Anda di halaman 1dari 13

SECTION 6. - Disinheritance Art. 915.

A compulsory heir may, in consequence of disinheritance, be deprived of his legitime, for causes expressly stated by law. (848a) Article 915 talks about the consequence of being disinherited DISINHERITANCE is the process or act, thru a testamentary disposition of depriving in a will any compulsory heir of his legitime for true and lawful causes. Disinheritance refers only to a compulsory heir Disinheritance is made through a testamentary disposition. There must be a will. There is no disinheritance in legal or intestate succession, only in testate succession Disinheritance can be made only for causes expressly stated by law A compulsory heir cannot deprive his compulsory heir of his legitime unless expressly provided by law. The law expressly provides only one way, valid disinheritance.

Art. 916. Disinheritance can be effected only through a will wherein the legal cause therefor shall be specified. (849) Art. 917. The burden of proving the truth of the cause for disinheritance shall rest upon the other heirs of the testator, if the disinherited heir should deny it. (850)

Requisites for a valid disinheritance: 1. The disinheritance must be made in valid will The disinheritance can also be effected by virtue of a codicil Disinheritance can also be made in a separate will Disinheritance can also be made in Incorporation By Reference 2. The disinheritance must be made expressly, not impliedly 3. There must be a legal cause for the disinheritance 4. The disinheritance must be made for a true cause 5. The disinheritance must be for and existing cause A conditional disinheritance is not allowed: I will disinherit my son if he will kill me in the future But a conditional revocation of disinheritance is allowed: My son attempted for my life. I will disinherit him. But if he will ask for my forgiveness, I will revoke the disinheritance 6. The disinheritance must be total or complete

7. The cause must be stated in the will itself 8. The heir disinherited must be clearly identified, so that there will be no doubt as to who is really being disinherited. 9. The will in which the disinheritance is stated must not have been revoked, at least in so far as the disinheritance is concerned

In other words, 1. Made in a valid will. (Art. 916.)2. Identity of the heir is clearly established 3. For a legal cause. (Articles 919 to 921.) 4. Expressly made 5. Cause stated in the will. 6. Absolute or unconditional (not "if he doesn't apologize.") 7. Total 8. Cause must be true and if challenged by the heir, it must be proved to be true (proponent of disinheritance has the burden of proof.) Art. 918. Disinheritance without a specification of the cause, or for a cause the truth of which, if contradicted, is not proved, or which is not one of those set forth in this Code, shall annul the institution of heirs insofar as it may prejudice the person disinherited; but the devises and legacies and other testamentary dispositions shall be valid to such extent as will not impair the legitime. (851a) Article 918 talks of invalid disinheritance Instances wherein there is ineffective disinheritance: 1. Disinheritance without specification of the cause 2. For a cause which is not a true cause 3. For a cause not given in law Consequence if there is an invalid disinheritance It shall annul the institution of the heirs but in so far as only for the purpose of completing the legitime of the compulsory heir But the devises and legacies and other testamentary dispositions shall be valid to such extent as will not impair the legitime EXAMPLE # 1: The testator instituted A and B in his will and disinherited C for the reason that C is ugly . A, B and C are all his legitimate children. His estate is worth P 120,000. The effect is it shall annul the institution of heirs insofar as only it may prejudice the legitime of the invalidly disinherited heir.

Legitime = P 120,000 / 2 = P 60,000 Legitime of each child = P 60,000 / 3 = P 20,000 Distribution: C A B = = = P 20,000 (legitime) P 20,000 + 30,000 = P 50,000 P 20,000 + 30,000 = P 50,000

EXAMPLE # 2: Same example with additional data that X is given a legacy of P 30,000 cash. C = P 20,000 A = P 20,000 + P 15,000 B = P 20,000 + P 15,000 X = P 30,000 Remember, in the order of distribution, the devise or legacy shall be given ahead of the inheritance.

