Caneda Vs CA G.R. No. 103554 Case Digest

TEODORO CANEDA, et al.
, petitioners,
vs.
HON. COURT OF APPEALS and WILLIAM CABRERA, respondents.
G.R. No. 103554 May 28, 1993
FACTS:
On December 5, 1978, Mateo Caballero, a widower without any children, executed a last will and
testament before three attesting witnesses and was duly assisted by his lawyer and a notary public.
It was declared that the testator was leaving by way of legacies and devises his real and personal
properties to persons of whom do not appear to be related to the testator.
On April 4, 1979, Mateo Caballero himself filed a petition before the lower court of Cebu seeking the
probate of his last will and testament but the testator passed away before his petition could finally
be heard.
The petitioners, claiming to be nephews and nieces of the testator, instituted a second petition,
entitled "In the Matter of the Intestate Estate of Mateo Caballero". They opposed the probate of the
Testator's will and the appointment of a special administrator for his estate.
The probate court rendered a decision declaring the will in question as the last will and testament
of the late Mateo Caballero.
Petitioners elevated the case in the Court of Appeals. They asserted therein that the will in question
is null and void for the reason that its attestation clause is fatally defective since it fails to
specifically state that the instrumental witnesses to the will witnessed the testator signing the will
in their presence and that they also signed the will and all the pages thereof in the presence of the
testator and of one another.
The CA affirmed the decision of the trial court, and ruling that the attestation clause in the last will
of Mateo Caballero substantially complies with Article 805 of the Civil Code.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the attestation clause in question may be considered as having substantialy
complied with the requirements of Art. 805 of the Civil Code.
RULING:
No. The Supreme Court finds the present petition to be meritorious.
Article 805 requires that:
Every will, other than a holographic will, must be subscribed at the end thereof by the testator
himself or by the testator's name written by some other person in his presence, and by his
express direction, and attested and subscribed by three or more credible witnesses in the
presence of the testator and of one another.
The testator or the person requested by him to write his name and the instrumental witnesses
of the will, shall also sign, as aforesaid, each and every page thereof, except the last, on the left
margin, and all the pages shall be numbered correlatively in letters placed on the upper part
of each page.
The attestation should state the number of pages used upon which the will is written, and the
fact that the testator signed the will and every page thereof, or caused some other person to
write his name, under his express direction, in the presence of the instrumental witnesses, and
that the latter witnessed and signed the will and all the pages thereof in the presence of the
testator and of one another. If the attestation clause is in a language not known to the witness,
it shall be interpreted to them.
Article 805 requires that the witness should both attest and subscribe to the will in the presence of
the testator and of one another. While it recites that the testator indeed signed the will and all its
pages in the presence of the three attesting witnesses and states as well the number of pages that
were used, the same does not expressly state therein the circumstance that said witnesses
subscribed their respective signatures to the will in the presence of the testator and of each other.
The SC also held that what is then clearly lacking is the statement that the witnesses signed the will
and every page thereof in the presence of the testator and of one another. As petitioners correctly
observed, the presence of said signatures only establishes the fact that it was indeed signed, but it
does not prove that the attesting witnesses did subscribe to the will in the presence of the testator
and of each other.
Furthermore, under Article 809, the defects and imperfections must only be with respect to the
form of the attestation or the language employed therein. Such defects or imperfections would not
render a will invalid should it be proved that the will was really executed and attested in
compliance with Article 805. In this case, the defect is not only in the form or language of the
attestation clause but the total absence of a specific element required by Article 805 to be
specifically stated in the attestation clause of a will.
Hence, omissions which can be supplied by an examination of the will itself, without the need of
resorting to extrinsic evidence, will not be fatal and, correspondingly, would not obstruct the
allowance to probate of the will being assailed. However, those omissions which cannot be supplied
except by evidence aliunde would result in the invalidation of the attestation clause and ultimately,
of the will itself.

Caneda Vs CA G.R. No. 103554 Case Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Caneda Vs CA G.R. No. 103554 Case Digest

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Caneda Vs CA G.R. No. 103554 Case Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TEODORO CANEDA, et al.

G.R. No. 103554 May 28, 1993

No. The Supreme Court finds the present petition to be meritorious.

Article 805 requires that:

You might also like

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