Anda di halaman 1dari 1

applying the rules on intestate ion.

The reason is
RE: CLAIMS FOR BENEFITS OF THE HEIRS OF that sometimes the estate is not even sufficient
THE LATE MARIO V. to satisfy the legitimes. The legitimes of the
CHANLIONGCO, FIDELA B. primary compulsory heirs, like a child or
CHANLIONGCO, MARIO B. descendant, should first be satisfied.
CHANLIONGCO II, MA. ANGELINA In this case the decedent's legal heirs are his
C. BUENAVENTURA and MARIO C. legitimate child, his widow and two intimate
CHANLIONGCO, JR. children. His estate is partitioned among those
Facts: heirs by giving them their respective time.
This matter refers to the claims for retirement The legitimate child gets one-half of the estate as
benefits filed by the heirs of the late ATTY. his legitime which is regarded as his share as a
MARIO V. CHANLIONGCO an attorney of the legal heir Art 888, Civil Code).
Court, it is in the records that at the time of his The widow's legitime is one-fourth of the estate.
death, Atty. Chanliongco was more than 63 years That represents also her share as a legal heir.
of age, with more than 38 years of service in the The remaining one-fourth of the estate, which is
government. He did not have any pending the free portion, goes to the illegitimate children
criminal administrative or not case against him, in equal shares, as their legitime, Pursuant to the
neither did he have any money or property provision that 'the legitimate of the illegitimate
accountability. The highest salary he received children shall be taken from the portion of the
was P18,700.00 per annum. estate at the free disposal of the testator,
provoked that in no case shall the total legitime
Aside from his widow, Dra. Fidel B. Chanliongco of such illegitimate children exceed that free
and an only Intimate Mario it appears that there portion, and that the legitime of the surviving
are other deceased to namely, Mrs. Angelina C. , spouse must first be fully satisfied.
Jr., both born out of wedlock to Angelina R The rule in Santillon vs. Miranda, L-19281, June
Crespo, and duly recognized by the deceased. 30, 1965, 14 SCRA 563, that when the surviving
Except Mario, Jr., who is only 17 years of age, all spouse concurs with only one legitimate child, the
the claimants are of legal age. spouse is entitled to one-half of the estate and
the gets the other half, t to article 996 of the
According to law, the benefits accruing to the Civil Code, does not apply to the case because
deceased consist of: (1) retirement benefits; (2) here intimate children concur with the surviving
money value of terminal leave; (3) life insurance spouse and the intimate child.
and (4) refund of retirement premium. In this case, to divide the estate between the
From the records now before US, it appears that surviving spouse and the ligitemate child that
the GSIS had already the release the life deprive the illegitimate children of their legitime.
insurance proceeds; and the refund of rent to the So, the decendent's estate is distributed in the
claimants. proportion of 1/2 for the legitimate child, 1/4 for
the widow and 1/8 each for the two illegitimate
RULING: children.
Also not of possible application to this case is the
The record also shows that the late Atty. rule that the legal of an acknowledge natural
Chanliongco died ab intestato and that he filed or child is 1/2 of the legitime of the legitimate child
over to state in his application for membership of that the of the spurious child is 2/5 of that of
with the GSIS the beneficiary or benefits of his the of the intimate child or 4/5 of that of that of
retirement benefits, should he die before the acknowledged natural child.
retirement. Hence, the retirement benefits shall The rule be applied because the estate is not
accrue to his estate and will be distributed among sufficient to cover legitimes of all compulsory
his Legal heirs in with the benefits on intestate heirs. That is one of the flaws of the law of
s , as in the caw of a fife if no benefit is named in succession. A situation as in the instant case may
the policy (Vda. de vs. GSIS, L-28093, Jan. 30, arise where the illegitimate children get less than
1971, 37 SCRA 315, 325). their legitime. With respect to the decendant's
unpaid salary and the money value of his leave,
the same are conjugal properties because of the
AQUINO, J., concurring: rule that property "obtained by the or work, or as
salary of the spouses, or either of them", is
There may be instances, like the instant case, conjugal in character.
where in legal succession the estate is distributed
according to the rules on legitime without