Case Digest (G.R. No. L-2200)
Facts:
The case titled "In Re Will of Victor Bilbao" involves Ramon N. Bilbao as the petitioner and appellant against Dalmacio Bilbao, Cleofas Bilbao, Eusebia Bilbao, Catalina Bilbao, Filemon Abringe, and Francisco Academia as the oppositors and appellees. The case was decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on August 2, 1950. The events leading to this case began with the death of Victor S. Bilbao on July 13, 1943. His widow, Ramona M. Navarro, filed a petition for the admission to probate of his last will and testament, which was executed on October 6, 1931. The will was a single-page document that stated that all properties, both private and conjugal, would be transmitted to the surviving spouse. The petition faced opposition from Filemon Abringe, a relative of the deceased, who argued that the will was invalid because it was executed jointly by the husband and wife for their reciprocal benefit, and that it did not comply with the legal requirements for executio...
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-2200)
Facts:
Parties Involved:
- Petitioner and Appellant: Ramon N. Bilbao (widow and co-testator of Victor S. Bilbao).
- Oppositors and Appellees: Dalmacio Bilbao, Cleofas Bilbao, Eusebia Bilbao, Catalina Bilbao, Filemon Abringe, and Francisco Academia.
Background:
- Victor S. Bilbao died on July 13, 1943.
- His widow, Ramona M. Navarro, filed a petition for the probate of Victor’s last will and testament.
- The will in question was executed on October 6, 1931, jointly by Victor Bilbao and his wife Ramona M. Navarro.
Terms of the Will:
- The will directed that all properties (private, conjugal, or otherwise) of the spouses be given to the surviving spouse.
Opposition to Probate:
- Filemon Abringe, a relative of the deceased, opposed the probate on the grounds that:
- The will was executed jointly by the husband and wife for their reciprocal benefit, which is prohibited by law.
- The will was not executed and attested to as required by law.
- Filemon Abringe, a relative of the deceased, opposed the probate on the grounds that:
Trial Court Decision:
- The Court of First Instance of Negros Oriental denied the petition for probate, ruling that the will was executed conjointly for reciprocal benefit, which is prohibited under Article 669 of the Civil Code.
Issue:
- Whether a joint and reciprocal will, particularly between husband and wife, is valid under the law.
- Whether the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure on wills have impliedly repealed Article 669 of the Civil Code, which prohibits joint and reciprocal wills.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)