SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR SEPTEMBER 15, 2017


SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR SEPTEMBER 15, 2017

Study the notes and cases in the text book (“Special Proceedings: An Exhaustive Exposition”) from page 37 to page 112 (Section 2, Rule 73 up to Section 13, Rule 76 of the Rules of Court).

SECTION 2, RULE 73. WHERE ESTATE SETTLED UPON

DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE

Conjugal partnership ends upon the death of either spouse

Ventura v. Militante, GR 63145. Oct. 5, 1999, 316 SCRA 226

Methods of liquidating the property of a conjugal partnership if one spouse dies

Death of one spouse terminates the power of management of the surviving spouse; power passed on to the appointed administrator

Cruz v. De Jesus, GR L-30491. Mar. 2, 1929, 52 Phil., 870

Conjugal property and not just decedent’s estate is under administration

Picardal v. Lladas, GR L-21309. Dec. 29, 1967, 21 SCRA 1438

Claims against the conjugal property should be brought in the probate proceedings

Calma v. Tañedo, GR L-44602. Nov. 28, 1938, 66 Phil. 594

Conveyance made by the surviving spouse of the conjugal property may be void

Corpuz v. Corpuz, GR L-7495. Sept. 30, 1955, 97 Phil. 655

Conjugal partnership of deceased spouses may be settled or liquidated in the probate proceedings of either

PCIB v. Escolin, GR L-27860 and L-27896. Mar. 29, 1974, 56 SCRA 266

SECTION 3, RULE 73. PROCESS

Probate court may issue necessary warrants and processes

Sec. 3, Rule 73 RoC

SECTION 4, RULE 73. PRESUMPTION OF DEATH

Presumptive death

Art. 390, CC

Other persons considered absent for the purpose of opening succession

Article 391 of the Civil Code

Sec. 4, Rule 73, RoC

Presumption of death cannot be the subject of an independent court proceeding

In re Szatraw, GR L-1780. Aug. 31, 1948, 81 Phil. 461

Judicial declaration that a person is presumptively dead does not attain finality; no court declaration needed for presumption to arise

Valdez v. Republic, GR 180863. Sept. 8, 2009, 598 SCRA 646

Presumption of death should yield to preponderance of evidence

Lucero v. NLRC, GR 74197. Oct. 28, 1991, 203 SCRA 218).

RULE 74. SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE

General rule on judicial administration of decedent’s estate; exceptions

SECTION 1, RULE 74. EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT BY

AGREEMENT BETWEEN HEIRS

Extrajudicial settlement of the estate; appointment of administrator not necessary

Guico v. Bautista, GR L-14921, Dec. 31, 1960, 110 Phil. 584

Special proceedings can be compelled when estate debts cannot be collected extrajudicially

Cadag v. Treananes, 40 OG 4th supp. 324; Torres v. Torres, GR L-19064, Jan. 31, 1964, 10 SCRA 185

Rationale for the rule on extrajudicial settlement of the estate

Vda. De Rodriguez v. Tan, GR L-6044. Nov. 24, 1952, 92 Phil., 273

Provision not mandatory even though the decedent left no debts

Rodriguez v. Tan, GR L-6044. Nov. 24, 1952, 92 Phil. 273

What constitutes good and compelling reasons

Intestate Estate of Mercado v. Magtibay, GR L-6829. Dec. 29, 1954. 96 Phil, 383

Pereira v. CA, GR L-81147. June 20, 1989, 174 SCRA 154).

Some circumstances not considered as good reasons

Substantive requisites of extrajudicial settlement

Rebuttable presumption that decedent left no debts

When bond is required; real property subject to a 2-year lien

Sec. 4, Rule 74, RoC; Rebong v. Ibañez, GR L-1578, Sept. 30, 1947, 79 SCRA 324

Adjudication requisites

Requisites common to the 2 modes of extrajudicial settlement

Affidavit of self-adjudication by sole heir

Vda. de De la Rosa v. Heirs of Vda. de Damian, GR 155733. Jan. 27, 2006. 480 SCRA 334

Procedural requisites of extrajudicial settlement between heirs

When the subject of division is a realty; extent of lien

Is the required public instrument under Section 1 of Rule 74 constitutive and not merely evidential of partition?

