Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 31 views

    Enriquez Vs Abadia

    Uploaded by

    Jan Niño
    1. This case involves the will of Fr. Abadia that was executed in 1923 as a holographic will, which was not permitted under Philippine law at that time. 2. The trial court admitted the will to probate, relying on laws in effect at the time of the hearing that permitted holographic wills. However, the Supreme Court overturned this, citing that a will's validity depends on the laws in effect at the time of execution. 3. As holographic wills were invalid under the laws in 1923 when this will was executed, the will is void, even if laws later permitted it. The testator's heirs inherit intestate since the will is invalid.

    Copyright:

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

    Enriquez Vs Abadia

    Uploaded by

    Jan Niño
    31 views2 pages
    1. This case involves the will of Fr. Abadia that was executed in 1923 as a holographic will, which was not permitted under Philippine law at that time. 2. The trial court admitted the will to probate, relying on laws in effect at the time of the hearing that permitted holographic wills. However, the Supreme Court overturned this, citing that a will's validity depends on the laws in effect at the time of execution. 3. As holographic wills were invalid under the laws in 1923 when this will was executed, the will is void, even if laws later permitted it. The testator's heirs inherit intestate since the will is invalid.

    Original Title

    Enriquez vs Abadia

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. This case involves the will of Fr. Abadia that was executed in 1923 as a holographic will, which was not permitted under Philippine law at that time. 2. The trial court admitted the will to probate, relying on laws in effect at the time of the hearing that permitted holographic wills. However, the Supreme Court overturned this, citing that a will's validity depends on the laws in effect at the time of execution. 3. As holographic wills were invalid under the laws in 1923 when this will was executed, the will is void, even if laws later permitted it. The testator's heirs inherit intestate since the will is invalid.

    Copyright:

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

    Enriquez Vs Abadia

    Uploaded by

    Jan Niño
    1. This case involves the will of Fr. Abadia that was executed in 1923 as a holographic will, which was not permitted under Philippine law at that time. 2. The trial court admitted the will to probate, relying on laws in effect at the time of the hearing that permitted holographic wills. However, the Supreme Court overturned this, citing that a will's validity depends on the laws in effect at the time of execution. 3. As holographic wills were invalid under the laws in 1923 when this will was executed, the will is void, even if laws later permitted it. The testator's heirs inherit intestate since the will is invalid.

    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

    Enriquez vs Abadia

    FACTS:
    Fr. Abadia, parish priest of Talisay, Cebu, executed a holographic will in 1923. He died on
    January 14, 1943, in the municipality of Aloguinsan, Cebu. On October 2, 1946, Andres
    Enriquez, one of the legatees filed a Petition for its probate. This was opposed by some of the
    cousins and nephew who would inherit the estate of the deceased if he left no will.
    The court of first instance found and declared the Will as a holographic will. The court admitted
    to probate the will of Fr Sancho although at the time of its execution and at the time of
    testator’s death, holographic wills were still not permitted by law, in light of the new Civil Code
    (which permitted holographic wills) that was effective at the time of the hearing. It applied a
    liberal interpretation of the law.
    The oppositors appealed.
    ISSUE: Is the will valid?
    RULING: The will is denied probate. THE WILL IS VOID.
    1. At the time of the execution of the will in 1923 and at the time of death of Fr. Sancho Abadia
    in 1943, holographic wills were not permitted.
    2. Art. 795 of the CC provides: “The validity of a will as to its form depends upon the observance
    of the law in force at the time it is made.” Thus a validity of a will is to be judged not by the law
    enforce at the time of the testator's death or at the time the supposed will is presented in court
    for probate or when the petition is decided by the court but at the time the instrument was
    executed. One reason in support of the rule is that although the will operates upon and after
    the death of the testator, the wishes of the testator about the disposition of his estate among
    his heirs and among the legatees is given solemn expression at the time the will is executed,
    and in reality, the legacy or bequest then becomes a completed act. This ruling has been laid
    down by this court in the case of In re Will of Riosa, 39 Phil., 23. It is a wholesome doctrine and
    should be followed.
    3. Although there is a view that the intention of the testator should be the ruling and
    controlling factor and that all adequate remedies and interpretations should be resorted to in
    order to carry out said intention, and that new statutes passed after the execution of the will
    and after the death of the testator should be applied to validate wills defectively executed
    according to thelaw in force at the time of the exection. We should not forget that from the day
    of the death of the testator, if he leaves a will, the title of the legatees and devisees under it
    become a vested right, protected under the due process clause of the constitution against a
    subsequent change in the statute adding new legal requirements of execution of wills which
    would invalidate such a will.
    4. The general rule is that the Legislature can not validate void wills. When one executes a will
    which is invalid for failure to observe and follow the legal requirements at the time of its
    execution then upon his death he should be regarded and declared as having died intestate,
    and his heirs will then inherit by intestate succession, and no subsequent law with more liberal
    requirements or which dispenses with such requirements as to execution should be allowed to
    validate a defective will and thereby divest the heirs of their vested rights in the estate by
    intestate succession.
    Note:
    When did the NCC take efect? August 30, 1950
    The testator executed his will in 1923. It was admitted to probate in 1952. That time the NCC
    had taken effect. Is that will valid? No, Art. 795 provides that the validity of a will as to its form
    depends upon the observance of the law in force at the time it is made.

    Obviously, when the will was made, the law did not recognize holographic wills. That will was
    void as of the date when it was made and it remains void althroughout notwithstanding the
    amendment of the law. So if the will is void at the time of its execution, it remains void even if
    at the time of death of the testator, it was made valid or even when the probate was filed in
    court, such will is recognized by law.

    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