PRETERITION The omission may be either intentional or unintentional as long as the deprivation is total. With cause or without cause Annuls the institution

May exist with or without a will. Q: How does preterition exist without a will? A: During the lifetime of the testator, he can make donations and the donations will be collated later on. If during his lifetime, he gave all his properties to one of his children. So upon his death, there is nothing left. So upon his death, there is no will but still there is preterition because there is omission. The institution is always void The institution will be followed unless there is another cause for not following the institution which is not because of

VALID DISINHERITANCE Disinheritance is always intentional because it has to be provided for in the will. The cause must be provided for by law. (Articles 920 & 921 NCC) The disinherited heir inherits nothing from the legitime & the free portion. There must always be a will

the disinheritance but for other causes. PRETERITION IMPERFECT DISINHERITANCE The institution of heirs is completely The institution remains valid, but must annulled be reduced insofar as the legitime has been impaired If there is a devise or legacy, he will Devises, legacies or other testamentary receive the devise or legacy as long as it dispositions shall be valid. Even if the is not inofficious person is just an instituted heir, he will still receive his share or inheritance. It is important to distinguish whether Even if the person is just an instituted the person is an instituted heir or a heir, as long as the institution does not devisee or legatee prejudice the legitime of the invalidly disinherited heir, then, that heir shall receive the inheritance Art. 919. The following shall be sufficient causes for the disinheritance of children and descendants, legitimate as well as illegitimate: (1) When a child or descendant has been found guilty of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her spouse, descendants, or ascendants; (2) When a child or descendant has accused the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment for six years or more, if the accusation has been found groundless; (3) When a child or descendant has been convicted of adultery or concubinage with the spouse of the testator; (4) When a child or descendant by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue influence causes the testator to make a will or to change one already made; (5) A refusal without justifiable cause to support the parent or ascendant who disinherits such child or descendant; (6) Maltreatment of the testator by word or deed, by the child or descendant; (7) When a child or descendant leads a dishonorable or disgraceful life; (8) Conviction of a crime which carries with it the penalty of civil interdiction. (756, 853, 674a)

Article 919 talks about the grounds for disinheritance Under Article 919, the person who is disinherited is a child or descendant of the testator, whether that child is legitimate or illegitimate

(1) When a child or descendant has been found guilty of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her spouse, descendants, or ascendants
There is final judgment or conviction already. Final conviction is necessary. "Attempt" is a generic term which includes all kinds of commission, whether frustrated or consummated. Intent to kill must be present. At the time of the execution of the will, it is not necessary that the judgment is final He can be found guilty and the judgment may become final after the death as long as it becomes final. Disinheritance can be given effect once the judgment becomes final already. There must be an intent to kill. Even if the descendant is just an accomplice or accessory, this paragraph applies Even if the law says attempt, the more reason that frustrated and consummated stages are to be included -Reckless imprudence the child cannot be disinherited.

(2) When a child or descendant has accused the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment for six years or more, if the accusation has been found groundless.
The accusation must be in connection with a criminal case. The crime carries an imprisonment of more than six (6) years. -Accusation is a generic term which includes: (i) filing of an information; (ii) presenting incriminating evidence; (iii) acting as a witness against the ascendant. Accusation is groundless.-- Ascendant is acquitted on the finding that: (i) there is no crime; or (ii) that the ascendant did not commit it. -If the ascendant was acquitted on reasonable doubt, the ascendant cannot disinherit because the accusation is not groundless.

-Malicious prosecution are covered by the cause. Also Includes false testimony.

(3) When a child or descendant has been convicted of adultery or concubinage with the spouse of the testator.
The law here says convicted of adultery or concubinage, unlike the ground in legal separation where preponderance of evidence is sufficient. Example: When your parent remarries someone young and you have an affair with that person. The guilty spouse is deemed disinherited by operation of law in case legal separation decreed by the court. (Art. 63 (par. 4) FC. No need of formal disinheritance in the will. There has to be conviction.

(4) When a child or descendant by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue influence causes the testator to make a will or to change one already made
There has to be another will made. This goes into the very essence of will-making-the freedom deprived by the child or descendant. It does not mention prevent because if he was prevented, how can he make a will of disinheritance? Prevention is a ground for unworthiness (Art. 1032, par. 7) which has the same effect as disinheritance

(5) A refusal without justifiable cause to support the parent or ascendant who disinherits such child or descendant
The determination whether or not the refusal of the child is without just cause will depend upon the means of the child and the necessity of the ascendant. Refusal, itself, is not a ground; it must be unjustified. E.g., In the FC, there is an order of preference for support. The person may be willing to support but it is not economically feasible. A person must support his wife and children first. There is here a justified refusal. -To justify disinheritance under this provision, there must first be a demand either judicial or extra-judicial. The child despite financial capability does not show any concern to the ascendant and there is no valid ground for the child to withhold it, he can be disinherited.