Hernandez v. Andal, GR L-273. Mar. 29, 1947, 78 Phil. 196

Second sentence of Section 1 of Rule 74 an exception to the general rule

Portugal v. Portugal-Beltran, GR 155555, Aug. 16, 2005, 467 SCRA 184

Ex-parte proceeding

Cua v. Vargas, GR No. 156536. Oct. 31, 2006, 506 SCRA 374

Publication requirement only intended to protect creditors and not to deprive heirs of their lawful participation

Cua v. Vargas, GR 156536, Oct. 31, 2006, 506 SCRA 374).

Partition not included in statute of frauds

Application of the statute

Gomez v. Salcedo, GR 7821. Dec. 31, 1913. 26 Phil., 485

Almirol v. Montserrat, GR 23717. Sept. 28, 1925. 48 Phil. 67

Oral partition enforced in equity when performed

Hernandez v. Andal, GR L-273. Mar. 29, 1947, 78 Phil. 196

Section 1 of Rule 74 not constitutive but merely evidential of partition; purpose of the registration requirement

Hernandez v. Andal, GR L-273. Mar. 29, 1947, 78 Phil. 196

Effect of an unregistered extrajudicial settlement

Vda. de Reyes v. CA, GR 92436 July 26, 1991. 199 SCRA 646

Remedies of unpaid creditor and defrauded party after the extrajudicial settlement

Finality of partition

Mendiola v. Mendiola, GR 26977, Nov. 27, 1906. Phil. 71

Remedies of aggrieved parties against the extrajudicial settlement or summary settlement

Remedies for an aggrieved co-heir

Recourse in case of disagreement among co-heirs

Remedy of a non-participating heir

Prescriptive period for non-participating heirs

Sps. Alfredo v. Sps. Borras, GR 144225, June 17, 2003. 404 SCRA 145

Exception to prescription of action for reconveyance

Millena v. CA, GR 127797. Jan. 31, 2000, 324 SCRA 126

Rodriguez v. Director of Lands, GR L-9941. Aug. 7, 1915. 31 Phil. 272

SECTION 2, RULE 74. SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF SMALL VALUE

Estate of small value

 Summary procedure defined

Abarro v. De Guia, GR L-47317, June 10, 1941. 72 Phil. 245

Requisites for summary settlement

Sampilo v. CA, GR L-10474. Feb. 28, 1958, 103 Phil. 70

Distributees to receive and enter into possession

Claims of heirs adverse to decedent’s; exception

Guzman v. Anog, GR L-10618. Oct. 26, 1917, 37 Phil. 61

Estate of Francisco v. Carreon, GR L-5033. July 28, 1954, 95 Phil. 237

SECTION 3, RULE 74. BOND TO BE FILED BY

DISTRIBUTEES

Bond to be filed; amount

SECTION 4, RULE 74. LIABILITY OF DISTRIBUTEES AND ESTATE

Right to compel judicial settlement

Sec. 4, Rule 74, RoC

Claim against the bond or real estate or both

Domingo v. Roces, GR 147468. Apr. 9, 2003, 401 SCRA 197

When judicial settlement of the estate may be compelled

Two-year prescriptive period

Pedrosa v. CA, GR 118680. Mar. 5, 2001. 353 SCRA 620

Rule covers transfers of real property to any person; effects of the provision

Cancellation of annotation of lien on the title of real property after 2 years

Purpose of the annotation; creation of a legal encumbrance or lien

Tan v. Benolirao, GR 153820. Oct. 16, 2009, 604 SCRA 36

Substitution of a bond for the 2-year lien has no basis in the Rules

Rebong v. Ibañez, GR L-1578, Sept. 30, 1947, 79 Phil. 324

Remedies of the unpaid creditor of an estate summarily settled

Bar against distributees from objecting to an extrajudicial partition after the expiration of 2 years

