Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 98 views

    Alvarado V Gaviola

    Uploaded by

    T Cel Mrmg
    Brigido Alvarado executed a notarial will disinheriting his illegitimate son Cesar and revoking a previous will. Cesar contested the will's validity claiming his father was mentally incapacitated. The court found that although the will was not read to Brigido twice as required by law, reading it aloud once in front of witnesses was substantial compliance and ensured the will's contents were known. The purpose of the law was served even if the letter was not strictly followed. The will was admitted to probate despite the technical defects in execution, so as not to defeat Brigido's intentions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Alvarado V Gaviola

    Uploaded by

    T Cel Mrmg
    98 views2 pages
    Brigido Alvarado executed a notarial will disinheriting his illegitimate son Cesar and revoking a previous will. Cesar contested the will's validity claiming his father was mentally incapacitated. The court found that although the will was not read to Brigido twice as required by law, reading it aloud once in front of witnesses was substantial compliance and ensured the will's contents were known. The purpose of the law was served even if the letter was not strictly followed. The will was admitted to probate despite the technical defects in execution, so as not to defeat Brigido's intentions.

    Original Description:

    Alvarado v Gaviola

    Original Title

    Alvarado v Gaviola

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Brigido Alvarado executed a notarial will disinheriting his illegitimate son Cesar and revoking a previous will. Cesar contested the will's validity claiming his father was mentally incapacitated. The court found that although the will was not read to Brigido twice as required by law, reading it aloud once in front of witnesses was substantial compliance and ensured the will's contents were known. The purpose of the law was served even if the letter was not strictly followed. The will was admitted to probate despite the technical defects in execution, so as not to defeat Brigido's intentions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    98 views2 pages

    Alvarado V Gaviola

    Uploaded by

    T Cel Mrmg
    Brigido Alvarado executed a notarial will disinheriting his illegitimate son Cesar and revoking a previous will. Cesar contested the will's validity claiming his father was mentally incapacitated. The court found that although the will was not read to Brigido twice as required by law, reading it aloud once in front of witnesses was substantial compliance and ensured the will's contents were known. The purpose of the law was served even if the letter was not strictly followed. The will was admitted to probate despite the technical defects in execution, so as not to defeat Brigido's intentions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Alvarado v.

    Gaviola, 226 SCRA 347


    On 5 November 1977, 79-year old Brigido Alvarado executed a notarial will entitled Huling Habilin wherein he
    disinherited an illegitimate son, petitioner Cesar Alvarado, and expressly revoked a previously executed holographic
    will at the time awaiting probate before the RTC of Laguna.
    According to Bayani Ma. Rino, private respondent, he was present when the said notarial will was executed, together
    with three instrumental witnesses and the notary public, where the testator did not read the will himself, suffering as
    he did from glaucoma. Rino, a lawyer, drafted the eight-page document and read the same aloud before the testator,
    the three instrumental witnesses and the notary public, the latter four following the reading with their own respective
    copies previously furnished them.
    Thereafter, a codicil entitled Kasulatan ng Pagbabago ng Ilang Pagpapasiya na Nasasaad sa Huling Habilin na May
    Petsa Nobiembre 5, 1977 ni Brigido Alvarado was executed changing some dispositions in the notarial will to
    generate cash for the testators eye operation. Said codicil was likewise not read by Brigido Alvarado and was read in
    the same manner as with the previously executed will.
    When the notarial will was submitted to the court for probate, Cesar Alvarado filed his opposition as he said that the
    will was not executed and attested as required by law; that the testator was insane or mentally incapacitated due to
    senility and old age; that the will was executed under duress, or influence of fear or threats; that it was procured by
    undue pressure and influence on the part of the beneficiary; and that the signature of the testator was procured by
    fraud or trick.
    Whether or not notarial will of Brigido Alvarado should be admitted to probate despite allegations of defects in the
    execution and attestation thereof as testator was allegedly blind at the time of execution and the double-reading
    requirement under Art. 808 of the NCC was not complied with.
    YES. The spirit behind the law was served though the letter was not. Although there should be strict compliance with
    the substantial requirements of law in order to insure the authenticity of the will, the formal imperfections should be
    brushed aside when they do not affect its purpose and which, when taken into account, may only defeat the testators
    will. Cesar Alvardo was correct in asserting that his father was not totally blind (of counting fingers at 3 feet) when the
    will and codicil were executed, but he can be so considered for purposes of Art. 808. That Art. 808 was not followed
    strictly is beyond cavil. However, in the case at bar, there was substantial compliance where the purpose of the law
    has been satisfied: that of making the provisions known to the testator who is blind or incapable of reading the will
    himself (as when he is illiterate) and enabling him to object if they do not accord with his wishes.
    Rino read the testators will and codicil aloud in the presence of the testator, his three instrumental witnesses, and the
    notary public. Prior and subsequent thereto, the testator affirmed, upon being asked, that the contents read
    corresponded with his instructions. Only then did the signing and acknowledgment take place.

    There is no evidence that the contents of the will and the codicil were not sufficiently made known and communicated
    to the testator. With four persons, mostly known to the testator, following the reading word for word with their own
    copies, it can be safely concluded that the testator was reasonably assured that what was read to him were the terms
    actually appearing on the typewritten documents.
    The rationale behind the requirement of reading the will to the testator if he is blind or incapable of reading the will to
    himself (as when he is illiterate), is to make the provisions thereof known to him, so that he may be able to object if
    they are not in accordance with his wishes. Although there should be strict compliance with the substantial
    requirements of law in order to insure the authenticity of the will, the formal imperfections should be brushed aside
    when they do not affect its purpose and which, when taken into account, may only defeat the testators will.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy