliana Bagtas
then sought the probate of the purported last will and testament of Pioquinto. The CFI of Bataan
admitted the same for probate. Isidoro Paguio, a son of the decedent by a former marriage,
opposed the probation on the ground that the testator was not in full enjoyment and use of his
mental faculties and was without mental capacity necessary to execute a valid will.

Issue: Whether the will was validly executed?

Ruling: The rule of law relating to the presumption of mental soundness is well-established, and
the testator in the case at bar, never having been adjudged insane by the court of competent
jurisdiction, this presumption continues, and it is therefore incumbent upon the opponents to
overcome this legal presumption by proper evidence; the opponents failed to do this.

The courts have repeatedly held that mere weakness of mind and body, induced by age and
disease does not render a person incapable of making a will. The law does not require that a
person shall continue in the full enjoyment and use of his pristine physical and mental powers in
order to execute a valid will. If such were the legal standard, few indeed would be the number of
wills that could meet such exacting requirements. The authorities, both medical and legal, are
universal in the statement that the question of mental capacity is one of degree, and that there are
many gradations from the highest degree of mental soundness to the lowest conditions of
diseased mentality which are denominated insanity or idiocy.

69. Bugnao vs. Ubag (1909)

Facts: This is an appeal from an order of the CFI of Oriental Negros, admitting to probate a
document purporting to be the last will and testament of Domingo Ubag, deceased. The
instrument was propounded by his widow, Catalina Bugnao, the sole beneficiary thereunder, and
probate was contested by the appellants, who are brothers and sisters of the deceased, and who
would be entitled to share in the distribution of his estate, if probate were denied, as it appears
that the deceased left no heirs in the direct ascending or descending line.

Appellants contend that the evidence of record is not sufficient to establish the execution of the
alleged will in the manner and form prescribed in Section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure;
and that at the time when it is alleged that the will was executed, Ubag was not of sound mind
and memory, and was physically and mentally incapable of making a will.

Issue: What are the requisites for one to be able to be considered as having a soundness of mind
or having testamentary capacity?

Ruling: These are:

1. Know the nature of the estate to be disposed of;

2. The proper objects of his bounty; and
 3. He must know the character of the testamentary act.

It is true that the testimony discloses the fact that the testator at that time of execution of the will
was extremely ill, in an advanced stage of tuberculosis complicated with severe attacks of
asthma. But all the evidence of physical weakness in no wise establishes his mental incapacity or
a lack of testamentary capacity. Mere weakness of mind or partial imbecility from disease of
body, or from age, will not render a person incapable of making a will; a weak or feeble minded
person may make a valid will, provided he has understanding and memory sufficient to enable
him to know what it is about and how or to whom he is disposing of his property.

The order probating the will should be land is hereby affirmed, with the cost of this instance
against the appellants.