(6) Maltreatment of the testator by word or deed, by the child descendant

or

This ground of maltreatment is present only with respect to disinheritance of a descendant No conviction is required as compared to number 1 wherein conviction is needed. This may be proven by preponderance of evidence. It is possible for an act not to fall in number 1 but to fall in number 6. E.g., The son shoots his father. The father is wounded but he recovers. The father does not want a scandal so he does not file charges against his son. So, he disinherits his son not under number 1 but under no. 6.

(7) life

When a child or descendant leads a dishonorable or

disgraceful

What is dishonorable or disgraceful life is a question which is addressed to the judgment of the court but generally, the act must not be an isolated or single act. Example: Having sex with a boyfriend. Dishonorable or disgraceful life must have some kind of continuity or constancy. It has to be a way of life like prostitution or drug pushing.. The child or descendant may be a male or a female

(8) Conviction of a crime which carries with it the penalty of civil interdiction
Generally, crimes which are punishable by death penalty, reclusion perpertua and reclusion temporal, all of these carry with it the accessory penalty of civil interdiction. (See: Art 40 and 41, RPC)

Art. 920. The following shall be sufficient causes for the disinheritance of parents or ascendants, whether legitimate or illegitimate: (1) When the parents have abandoned their children or induced their daughters to live a corrupt or immoral life, or attempted against their virtue; (2) When the parent or ascendant has been convicted of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her spouse, descendants, or ascendants; (3) When the parent or ascendant has accused the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment for six years or more, if the accusation has been found to be false;

(4) When the parent or ascendant has been convicted of adultery or concubinage with the spouse of the testator; (5) When the parent or ascendant by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue influence causes the testator to make a will or to change one already made; (6) The loss of parental authority for causes specified in this Code; (7) The refusal to support the children or descendants without justifiable cause; (8) An attempt by one of the parents against the life of the other, unless there has been a reconciliation between them. (756, 854, 674a) This article deals with the causes disinheriting an ascendant The disinherited heir may controvert the grounds stated in the will (1) When the parents have abandoned their children or induced their daughters to live a corrupt or immoral life, or attempted against their virtue Abandonment here does not even have to amount to a crime as long as he has already deprived his child of the basic necessity or he has not been seen for a number of years Abandonment refers to either physical, educational or moral as long as you neglect your child This may be applied by analogy to sons (2) When the parent or ascendant has been convicted of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her spouse, descendants, or ascendants

(3) When the parent or ascendant has accused the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment for six years or more, if the accusation has been found to be false (4) When the parent or ascendant has been convicted of adultery or concubinage with the spouse of the testator (5) When the parent or ascendant by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue influence causes the testator to make a will or to change one already made Numbers 2, 3, 4, and 5 are the same as those in Article 919 Code

(6) The loss of parental authority for causes specified in this

In this case, this should refer to those causes by which the parent or ascendant is at fault. These causes are provided for in Article 330 and 332 of the Civil Code.

ARTICLE 330 NEW CIVIL CODE. The father and in a proper case the mother, shall lose authority over their children: (1) When by final judgment in a criminal case the penalty of deprivation of said authority is imposed upon him or her; (2) When by a final judgment in legal separation proceedings such loss of authority is declared. (169a) ARTICLE 332 NEW CIVIL CODE. The courts may deprive the parents of their authority or suspend the exercise of the same if they should treat their children with excessive harshness or should give them corrupting orders, counsels, or examples, or should make them beg or abandon them. In these cases, the courts may also deprive the parents, in whole or in part, of the usufruct over the child's property, or adopt such measures as they may deem advisable in the interest of the child. (171a) A child under parental authority cannot execute a will If the parent regains parental authority, there are 2 views:

1. The disinheritance will remain notwithstanding that the parent has regain his or her parental authority because the reason for the disinheritance is not really the loss of parental authority but the cause for the loss of parental authority. 2. The disinheritance is already deemed ineffective because upon the death of the child there is really no more loss of parental authority. (7) The refusal to support the children or descendants The same with Article 919 other, unless there has been without justifiable cause

(8) An attempt by one of the parents against the life of the a reconciliation between them.

-The child, the son, the daughter or the grandchild may disinherit his parent who has attempted against the life of the other parent -No need for conviction because the law says attempt, so mere attempt

-But if there is a reconciliation between the parents, then, the child cannot anymore disinherit because if the offended party has deemed it proper to forgive the other spouse, then, with more reason the child because he is not the party directly offended Art. 921. The following shall be sufficient causes for disinheriting a spouse: (1) When the spouse has been convicted of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her descendants, or ascendants; (2) When the spouse has accused the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment of six years or more, and the accusation has been found to be false; (3) When the spouse by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue influence cause the testator to make a will or to change one already made; (4) When the spouse has given cause for legal separation; (5) When the spouse has given grounds for the loss of parental authority; (6) Unjustifiable refusal to support the children or the other spouse. (756, 855, 674a) When the spouse has given cause for legal separation -In this case, there is yet no decree of legal separation but only the occurrence of the cause for legal separation. -You do not have to secure a decree of legal separation first before you can disinherit your spouse who has given ground Grounds for Legal Separation: ARTICLE 55 NEW CIVIL CODE. A petition for legal separation may be filed on any of the following grounds: (1) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner; (2) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation; (3) Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement; (4) Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six years, even if pardoned; (5) Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent; (6) Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;

(7) Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines or abroad; (8) Sexual infidelity or perversion; (9) Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner; or (10) Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year. For purposes of this Article the term "child" shall include a child by nature or by adoption. (97a) -Note that even if there is merely an attempt against the life of the other spouse, it can be a ground for disinheritance because it is a ground for legal separation. In this ground, there is no conviction, but mere attempt -But under Article 921, paragraph 1, take note that what it provides is conviction: When the spouse has been convicted of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her descendants, or ascendants -If one of the spouses attempt against the life of a common child or descendant, there has to be conviction in order that it may constitute a ground for disinheritance because it is not a ground for legal separation -If there already has been a decree of legal separation, there is no more need to disinherit the offending spouse because by operation of law, the inheritance given to the other spouse is revoked and he or she is also disqualified from inheriting from the innocent spouse. Art. 922. A subsequent reconciliation between the offender and the offended person deprives the latter of the right to disinherit, and renders ineffectual any disinheritance that may have been made. (856)
1. Reconciliation.-- Two persons who are at odds decide to set aside their differences and to resume their relations. They need not go back to their old relation. A handshake is not reconciliation. It has to be something more. It must be clear and deliberate. 2. What is the effect of reconciliation? a. If there is no will.-- It deprives the offended person of his right to disinherit the offending person. b. If already disinherited.-- It sets aside disinheritance already made. 3. This is inconsistent with Art. 1033. In disinheritance, reconciliation is sufficient. It need not be in writing. In unworthiness, however, it needs to be in writing. This is inconsistent because when you are dealing w/ the express will to disinherit, reconciliation is enough when you are dealing w/ the presumed will, it must be in writing.

Art. 923. The children and descendants of the person disinherited shall take his or her place and shall preserve the rights of compulsory heirs with respect to the legitime; but the disinherited parent shall not have the usufruct or administration of the property which constitutes the legitime. (857) Article 923 talks about the right of representation of the heirs of the disinherited heir

EXAMPLE: Testator has 2 children, A and B. A has 2 children, C and D. A is disinherited. Even if A can no longer inherit, C and D will now represent A but only with respect to the legitime of A. The fault of A should not be imputed against As heirs. An heir who has been disinherited can be represented PER CAPITA means one inherits in his own right. In the example, B inherits in his own right. PER STIRPES means one inherits by virtue of representation. In the example, C and D inherit as representatives of A When there is a will, representation takes place only with respect to the legitime. But if there is no will, representation pertains to the ENTIRE portion -A will containing only a disinheritance is an indirect disposition. It is a valid will PRINCIPLE: When there is a will, the representation of the heir of the disinherited heir will only be to the EXTENT OF THE LEGITIME. But with respect to the free portion, that goes to the instituted heir UNLESS the will does not dispose of the entire property and that there is intestacy the own heirs of the disinherited heir may still part of the free portion The disinherited heir who is represented has no usufruct or administration of the property which constitutes the legitime. Even if his own children will get the property which he should have gotten had he not been disinherited, he cannot use it and he cannot administer it There is no representation with respect to the spouse. right of representation pertains only to the descending and direct line There is no right of representation in the ascending line

EXAMPLE: X ---------| | A B -------| | a1

a2

a. X made a will giving Y, a friend, 1/2 of his estate. This covered the free portion. X validly disinherited A. Can a1 and a2 represent A? Yes. Children of A can represent him as to the legitime only because the free portion has been given to B. b. X validly disinherits A. X did not dispose of his free portion. How much will the children of A inherit from X? They will inherit A's share in the legitime and in the free portion, 1/4 -- legitime,. 1/4 -- free portion. The representative of the disinherited person will receive both the legitime and the free portion which might have accrued to the person disinherited if he had not been disinherited.