Sampilo v. CA, GR L-10474. Feb. 28, 1958, 103 Phil. 70

Constructive notice vis-à-vis prescription of an action to contest an extrajudicial partition; two-year prescriptive period

PEZA v. Fernandez, GR 138971. June 6, 2001, 358 SCRA 489

Buyers bound by annotation per Section 4 of Rule 74

David v. Malay, GR 132644, Nov. 19, 1999

Vazquez v. CA, GR 83759, July 12, 1991, 199 SCRA 102

SECTION 5, RULE 74. PERIOD FOR CLAIM OF MINOR OR INCAPACITATED PERSON

Period to present a claim for a minor, incapacitated person, prisoner or a person out of the country

Sec. 5, Rule 74, RoC

Effect of Section 5, Rule 74 not being annotated on the certificate of title

Estate of Francisco v. Carreon, GR L-5033. June 28, 1954, 95 Phil. 237

RULE 75. PRODUCTION OF WILL. ALLOWANCE OF WILL NECESSARY

SECTION 1, RULE 75. ALLOWANCE NECESSARY, CONCLUSIVE AS TO EXECUTION

Will defined

Art. 783, CC

Art. 784, CC

Probate or allowance of will defined

Art. 838, CC

Ajero v. CA, GR 106720, Sept. 15, 1994, 236 SCRA 488

Probate does not deal with the intrinsic validity of the will

Probate of will mandatory

Guevara v. Guevara, GR L-48840. Dec. 29, 1943, 74 Phil. 479

Luzon Surety Co., Inc. v. Quebrar, GR L-40517. Jan. 31, 1984, 127 SCRA 296

Due execution of the will or its extrinsic validity define

Pastor, Jr. v. CA, GR L-56340. June 24, 1983, 207 Phil. 758

Nature and characteristics of a probate proceeding

Nature of action or proceeding; how determined

Vda. de Manalo v. CA, GR 129242, Jan. 16, 2001, 349 SCRA 135

Notice by publication essential to validity of the proceeding

Manalo v. Paredes, GR 24168, Sept. 22, 1925. 47 Phil. 938

Eusebio v. Valmores, GR L-7019, May 31, 1955. 96 Phil. 163

Who may file a petition for probate

Alaban v. CA, GR 156021. Sept. 23, 2005, 470 SCRA 697

Venue and jurisdiction; proper court

Probate court bereft of power to adjudicate title to properties 

Nittscher v. Nittscher, GR 160530, Nov. 20, 2007, 537 SCRA 681

Probate concerned only with the determination of the extrinsic validity of a will

Vda. de Ramos v. CA, GR L-40804. Jan. 31, 1978, 81 SCRA 393

Probate of a will conclusive as to its due execution and validity  

Rodriguez v. Borja (GR No.L-21993, June 21, 1966, 17 SCRA 418)

Doubts to be resolved in favor of testacy

Rodriguez v. CA, GR L-28734, Mar. 28, 1969, 27 SCRA 546

Testate proceedings for the settlement of the estate of a deceased person take precedence over intestate proceedings  

Sec. 2, Rule 75, RoC

SECTION 3, RULE 75. EXECUTOR TO PRESENT WILL AND ACCEPT OR REFUSE TRUST.

Duty of the executor named in the will

SUBJECT TO FINE FOR NEGLECT

Failure by the custodian or executor to fulfill his duties

SECTION 5, RULE 75. PERSON RETAINING WILL MAY BE COMMITTED

Person failing to deliver a will may be ordered detained  

ALLOWANCE OF WILL

Who may petition for the probate of a will 

Teotico v. Del Val, GR L- 18753. Mar. 26, 1965, 13 SCRA 406

Indirectly interested person cannot interfere in probate 

Rodriguez v. De Borja, GR L-21993. June 21, 1966, 17 SCRA 41

Effect of probate of a will   

Palaganas v. Palaganas, GR 169144. Jan. 26, 2011, 640 SCRA 538

When the probate court may rule on issues other than the intrinsic validity of a will; case lawsDue execution of the will or its extrinsic validity defined

