Title
Testate Estate of Rigor vs. Rigor
Case
G.R. No. L-22036
Decision Date
Apr 30, 1979
A priest’s bequest of ricelands to a male relative studying for the priesthood failed due to no qualified devisee, passing the lands to legal heirs via intestate succession.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 124013)

Key Dates

• Will executed: October 29, 1933
• Testator’s death: August 9, 1935
• Probate ordered: December 5, 1935 (Court of First Instance, Tarlac)
• Project of partition approved: August 15, 1940
• Petition for new administrator filed: February 19, 1954
• Petition for delivery of lands filed: January 31, 1957
• Lower court’s inoperative-bequest order: June 28, 1957 (reconsidered December 10, 1957)
• Court of Appeals affirmance: August 1, 1963
• Supreme Court decision: April 30, 1979

Applicable Law

• 1935 Philippine Constitution
• Civil Code of the Philippines (Old Code articles 789, 888 [now 956], 912(2) [now 960(2)], 1025; New Code article 870)
• Rule against perpetuities

Testamentary Provisions of the Will

Father Rigor devised four titled riceland parcels to “any nearest male relative who shall study for the ecclesiastical career and be ordained a priest,” subject to these conditions:

  1. Absolute prohibition against sale.
  2. Right to enjoy and administer lands from start of sacred theology studies through priestly life, forfeited upon discontinuation of studies.
  3. Annual obligation to celebrate twenty masses for the repose of the testator’s and his parents’ souls.
  4. Automatic divestment and transfer of administration to the incumbent Parish Priest of Victoria upon devisee’s excommunication.
  5. Interim administration by the Parish Priest of Victoria during periods with no qualified devisee, with the administrator to retain 5% of annual produce plus mass fees and deposit the balance in bank under the legacy’s name.

Initial Probate and Partition Proceedings

• Administratrix (Florencia Rigor-Escobar) submitted a partition plan (1940) allocating the ricelands to the legacy, to be held by the Parish Priest in trust until a qualified male relative claimed them.
• Judge Cruz approved the plan without interpreting the complex conditions.
• No nephew claimed the devise; administratrix and heirs withheld delivery; estate remained unsettled.

Parish Priest’s Subsequent Petitions

• 1954: Petition for appointment of new administrator and accounting of produce.
• 1957: Petition for delivery of ricelands to the church as trustee.
• Heirs counter-petitioned to declare the bequest inoperative, asserting no nearest male relative ever studied for the priesthood.

Lower Court Rulings

• June 28, 1957: Probate court declared the devise inoperative and awarded the ricelands to legal heirs.
• December 10, 1957 (reconsideration): Court found a grandnephew, Edgardo G. Cunanan, was a seminarian and ordered delivery to the Parish Priest as trustee.

Court of Appeals Decision

• Recognized a testamentary trust for the nearest male relative seeking holy orders but applied the rule against perpetuities, limiting enforcement to twenty years post-death.
• Since no qualified claimant emerged within that period, the devise lapsed and the lands passed to legal heirs under old Civil Code articles 888 and 912(2) and New Code article 870.

Supreme Court’s Analysis of Testator’s Intention

• Primary rule: the will is the testator’s law; intention must be gleaned from its plain terms.
• “Nearest male relative” refers to those living at the testator’s death (Civil Code art. 1025), not an indefinite class born or qualifying there



...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.