Title
Luz Delos Santos, et al. vs. Demy Alma M. Delos Santos, et al.
Case
G.R. No. 258887
Decision Date
Jul 31, 2023
The Supreme Court upheld that co-heirs are entitled to their rightful shares of conjugal properties, annulling a settlement that excluded them.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 258887)

Applicable Law

The case invokes the provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the New Civil Code of the Philippines, and relevant rules under the Rules of Court pertaining to inheritance laws and property settlements. The specific legal principles surrounding conjugal partnerships, extrajudicial settlements, and the rights of heirs are central to the dispute.

Factual Background

This dispute arose from the extrajudicial settlement of estate executed in 2009 by Emerenciano and Luz, claiming sole heirship over Adalia's estate and subsequently communicating transactions that excluded Demy and her siblings. Emerenciano and Luz’s execution of this settlement and subsequent deeds led to the reissuance of property titles favoring their children, prompting the respondents to file a complaint for annulment after discovering the conveyances. The respondents argue that they were unlawfully deprived of their shares in the inheritance, as Adalia’s children and legitimate heirs.

Judicial Findings by the Regional Trial Court (RTC)

The RTC ruled in favor of the respondents, recognizing them as legal heirs entitled to their shares of Adalia’s estate. The court noted that the conveyances executed by Emerenciano were void, as respondents were not considered parties in the EJSW, which misrepresented their heirship status. However, the RTC allowed for the possibility of the petitioners (Emerenciano’s children with Luz) receiving a portion related to Emerenciano’s share, but required future liquidation and partition of the estate.

Appellate Review

The Court of Appeals upheld the RTC’s decision, dismissing the petitioners' claims of laches and prescription. It confirmed the lower court's ruling, which emphasized that respondents were indeed legal heirs, negating the assertions made regarding their lack of awareness of the transactions during Emerenciano’s lifetime. The appellate court affirmed that misrepresentation regarding heirship rendered the extrajudicial settlement void in part concerning the respondents.

Supreme Court’s Ruling

The Supreme Court partly granted the petition, reinforcing that a separate proceeding to establish heirship was unnecessary. It acknowledged the respondents’ existing legal status as heirs by virtue of law, given their established relationship with the deceased. It concluded that the EJSW and associated conveyances were void regarding the respondents and sanctioned Emerenciano’s children's rights over the surviving half of the conjugal estate, which required future liquidation. The ruling emphasized that the properties remained co-owned by both sides pending proper division.

Co

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.