Baltazar v. Laxa, GR 174489. Apr. 11, 2012, 669 SCRA 249

Requisites of due execution

SECTION 3, RULE 76. COURT TO APPOINT TIME FOR PROVING WILL. NOTICE THEREOF TO BE PUBLISHED

Notice of time and place for proving the will 

Rodriguez v. Borja, GR L-21993, June 21, 1966, 17 SCRA 418

Notice required to be personally given only to known heirs, legatees, and devisees; case law

Alaban v. CA, GR 156021, Sept. 23, 2005, 470 SCRA 697

Publication not required for testator filing the petition himself

Abut v. Abut, GR L-26743. May 31, 1972, 45 SCRA 326 Sec. 4, Rule 76, RoC

Three weeks successively construed

Sec. 4, Rule 76, RoC

Persons to be given notice

Modes and periods of notification

Probate of a will a proceeding in rem; notice by publication a constructive notice to the whole world 

Joson v. Nable, GR L-3450. Sept. 19, 1950. 87 Phil. 337

SECTION 5, RULE 76. PROOF AT HEARING. WHAT SUFFICIENT IN ABSENCE OF CONTEST

Publication and notice must be shown first

Unson v. Abella, GR 17857, June 12, 1922. 43 Phil. 494

Uncontested notarial wills

Sec. 7, Rule 76, RoC Sec. 5, Rule 76, RoC

Contested notarial will; an instance where a party may impeach own witness

Sec. 11, Rule 76, RoC

Lost or destroyed holographic wills cannot be probated; exception

Sec. 5, Rule 76, RoC

SECTION 6, RULE 76. PROOF OF LOST OR DESTROYED WILL. CERTIFICATE THEREUPON

Facts that should be proved to allow a lost or destroyed willLost or destroyed will not proved by bare testimony; exception    

Sec. 8, Rule 76, RoC

SECTION 9, RULE 76. GROUNDS FOR DISALLOWING WILL

Grounds for disallowing a will under the Rules of Court 

Art. 839, CC

Lists exclusive; no other grounds that would disallow a will

Rey v. Cartagena, GR 34288, Nov. 10, 1931. 56 Phil. 282

Joint probate of separate wills executed by spouses who died simultaneously

Art. 818, CC

Laws governing the validity of a will as to its execution and form

Article 795 of the Civil Code

SECTION 10, RULE 76. CONTESTANT TO FILE GROUNDS OF CONTEST

Contestant to file opposition stating his grounds therefor   

Sec. 11, Rule 76, RoC

SECTION 12, RULE 76. PROOF WHERE TESTATOR PETITIONS FOR ALLOWANCE OF HOLOGRAPHIC WILL

Proof necessary if the testator himself files the petition for probate

Contested holographic wills

Contested notarial wills

SECTION 11, RULE 76. SUBSCRIBING WITNESSES PRODUCED OR ACCOUNTED FOR WHERE WILL CONTESTED

Sec. 10, Rule 76, RoC

In the matter of probation of the will of Riosa, GR L-14074, Nov. 7, 1918. 39 Phil. 23

