A GRASP ON SUCCESSION

Philippine Succession LawsImage via Wikipedia

By Beverly Caboteja
I’m looking through my notes at home , and I remember one subject, which a lot of people say , one of the most difficult yet boring subjects. It is SUCCESSION. I had no clear idea though of what kind of animal is this (not until I have studied it) because at one point, I know I have no property or rights to transfer, neither do I have the inheritance to succeed. But nobody knows what lies ahead. Maybe in the future, God willing, I can use this.
One author says that , Civil Law has and always will be one of the stabilizing factors in our daily lives. Part of this is succession. When we mention the word “succession” , some people get excited, some get nervous because basically we talk about inheritance and death, respectively. Of course, up to a certain degree we need to know about succession because the only way we can learn is through discussing it. Seldom do people talk about it because they say this is only for the rich and famous. True or not, the need still arises.
Art 777 of the Civil Code states that “ the rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent. At the moment of the decedent’s death , the heirs start to own the property , subject to the decedent’s liabilities. In fact, they may dispose of the same even while the property is under administration.”
In its generic or general sense, succession is defined as the transmission of rights and properties from one person to another. In this sense, succession may be intervivos (where transfer is effective during lifetime of the giver) or mortis causa (after his death).
Succession in its legal definition, is a mode of acquisition by virtue of which the property, rights and obligations to the extent of the value of the value of the inheritance , of a person are transmitted through his death to another or others either by his will or by operation of law (Art. 774, New Civil Code). In brief, someone gets something from another who has died.
It is true that death transfers the rights to the succession- but only if the following conditions are present, namely:
1. That indeed there has been a death (either actual or presumed)
The law is silent in determining as to when a person is deemed considered dead. Technically, a person is considered dead when all its sensory faculties, bodily activities, heart and brain systems cease to function. Yet, under the law death is not limited to natural or physical demise. It includes presumed death occasioned by prolonged legal absence.
Legally, there are two (2) kinds of presumed death: the ordinary presumption caused by ordinary absence there being no danger or idea of death and an extraordinary presumption caused by an extraordinary or qualified absence. Here in the first presumption, if a person disappears, at the end of ten (10) years, he shall be presumed dead for the purpose of opening his succession (Art 390 of the Civl Code).
On the other hand, if he disappears after the age of 75, absence of five (5) years is enough in order that his succession may be opened. Note that death takes place on the last day of the period of absence required by law.
Moreover, under Art 391 of the Civil Code, there is extraordianary presumption because of great probability of death. The law says that the following shall be presumed dead for all purposes including the division of the estate among the heirs:
a. A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage or an aeroplane which is missing, who has not been heard for four years since the loss of the vessel or aeroplane;
b. A person in the armed forces who has taken part in war, and has been missing for four years;
c. A person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances and his existence has not been known for four years.
Under these conditions, it has been held that the person is presumed to have died at the time of the disappearance, that is at the time the calamity took place and not at the end of four years. In other words, at the end of four years, the presumption will arise that death had occurred four (4)years before.
Furthermore, in both absences, succession is only of provisional character because there is always a chance that the absentee may still be alive. As such, it may be rebutted or proved as to when death actually occurred.
The problem here is, what if the absentee appears or returns? Knowingly, if the absentee appears or without appearing his existence is proved, “he shall recover his property in the condition in which it may be found and the price of any property that may have been alienated or the property acquired therewith; but he cannot claim either fruits or rent. “
2. That the rights or properties are indeed transmissible or descendible
As mentioned, inheritance includes all the property , rights and obligations of a person which are not extinguished by his death. Some rights are extinguished by death, some are not. To name few of those rights which are extinguished by death (and which therefore are not part of the estate), these include: family rights, marital and parental authorrity, support, action for legal separation, right to hold public office or private office or job. These rights have no inheritability , hence not transmissible mortis causa.
Thus, rights and obligations are generally transmissible unless purely personal.
3. That the transferee is still alive (no predecease), willing (no repudiation) and is capacitated to inherit.
It is noteworthy that if the heir instituted is incapacitated, repudiates the inheritance, or predeceases the testator, said heir inherits NOTHING. The same conclusion is reached when although the heir is ready, willling and able- the right is not transmissible or descindible- as for instance the right to support.
While it is true that a person has the right to transfer his or her inheritance but this only takes place by virtue of his will (i.e testamentary succession )or by operation of law (i.e. legal or intestate). Still, the act of such person is moderated by the law so as not to defeat the real intent or purpose of the law. So long as all the requisties concur or all requirements are complied with, succession may transpire.

LEGAL HEIRS

LEGAL HEIRS

Image via Wikipedia

By Beverly Caboteja

As is implicit in said Section 119 of the Public Land act, where the vendor is still living, he alone has the right of redemption, but if he had died, his widow and his legal heirs have that right.

As stated in Section 119: “Every conveyance of land acquired under the free patent or homestead provisions of the Public Land Act, when proper, shall be subject to repurchase by the applicant, his widow or legal heirs, within a period of five (5) years from the date of conveyance.”

It has been noted that the enumeration in the law as to who can effect the repurchase within a period of five years from the date of conveyance is not an exclusionary rule. It merely includes the persons qualified under the law to make repurchase, without regard to order of preference. Hence, the son and lawful heir of the homesteader can exercise the right of repurchase while the latter is still living, and a deed of assignment to that effect is valid.

Further, the term legal heir, as explained in the case of Medarcos v. Merrced (174 SCRA 599), is used in Section 119 in a generic sense. It is broad enough to cover any person who is called to the succession either by provision of a will or by operation of law. Thus, legal heirs, according to the Court, include both testate and intestate heirs depending upon whether succession is by the will of the testator or by law. Legal heirs are not necessarily compulsory heirs but they may be if the law so prescribes or reserves it for them. Nonetheless, well-settled is the rule that only the vendor has the right to redemption.

In the aforementioned case, as the decedents had left no will, the law supplanted its intention. Since the deceased couple were childless and are survived only by their nephew and nieces, the latter succeeded to the entire estate of the deceased.

Article 975 of the Civil Code states that “when children of one or more brothers or sisters of the deceased survive, they shall inherit from the latter by representation, if they survive with their uncles or aunts. But if they alone survive, they shall inherit in equal portions.”

Verily, the Court held that petitioners are legal heirs. Having been decreed under the rules on intestacy as entitled to succeed the estate of the Catain spouses due to the absence of compulsory heirs, they now step into the shoes of the decedents. They should be considered as among the legal heirs contemplated by Section 119 as entitled to redeem the property.

In sum, in any of the 3, the applicant, his widow or his legal heirs may avail of the right to repurchase but take note, that it is only the vendor who has the right of redemption.

Marriage without love is like running engine without oil

Image by hebedesign via Flickr

Marriage Without Love
By Beverly Caboteja

I am all here all alone in my room looking at my family picture, feeling nostalgic. I can not help but miss my family.  As I continued gazing upon it, I started to ask, why some parents can’t get married and stay get married? Why do some relationships fail? Why do families break up?

Maybe some of you have also asked the same question. Even I myself wondered why did I ask such question when in fact, I had not experienced such scenario myself.

Probably, nobody who has ever lived wished that they grow in a broken family. Nobody does. Too often we dream to be in a family where love and care always reside- a family where each member brings out the best in us. But there are always exceptions to everything. What if your family is missing a mom or dad because of separation? What might have gone wrong in the course of their marriage?

According to Justice Pineda, marriage without love is like running engine without oil. Sooner or later the engine will burn down. He added, that living together under one roof without love is to live in turmoil soaked in mental torture and suffering. So, why are these given emphasis?

Many might be caught unaware, but the law obliges the spouses now to love each other, that is to have devoted affection for one another. This calls for a relationship which is more emotional than legal, But where there is the fortune of devotion, whether spontaneous or induced, the resulting harmony and openness to sacrifice pleasantly enhance the aims of matrimonial life.

Art 149 of the Family Code of the Philippines regards the family as a basic social institution and as the foundation of the nation. This Article is in line with the policy of the State as expressed in the 1987 Constitution, to protect and strengthen the family. Hence, as mandated, “no custom, practice or agreement destructive of the family shall be recognized or given effect. “  I just remembered then one of the cases we discussed in our Family Relations class and the same was published in one of the articles of Jose V. Sison in “A law each day” of the Philippine Star.

I got amazed that studying cases in law school is also like reading short stories. But, I may say, they are not only ordinary stories. Such stories depict true pictures of life- realities at that- where any person, boy or girl, rich or poor alike can experience. Just like the story of a woman who endured almost 20 years of torture and suffering for the sake of preserving the sanctity of marriage as an inviolable social institution and the foundation of the family. The irony of her case is that when she could no longer endure the tempestuous and cruel relationship she’s even blamed for the break-up. This is the story of Thelma.

