Scribd
Upload
79 views2 pages

D-06. Natividad v. Gabino Facts

The testator bequeathed ownership of a property to Basilia with the condition that if Basilia dies, the property would be delivered to Emilio upon payment of P4,000 to Lorenzo. Emilio claimed Basilia only had usufruct and ownership belonged to him. The court held the condition was valid, as a testator can impose conditions on heirs and legatees that conform to law. The testator intended for Basilia to have ownership during her lifetime, with the property reverting to the lawful heir after. In a separate case, properties were inherited through intestate succession. The court applied reserva troncal, requiring the ascendant inheriting from a descendant who acquired the property by

Uploaded by

Ciamille Edaño
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
79 views2 pages

D-06. Natividad v. Gabino Facts

The testator bequeathed ownership of a property to Basilia with the condition that if Basilia dies, the property would be delivered to Emilio upon payment of P4,000 to Lorenzo. Emilio claimed Basilia only had usufruct and ownership belonged to him. The court held the condition was valid, as a testator can impose conditions on heirs and legatees that conform to law. The testator intended for Basilia to have ownership during her lifetime, with the property reverting to the lawful heir after. In a separate case, properties were inherited through intestate succession. The court applied reserva troncal, requiring the ascendant inheriting from a descendant who acquired the property by

Uploaded by

Ciamille Edaño
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

D-06. Natividad v.

Gabino
Facts:
The testator Salvador was married to Anselma and had a daughter
named Higinia. Anselma died first and later Higinia followed leaving her
children Emilio and Purificacion.
Salvador bequeathed to Basilia the ownership of the subject property
with a condition that should Basilia die, Lorenzo shall be obliged to deliver
the property to Emilio upon payment by the latter to the former of P4,000.
Emilio proposed a project of partition whereby Basilia is a mere
usufructuary of the property, the P4,000 is a legacy to Lorenzo, and the
ownership of the property belongs to Emilio. Basilia claimed that she is
entitled to the dominion and ownership of the property.
Issue:
Whether or not the condition is valid
Held:
Yes. A person is free to make his will as may best please him, provided
the testamentary provisions conform to law. He may impose conditions,
either with respect to the institution of heirs or to the designation of legatees,
and, when the conditions imposed do not fall within the Civil Code with
respect to heirs and legatees, they shall be governed by the rules on
conditional obligations.
It cannot be understood that the testator meant to bequeath to Basilia
the mere usufruct of the property inasmuch as he bequeathed her the
ownership of the property. It is true that she could not make any disposal but
if the institution of legacies depends on the free will of the testator, and that
if the testator intended no more than that Basilia should enjoy the ownership
of the property during her lifetime, this disposition is not contrary to law
inasmuch as the testator intended that the property should revert to its lawful
heir.
E-10. Carrillo v. De Paz
Facts:
Severino and Petra were the owners of Lot 221. Petra Garcia died.
Severino sold to Honoria his ½ portion. Honoria and other members of her
family were massacred by the Japanese. Specpro 3 settled the estates of
Severino and Petra, while Specpro 23 settled the estates of the Honoria’s
family. In Specpro 3, Lot 221 was adjudicated to Francisca.
In Specpro 23, the lower court applied the rule on survivorship
presumption whereby Simeon died first giving his properties to his children
Adolfo, Honoria, Consuelo and Ligaya. Honoria, Consuelo and Ligaya died
next giving their properties to their mother Isabel, while those of Ligaya
went to her son Ernesto. Isabel died next giving her properties to her son
Adolfo. Adolfo died last leaving his properties to his grandmother Agustina.
Agustina succeeded to the properties from Honoria and Isabel including ½ of
Lot 221.
Agustina filed an action against Francisca to recover ½ of Lot 221 in
Specpro 3. Agustina died. In Specpro 23, the court decreed that the
properties inherited by Agustina were subject to reserva troncal in favor of
Ernesto.
Issue:
Whether or not reserva troncal was established
Held:
Yes. According to Article 891, the ascendant who inherits from his
descendant any property which the latter may have acquired by gratuitous
title from another ascendant, or a brother or sister, is obliged to reserve such
property as he may have acquired by operation of law for the benefit of
relatives who are within the third degree and who belong to the line from
which said property came.
The reserva troncal arose in Specpro 23 when Agustina acquired by
operation of law all the properties of her grandson Adolfo, who acquired
them by gratuitous title from another ascendant, her mother Isabel.

You might also like