Vda. De Perez v. Tolete, GR 76714. June 2, 1994, 232 SCRA 722

Substantial compliance rule

Pecson v. Coronel, GR L-20374, Oct. 11, 1923. 45 Phil. 216

Grounds for disallowing a will under the Civil Code

Sec. 9, Rule 76, RoC

Proof when the witnesses are dead, insane or do not reside in the Philippines

SECTION 8, RULE 76. PROOF WHEN WITNESSES DEAD OR INSANE OR DO NOT RESIDE IN THE PHILIPPINES

Proof when the witnesses are not residents of the province

SECTION 7, RULE 76. PROOF WHEN WITNESSES DO NOT RESIDE IN PROVINCE

Rodelas v. Aranza, GR L-58509. Dec. 7, 1982, 119 SCRA 16

Proof of will

Gan v. Yap, GR L-12190. Aug. 30, 1958. 104 Phil. 509

Contested holographic will

Sec. 11, Rule 76, RoC

Uncontested holographic wills

Sec. 8, Rule 76, RoC

Sec. 5, Rule 76, RoC

Uncontested will; how proved

Sec. 5, Rule 76, RoC

Where notice not necessary

Mercado v. Santos, GR 45629. Sept. 22, 1938, 66 Phil. 215

Notice of the time and place of hearing

SECTION 4, RULE 76. HEIRS, DEVISEES, LEGATEES, AND EXECUTORS TO BE NOTIFIED BY MAIL OR PERSONALLY

Basa v. Mercado, GR 42226. July 26, 1935, 61 Phil. 632

Publication and notice requirement for ante mortem probate

Perez v. Perez, GR L-14781 July 15, 1959. 105 Phil. 1132

Service of notice upon the heirs a matter of procedural convenience and not a jurisdictional requisite

Sec. 3, Rule 76, RoC

Sec. 3, Rule 76, RoC

When may the court act on a will delivered to it

Sec. 3, Rule 76, RoC       

Pastor, Jr. v. CA, GR L-56340 June 24, 1983, 207 Phil. 758     

Jurisdictional facts

Contents of the petition for probate

SECTION 2, RULE 76. CONTENTS OF PETITION

Mercado v. Santos, GR 45629. Sept. 22, 1938, 66 Phil. 215

Delivery of the will to the court sufficient even if no petition filed yet

Mere copy of the will attached to the petition deemed sufficient

When is jurisdiction acquired by the probate court

Paras v. Narciso, GR 10959. Nov. 2, 1916, 35 Phil. 244

Person interested in the estate or interested party defined

Sec. 1, Rule 76, RoC

SECTION 1, RULE 76. WHO MAY PETITION FOR THE

RULE 76. ALLOWANCE OR DISALLOWANCE OF WILL

Sec. 5, Rule 75, RoC 

SECTION 4, RULE 75. CUSTODIAN AND EXECUTOR

Sec. 3, Rule 75, RoC

Duty of the custodian of the will to deliver it to the court or to the executor

SECTION 2, RULE 75. CUSTODIAN OF WILL TO DELIVER

Uriarte v. CFI of Negros, GR L-21938-39. May 29, 1970, 33 SCRA 252

Santos v. Manarang, GR L-8235, Mar. 19, 1914. 27 Phil. 209

Intestacy is subordinate to testacy

Imprescriptibility of probate

Procedure after delivery will to court or upon filing of petition for probate

Castañeda v. Alemany, GR 1439. Mar. 19, 1904, 03 Phil. 26

Probate proceedings not adversarial; best evidence to be presented

Pastor, Jr. v. CA, GR L-56340. June 24, 1983, 207 Phil. 758

Probate court’s limited authority

Cuizon v. Ramolete, GR L-51291 May 29, 1984, 129 SCRA 495

SECTION 13, RULE 76. CERTIFICATE OF ALLOWANCE ATTACHED TO PROVE WILL. TO BE RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF REGISTER OF DEEDS