Thelma got married to Randy and they were blessed with three healthy boys. But their burning love story only lasted for three years. This resulted to their almost everyday fights. Their frequent quarrels and misunderstanding made both of their lives miserable and hellish. Everyday seemed to be a battle ground for them.

Randy blamed Thelma for being negligent of her wifely duties and for not reporting to him the wrongdoings of their children. And these quarrels were always punctuated by violence, threats and intimidation by Randy against Thelma and their children. In the process, insulting words and language were heaped upon Thelma. As an aftermath of these quarrels, Thelma would sustain bruises and scars all over her body. Thelma suffered and endured the mental and physical anguish arising from these marital fights.

But Thelma reached to a point that she could no longer succumb to such agony. It was Christmas season in 1995, when Thelma protested Randy’s decision to allow their eldest son to travel to a far away place in another city down south. As a result of the heated argument, Thelma sustained bruises all over her body and face, blood clots, and bumps on her head. When she was down on the floor because of a blow in the stomach, Randy hit her head and pointed a gun at her and asked her to leave the house.

Without second thoughts, she left the house. She went to her sister and was accompanied by her other siblings to their parents where her injuries were treated by a doctor. After how many months, Thelma filed a complaint for legal separation invoking article 55 (1) of the Family Code, because of Randy’s physical violence, threats, intimidation and grossly abusive conduct.  This article provides for the grounds where legal separation may be filed. Under this provision, the act must be directed against the (a) spouse, or (b) a common child, or (c) child of the other spouse in a previous relationship, or (d) an adopted child. The violence must be physical, and the gross abuse can be abusive words or language.

The facts of the case would show that indeed there was physical violence and gross abuse inflicted to the aggrieved party Thelma.

On Randy’s part, alibi and denial could only be his lamest defenses. While he admitted that that they had really quarrelled on December 9, 1995, he said he was the one who left their house and stayed in their Greenhills Condominium until five days later when he returned on December 14, 1995 and learned that Thelma had already left the house. He then averred that Thelma’s petition for legal separation should be denied since she is guilty of abandonment.

He raised the defense, that under Article 56 (4) of the FC, the petition for legal separation shall be denied when both parties have given ground for it. Clearly, Randy would not want a legal separation as their conjugal properties would be liquidated and Thelma would get her share.

This case then raises an issue whether or not Randy is correct on his defense?

The Supreme Court answers in negative. The abandonment referred to by the Family Code is abandonment without justifiable cause for more than one year. In this case, Thelma has left Randy due to the latter’s gross abusive conduct. Such abandonment is not the abandonment contemplated by the said provision (Art 56 (4) FC).

The concept of abandonment, as predicated by law, is the “desertion of the conjugal dwelling without intention of returning. There must be an absolute cessation of marital relations, duties and rights with intention of perpetual separation.” This must not only be physical estrangement but also amounts to financial and moral desertion. As to the presumption of abandonment, the same must be rebutted by the presentation of clear, strong and convincing evidence that the absent spouse did not intend to leave the present spouse and the family.  Furthermore, the law requires, for purposes of legal separation, an abandonment of the other spouse for more than one year which must be unjustified.

In the given case, Thelma has adequately proven the presence of a ground for legal separation. The repeated physical violence and grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner are lucid and sufficient grounds for the prayed relief. The everyday bruises, scars, black eye and blows bore by Thelma are ample evidences of repeated physical violence. Hence, she is entitled to the relief as provided by law.

It is further noted in this case that, “our Constitution is indeed committed to the policy of strengthening the family as a basic social institution. But it does not establish the parameters of State protection to marriage and the family as that remains within the province of the legislature which shall define all legal aspects of marriage and prescribe the strategy and the modalities to protect it and put into operation the constitutional provision that protect the same.”

With the enactment of the Family Code, Randy’s undeserved acts could not be tolerated by law especially if they demean the rights of Thelma who all the while has tried to salvage the entire household. This would also defeat the purpose of meeting the ends of justice. (Ong vs. Ong, G.R. 153206, October 23, 2006)

So just like any short story, the story of Thelma, imposes a dispassionate reflection. The choice of a lifetime marriage partner is certainly one of the most important decisions a person can make. And that every family is unique, with each marriage partner bringing experiences and values from his or her own family. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a perfect marriage, “a marriage made in heaven”.

No. Not at all.