Case Summary (G.R. No. 35586)
Key Dates
The decision in this case was rendered on October 31, 1932.
Applicable Law
The governing law is found in Section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which outlines the requirements for the attestation clause and the signing of wills.
Probate Denial by Lower Court
The trial court denied the probate of Caridad Alcantara de Gorostiza's will on the grounds that the attestation clause was defective. Specifically, the clause lacked explicit mention that the testatrix signed each page of the will, as mandated by the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. The attestation clause submitted read that the testatrix signed the will in the presence of the witnesses, but it did not clarify that each page had been signed.
Contentions of the Parties
The petitioner argued that the phrase "the testatrix, whose name is signed hereinabove" referred to not just the signature at the end of the will but also to the signatures on the margin of the pages. Conversely, the appellee contended that the wording in the attestation clause only confirms that the testatrix signed the will in the presence of the witnesses without further acknowledgment of signatures on each page.
Interpretation of the Attestation Clause
Upon examination, the court concluded that the attestation clause complied with statutory requirements. The court rejected the appellant's interpretation of "hereinabove" as referencing more than the signature at the end of the will. Furthermore, the term "same" was determined to refer exclusively to the will itself, not implying the signatures on each page. The court reasoned that the language in the attestation can validly indicate compliance with the law, even if not perfectly mirroring statutory language.
Admission of Evidence and Will Examination
The court clarified that while no evidence can be admitted to rectify omissions in the attestation clause, the examination of the will itself is permitted. The will demonstrated that the testatrix and witnesses indeed signed on the margins and at the end, lending credence to the assertion that the requirements were fulfilled.
Divergence in Legal Doctrines
The court noted a division in Philippine jurisprudence regarding the interpretation of wills, highlighting a strict construction approach versus a more liberal perspective. The court acknowledged prior cases that favored a rigid interpretation but suggested that a decision favoring the validity of
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 35586)
Case Overview
- The case revolves around the probate of the will of Caridad Alcantara de Gorostiza, which was denied by the trial court.
- The primary reason for the denial was the alleged failure of the attestation clause to indicate that the testatrix signed every page of the will, as mandated by Section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Attestation Clause Analysis
- The attestation clause reads: "We, the undersigned attesting witnesses... do hereby certify that the testatrix... has signed the same in our presence..."
- The central question is whether the attestation clause is fatally defective or if it complies with legal requirements, allowing the court to respect the wishes of the deceased.
Arguments of the Parties
Petitioner and Appellant (Consorcia Dichoso de Ticson):
- Claims that "hereinabove" refers not only to the signature at the end but also to the signatures on the margins of the two pages.
- Argues that "the same" refers to the two pages of the will and not just the will itself.
Opposing Party (Marino de Gorostiza):
- Contends that references in the attestation clause only confirm that the testatrix signed the will in the witnesses' presence, without explicitly stating she signed every page.
Judicial Interpretation
- The court examined the attestation clause closely and determined it met statutory requirements.
- The interpretation by the appellant regarding "hereinabove" was rejec