Certificate of allowance of the will to be issued by the court

Sec.13, Rule 76, RoC

Probate order is final and appealable

Montañano v. Suesa, GR L-4724, Dec. 24, 1909. 14 Phil. 676

Fernandez v. Dimagiba, GR L-23638. Oct. 12, 1967, 21 SCRA 428

Advertisements

SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR SEPTEMBER 8, 2017


SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR SEPTEMBER 8, 2017
SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DECEASED PERSONS
1. Settlement of estate of deceased persons; what it intends to achieve and what it seeks to establish
2. Rights to succession; when transmitted
• Article 777 of the Civil Code
3. Right to the property transmitted from the moment of death; case law
• Bunyi v. Factor. GR 172547. June 30, 2009, 591 SCRA 350
4. Intestacy inferior to testacy
• Castro v. Martinez Gallegos, GR L-3880. Mar. 9, 1908, 10 Phil. 307
5. Modes of settlement of the estate of a deceased person
• Rule 69, RoC
• Sec. 1, Rule 74, RoC
• Sec. 3, Rule 74, RoC
• Rules 75 to 79, RoC
• Rule 79, RoC
6. Prompt filing of money claims against the decedent arising from contract
• Secs. 2 and 5, Rule 87, RoC
• Tan Sen Guan v. Go Sui San, GR L-22451. Dec. 22, 1924, 47 Phil. 96
7. Purpose of presentation of claims against decedents of estate in the probate court
• Estate of Olave v. Reyes, GR L-29407. July 29, 1983, 123 SCRA 767
8. Complaint against person/s suspected of keeping properties belonging to the estate; probate court has no authority to decide the issue of ownership
• Modesto v. Modesto, GR L-11801. June 30, 1959, 105 Phil. 1379
• Adapon v. Maralit, GR 46898. Jan. 20, 1940, 69 Phil 383
9. Jurisdiction acquired through publication
• Perez v. Perez, GR L-12359. July 15, 1959, 105 Phil. 1132
10. Service of notice to the heirs not a jurisdictional requirement
• Abut v. Abut, GR L-26743. May 31, 1972, 45 SCRA 326
RULE 73. VENUE AND PROCESS
SECTION 1, RULE 73. WHERE ESTATE OF DECEASED PERSONS SETTLED
1. Venue for ordinary civil actions and for special proceedings have the same meaning; residence defined
• Jao v. CA, GR 128314. May 29, 2002, 382 SCRA 407
2. Distinction between “residence” under election laws and for purposes of fixing the venue of actions under the Rules of Court
• Romualdez v. RTC, Br. 7, Tacloban City, GR 104960, Sept. 14, 1993, 226 SCRA 408
3. What determines venue?
4. Venue distinguished from jurisdiction
• Malig v. Bush, GR L-22761. May 31, 1969, 28 SCRA 449
5. Rule refers to venue and not to jurisdiction
6. Rules on venue and jurisdiction in probate proceedings
• Lim v. CA, GR 124715. Jan. 24, 2000, 323 SCRA 102
• Fule v. CA, GR L-40502. Nov. 29, 1976
7. Court which has jurisdiction over probate cases
• Lim v. CA, GR 124715. Jan. 24, 2000, 323 SCRA 102\
• Mendoza v. Teh, GR 122646. Mar. 14, 1997, 269 SCRA 764
8. Court first taking cognizance excludes all others; Domicile of the testator affects only the venue but not the jurisdiction
• Rodriguez v. De Borja, GR L-21993. June 21, 1966, 17 SCRA 41
9. When the administrator cannot enter into any transaction without prior court approval
• Estate of Olave v. Reyes, GR L-29407. July 29, 1983, 123 SCRA 767
10. Instances where two cases are filed, one testate and the other intestate: which courts should exercise jurisdiction; case laws
• Roberts v. Leonidas, GR L-55509. Apr. 27, 1984, 129 SCRA 33
• Cuenco v. CA, GR L-24742. Oct. 26, 1973, 53 SCRA 360
11. Wrong venue in probate a waivable procedural defect
• Uriarte v. CFI of Negros Occidental, GR L-21938. May 29, 1970, 33 SCRA 252
12. Jurisdiction over probate proceedings
13. Limited jurisdiction of probate courts
• Coca v. Borromeo, GR L-29545. Jan. 31, 1978, 81 SCRA 278
14. Powers and duties of the probate court
• Sec. 3, Rule 73, RoC
• Sec. 3, Rule 77, RoC
• Sec. 5, Rule 79, RoC
• Sec. 11, Rule 86, RoC
• Sec. 11, Rule 88, RoC
• Sec. 2, Rule 89, RoC
• Sec. 1, Rule 90, RoC
15. Probate court powerless to act on property rights from contracts
• Reyes-Mesugas v. Reyes, GR 174835. Mar. 22, 2010, 616 SCRA 345
16. Probate court as a trustee
• Tambunting De Tengco v. San Jose, GR L-8162. Aug. 30, 1955, 97 Phil. 491
17. Probate courts cannot determine the issue of ownership except provisionally
• Bernardo v. CA, GR L-18148. Feb. 28, 1963, 7 SCRA 367
18. Rationale for the rule
• Agtarap v. Agtarap, GR 177099. June 8, 2011, 651 SCRA 455
19. Probate court may pass upon the issue of ownership with the consent of the parties
• Pascual v. Pascual, GR L-48140. May 4, 1942, 73 Phil. 561
• Cunanan v. Amparo, GR L-1313. Feb. 16, 1948, 80 Phil. 229
20. Probate court to distribute the estate and determine the heirs
• Solivio v. CA, GR 83484. Feb. 12, 1990, 182 SCRA 119
• Litam v. Espiritu, GR L-7644. Nov. 27, 1956, 100 Phil. 364
• Pimentel v. Palanca, GR 2108. Dec. 19, 1905, 5 Phil. 436
21. Probate court generally cannot issue a writ of execution; exceptions
• Sec. 6, Rule 88, RoC
• Sec. 3, Rule 90, RoC
• Sec. 13, Rule 142, RoC
• Vda. De Valera v. Ofilada, GR L-27526. Sept. 12, 1974, 59 SCRA 96
22. Probate courts vested with jurisdiction to try controversies between heirs regarding ownership of property allegedly belonging to deceased
• Flores v. Flores, GR L-24173. Nov. 24, 1925, 48 Phil. 982
23. Probate court vested with jurisdiction to determine if properties belong to conjugal partnership
• Bernardo v. CA, GR L-18148. Feb. 28, 1963, 117 Phil. 385
• Probate court has no jurisdiction over an encumbrance
• Register of Deeds of Pampanga v. PNB, GR L-1781. Sept. 27, 1949, 47 OG 1157
• Diaz v. Sawamoto, GR L-22085. Apr. 30, 1966, 16 SCRA 937
• Attorney’s fees; against whom chargeable
• Albino v. Borromeo, GR L-19722. Feb. 28, 1966, 16 SCRA 247
24. Exclusionary rule
25. Publication of the filing of the application and of the date of hearing
• Pilapil v. Heirs of Briones, GR 150175. Feb. 5, 2007, 514 SCRA 197
26. Recourse in case the venue is improperly laid
• Eusebio v. Eusebio, GR L-8409. Dec. 28, 1956, 100 Phil. 593

SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR SEPTEMBER 8, 2017


SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR SEPTEMBER 8, 2017

SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DECEASED PERSONS

  1. Settlement of estate of deceased persons; what it intends to achieve and what it seeks to establish
  2. Rights to succession; when transmitted
  • Article 777 of the Civil Code
  1. Right to the property transmitted from the moment of death; case law
  • Bunyi v. Factor. GR 172547. June 30, 2009, 591 SCRA 350
  1. Intestacy inferior to testacy
  • Castro v. Martinez Gallegos, GR L-3880. Mar. 9, 1908, 10 Phil. 307
  1. Modes of settlement of the estate of a deceased person
  • Rule 69, RoC
  • Sec. 1, Rule 74, RoC
  • Sec. 3, Rule 74, RoC
  • Rules 75 to 79, RoC
  • Rule 79, RoC
  1. Prompt filing of money claims against the decedent arising from contract
  • Secs. 2 and 5, Rule 87, RoC
  • Tan Sen Guan v. Go Sui San, GR L-22451. Dec. 22, 1924, 47 Phil. 96
  1. Purpose of presentation of claims against decedents of estate in the probate court
  • Estate of Olave v. Reyes, GR L-29407. July 29, 1983, 123 SCRA 767
  1. Complaint against person/s suspected of keeping properties belonging to the estate; probate court has no authority to decide the issue of ownership
  • Modesto v. Modesto, GR L-11801. June 30, 1959, 105 Phil. 1379
  • Adapon v. Maralit, GR 46898. Jan. 20, 1940, 69 Phil 383
  1. Jurisdiction acquired through publication
  • