Title
Mijares vs. Nery
Case
G.R. No. 1380
Decision Date
Jan 18, 1904
Dispute over inheritance between a natural child and acknowledged illegitimate daughters; court ruled in favor of defendants, granting equal rights under Civil Code.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 1380)

Facts:

Death of Don Mariano Mijares: In 1899, Don Mariano Mijares died in the Province of Albay, leaving an estate estimated at 80,000 pesos. At the time of his death, he had no legitimate heirs (descendants or ascendants).

Plaintiff’s Claim: The plaintiff, Consolacion Mijares y Borromeo, was born in 1862 out of wedlock but was legally recognized as a natural child of Don Mariano Mijares. She claimed to be the sole natural daughter of the deceased and, thus, the sole heir to his estate.

Defendants’ Background: The defendants were five daughters of Don Mariano Mijares, born out of wedlock to Delfina Nery (the deceased’s niece). These daughters were born between 1862 and 1889 and were acknowledged by their father during his lifetime. A papal bull issued in 1878 authorized the marriage of Don Mariano and Delfina Nery, but they never married.

Legal Claim: The plaintiff filed suit to be declared the sole universal heir to her father’s estate, arguing that the defendants were illegitimate daughters without the status of natural children under Law 11 of Toro, which was in force at the time of their birth.

Defendants’ Defense: The defendants countered that, although they were illegitimate under Law 11 of Toro, they acquired the status of natural children under the Civil Code (effective in the Philippines in 1880) because they were acknowledged by their father. They also claimed entitlement to parts of the estate based on a will and codicil executed by Don Mariano Mijares.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Retroactive Application of the Civil Code: Under Article 119 of the Civil Code, the defendants acquired the status of natural children because their parents could have married at the time of their conception (with dispensation). This provision applies retroactively under Rule 1 of the transitory provisions of the Civil Code, even though the defendants were born under the old law.

  2. Status of Natural Children: The Civil Code modified the old law (Law 11 of Toro) by conferring the status of natural children on those born out of wedlock if their parents could have married at the time of conception, regardless of whether a dispensation was required.

  3. Succession Rights: Succession rights vest only upon the death of the parent. Since Don Mariano Mijares died in 1899, when the Civil Code was in force, the defendants’ rights as natural children are governed by the Civil Code.

  4. Equal Rights of Natural Children: The plaintiff and the defendants, as acknowledged natural children, have equal rights to inherit from their father’s estate. The plaintiff cannot claim to be the sole heir to the exclusion of her sisters.

  5. Non-Prejudice to the Plaintiff: The plaintiff’s right to inherit was not vested until her father’s death, which occurred under the Civil Code. Therefore, the defendants’ status as natural children does not prejudice the plaintiff’s rights.

  6. Will and Codicil: The court did not rule on the validity of the will and codicil presented by the defendants, leaving it to the lower court to address this issue if raised by the parties.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.