Case Summary (G.R. No. L-20234)
Petitioners
Heirs at law of the late Bernabe de la Cerna, challenging the validity and effect of the joint will insofar as it affects their inheritance rights.
Respondents
Manuela Rebaca Potot, testamentary heir under the joint will, and the Court of Appeals, Sixth Division, which affirmed probate of Bernabe’s will and dismissed the partition suit.
Key Dates
• May 9, 1939 – Execution of the joint will by Bernabe and Gervasia.
• August 30, 1939 – Death of Bernabe; subsequent probate and decree admitting his will.
• October 14, 1952 – Death of Gervasia; attempted probate of her share dismissed for failure to appear.
• December 23, 1964 – Decision by the Supreme Court.
Applicable Law (1935 Constitution Era)
• Civil Code of 1889, Art. 669: Prohibition of joint wills.
• Civil Code of the Philippines (1950), Art. 818: Continued prohibition of joint wills.
• Rules on probate jurisdiction and conclusive effect of final decrees.
Facts of the Case
Bernabe and Gervasia executed a joint will leaving their marital properties to their niece, Manuela. Upon Bernabe’s death, the Court of First Instance admitted the will to probate in 1939, issuing a final decree. After Gervasia’s death in 1952, an attempt to probate the same will insofar as it concerned her share was dismissed for lack of prosecution. Petitioners filed for partition of the properties, claiming the joint will was void under the Civil Code.
Issue
Whether the 1939 final decree admitting Bernabe’s joint will to probate is conclusive and whether Gervasia’s share under the joint will remains binding despite the statutory prohibition of joint wills.
Ruling on Bernabe’s Will
The Supreme Court held that the 1939 probate decree, though issued in error under a statute prohibiting joint wills, is conclusive as to Bernabe’s testamentary disposition. A final judgment in probate binds all parties and cannot be collaterally attacked. Petitioners are therefore precluded from contesting Bernabe’s share.
Conclusive Effect of Probate
The Court reaffirmed that probate courts have jurisdiction over wills and that final decrees become res judicata. Even if based on an erroneous interpretation of law, the decree’s conclusiveness preserves stability in property rights. Public policy favors finality, preventing endless litigation.
Effect on Gervasia’s Estate
The decree of probate in 1939 did not and could not adjudicate Gervasia’s interest, as she was alive. Upon her death, her participation in the joint will must be reevaluated afresh. Jo
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-20234)
Facts
- On May 9, 1939, spouses Bernabe de la Cerna and Gervasia Rebaca executed a joint last will and testament in the local dialect.
- They bequeathed two parcels of land (Tax Nos. 4676 and 6677 in sitio Bucao, barrio Lugo, Borbon, Cebu), with all improvements thereon, to their niece Manuela Rebaca (married to Nicolas Potot), citing their childlessness.
- The will provided that each spouse would enjoy the fruits of the lands during their lifetime.
- Bernabe de la Cerna died on August 30, 1939; Gervasia Rebaca survived him and later died on October 14, 1952.
Procedural History
- Upon Bernabe’s death, the will was probated before the Court of First Instance of Cebu (Special Proceedings No. 499). After publication and no opposition, the court, by order of October 31, 1939, legalized the document, granted widow’s rights to Gervasia, and ordered summary distribution in favor of Manuela Rebaca de Potot, subject to a P500 bond.
- After Gervasia’s death, Manuela Potot filed another probate petition (Special Proceedings No. 1016-R) on November 6, 1952. The petition was dismissed on March 30, 1954 for failure to appear at the hearing.
- The Court of First Instance later heard a petition for partition and declared the joint will null and void under Articles 669 (old Civil Code) and 818 (new Civil Code) prohibiting joint wills.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals (Sixth Division) reversed, holding the 1939 probate decree conclusive as to Bernabe’s will and enforceable despite