Facts:

The case involves Felix Azuela (petitioner) who filed a petition for probate before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila on April 10, 1984, seeking to admit to probate the notarial will of Eugenia E. Igsolo, who passed away on December 16, 1982, at the age of 80. Eugenia executed the will on June 10, 1981. Petitioner is the son of the cousin of the decedent, and the will was alleged to have been notarized by Notary Public Petronio Y. Bautista. The will, written in the vernacular Pilipino, consisted of two pages, containing Eugenia's testamentary dispositions, nominating Vart Pague as the executor and legating properties to Felix Azuela. The attestation clause failed to indicate the number of pages and was not signed at the bottom by the subscribing witnesses but only on the left margin. The signature of the testatrix did not appear on the second page, which contained the attestation clause.

The petition was opposed by Geralda Aida Castillo, who represented herself as att

...

Facts:

Background of the Case

• Petitioner Felix Azuela filed a petition to admit to probate a notarial will purportedly executed by Eugenia E. Igsolo, who died on December 16, 1982, at the age of 80.
• The will, written in the vernacular (Pilipino) and consisting of two pages, was notarized on June 10, 1981.
• The document exhibited several defects:
• The attestation clause did not state the number of pages on which the will was written.
• The attestation clause was not signed by the instrumental witnesses at its bottom, even though their signatures appeared on the left-hand margin of each page.
• There was no proper acknowledgment by the testator and witnesses before the notary public, as mandated by Article 806.
• The will also showed other minor deviations regarding the placement of the decedent’s signature and the method of page numbering (Arabic numerals instead of consecutive letters), though these were considered less crucial.

Procedural History and Parties Involved

• The petition for probate was initially filed on April 10, 1984, with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila.
• The petitioner, being the son of the decedent’s cousin, sought probate of the will and requested the issuance of letters testamentary to the designated executor, Vart Prague.
• Opponent Geralda Aida Castillo, acting as attorney-in-fact for what she claimed were the 12 legitimate heirs (including a surviving heir residing abroad), contended that the will was a forgery and improperly executed.
• The RTC admitted the will to probate on August 10, 1992, relying in part on the modern tendency toward a less rigid interpretation of formalities in the execution of wills.
• This decision was later reversed by the Court of Appeals due to the fatal defects in the attestation clause and the lack of proper notarial acknowledgment.

Defects Noted in the Will

• The attestation clause failed to state the number of pages composing the will, a requirement intended as a safeguard against tampering or interpolation.
• The instrumental witnesses’ signatures, although affixed on the left-hand margin of each page, did not appear at the bottom of the attestation clause itself, thus negating their attestation of the clause.
• The document lacked a proper acknowledgment before a notary public as required under Article 806, with the notary’s attestation being limited to a statement of notarization rather than a true acknowledgment.
• Petitioner argued for the application of a “substantial compliance rule” citing other cases, but this contention was met with strict scrutiny in light of the mandatory safeguards embodied in the Civil Code.

Issue:

Validity of the Will in Light of the Formal Defects

• Whether the failure of the attestation clause to state the total number of pages of the will constitutes a fatal defect.
• Whether the omission of the witnesses’ signatures at the bottom of the attestation clause, despite their signatures on the left-hand margins, satisfies the requirement for proper attestation under Article 805.
• Whether the will’s lack of proper acknowledgment before a notary public under Article 806 renders it invalid.

Application of the Substantial Compliance Rule

• Whether the “substantial compliance” rule under Article 809—allowing for some minor defects if the will clearly manifests its intent—can cure the identified deficiencies.
• Whether evidence within the will itself (or external evidence) could supply the missing information required by the attestation clause, particularly the number of pages.

Overall Compliance with Statutory Requirements

• Whether the will was executed in conformity with all the detailed requisites mandated by Articles 805 and 806 of the Civil Code.
• Whether failure to strictly adhere to these technical requirements justifies the denial of probate.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)