Case Summary (G.R. No. 174333)
Petitioner
Juan Miciano, as judicial administrator of the estate of Joseph G. Brimo, sought court approval of his proposed scheme of partition and distribution of assets, including the sale of the deceased’s business to Pietro Lanza.
Respondent
Andre Brimo, brother of the testator and one of the instituted legatees, filed opposition and assigned multiple errors in the trial court’s orders approving the partition scheme, excluding him from participation, denying reconsideration, validating the sale to Pietro Lanza, and refusing to defer action pending proof of Turkish law.
Key Dates
– Filing of the administrator’s scheme of partition (date not specified)
– Opposition and interlocutory motions (subsequent to filing)
– Decision rendered by the Supreme Court on November 1, 1924
Applicable Law
– Civil Code of Spain of 1889, as adopted in the Philippines
• Article 10: Succession governed by the national law of the decedent in respect to order, rights and validity of dispositions
• Article 792: Conditions impossible or contrary to law or good morals are deemed unwritten and do not prejudice heirs or legatees
Opponent’s Assigned Errors
Andre Brimo challenged: (1) approval of the partition scheme; (2) exclusion from inheritance despite being a named legatee; (3) denial of his motion for reconsideration; (4) ratification of the sale and transfer of the decedent’s business to Pietro Lanza; and (5) refusal to consider Turkish law or delay proceedings until he could present evidence on that law.
Requirement to Prove Foreign Law
Under established Philippine jurisprudence, foreign or national law must be pleaded and proved by the party invoking it. The opponent failed to introduce any evidence as to the content of Turkish succession law. In the absence of such proof, Philippine courts presume the foreign law to be identical to Philippine law. The trial court’s discretion in refusing further continuances to allow proof of Turkish law was proper, as the appellant already had ample opportunity to present competent evidence.
Validity of Testamentary Dispositions
Because no evidence demonstrated that the will’s provisions violated Turkish succession rules, and those provisions were not contrary to Philippine law, the partition scheme conformed to the national law of succession doctrine. Accordingly, the approval of the administrator’s partition plan was not in error.
Conditional Legatee Institution
The will’s second clause purported to condition any legacy in favor of relatives upon their respecting the testator’s wish that his estate be governed by Philippine, not Turkish, law—penalizing noncompliance by annulling dispositions for those who did not accede.
Illegality of the Condition
Article 792 of the Civil Code renders void any condition that is impossible, contrary to law, or against public policy. A stipulation that rejects the testator’s own national law runs afoul of A
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 174333)
Facts of the Case
- Joseph G. Brimo, a Turkish citizen by conquest, died owning property in the Philippine Islands and left a will.
- Juan Miciano was appointed judicial administrator of the estate.
- Andre Brimo, brother of the deceased and named legatee, opposed the administrator’s partition scheme.
- Pietro Lanza purchased the decedent’s business, and the administrator executed a deed transferring the business to him.
Procedural History
- The administrator submitted a proposed scheme of partition to the trial court.
- Andre Brimo filed opposition and was excluded from participation; his motion for reconsideration was denied.
- The trial court approved the partition scheme and the business transfer to Pietro Lanza.
- Andre Brimo appealed to the Supreme Court, assigning five errors relating to the partition, his exclusion, the sale, and the trial court’s handling of Turkish law.
Assigned Errors by Appellant
- Approval of the partition scheme despite alleged conflict with Turkish succession laws.
- Denial of his participation in the inheritance.
- Denial of his motion for reconsideration of the partition order.
- Approval of Pietro Lanza’s purchase and the deed of transfer of the business.
- Declaration that Turkish laws were irrelevant and refusal to defer approval pending proo