Title
De Bacayo vs. De Borromeo
Case
G.R. No. L-19382
Decision Date
Aug 31, 1965
Melodia Ferraris, presumed dead, left an estate with no direct heirs. Her nieces/nephew and aunt claimed inheritance. Court ruled nieces/nephew exclude aunt, prioritizing closer familial ties under succession laws.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-19382)

Key Dates and Applicable Law

  • Petition for summary settlement filed on December 22, 1960
  • Resolution excluding petitioner as heir dated September 20, 1961
  • Motion to reconsider denied on October 16, 1961
  • Decision rendered on August 31, 1965
    The applicable law is the Civil Code of the Philippines in force at that time, including articles 966, 975, 1001, 1004, 1005, and 1009, and relevant provisions of the 1889 Spanish Civil Code as precedent.

Factual Background

Melodia Ferraris left several properties in Cebu City, including a one-third share in the estate of her aunt valued at approximately P6,000. She died intestate with no spouse, descendants, or ascendants surviving her. The only surviving relatives were collateral relatives: the petitioner, an aunt (half-sister of Melodia’s father), and the appellees, children of Melodia’s predeceased full-blood brother.

Issue Presented

The central issue is who is entitled to inherit Melodia Ferraris’ estate under intestate succession laws when only collateral relatives survive—specifically, whether an aunt (petitioner) can inherit alongside or should be excluded by nieces and nephews (respondents) who are children of the decedent’s predeceased brother.

Trial Court Ruling

The lower court excluded the aunt petitioner from succession on the ground that the nephews and nieces, as children of a brother, are nearer in degree of relationship (two degrees) and succeed by right of representation, whereas the aunt is three degrees removed. The court relied on Article 1009 of the Civil Code which excludes more distant collaterals when closer relatives such as brothers, sisters, or their children survive.

Petitioner’s Argument

The petitioner argued that she and the nephews and nieces are equally related at three degrees of consanguinity because degrees in collateral succession are measured by ascending to the common ancestor and then descending to the heir (Article 966). Furthermore, she maintained that under Article 975, nieces and nephews inherit by representation only if they survive alongside uncles or aunts; otherwise, they inherit in equal portions and cannot exclude other collaterals such as an aunt.

Supreme Court’s Analysis on Degrees of Relationship

The Court agreed that both the aunt and the nephews and nieces are three degrees removed from the decedent, confirming the proper method of degree calculation per Article 966. The Court also acknowledged that nephews and nieces derive their rights by representation only when uncles or aunts coexist with them as heirs, citing Article 975.

Interpretation of Relevant Civil Code Provisions on Succession Preference

The Court emphasized that the nephews and nieces, as children of the decedent’s brother, exclude other collateral relatives like uncles, aunts, and cousins in inheriting intestate under Articles 1001, 1004, 1005, and 1009 of the Civil Code. Article 1009 specifically requires the absence of brothers, sisters, or their children before more distant relatives can inherit.

Historical Precedent from Spanish Civil Code

The Court referenced analogous provisions in the 1889 Spanish Civil Code which also placed brothers, sisters, and their children ahead of other collateral relatives and the surviving spouse in intestate succession, confir

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.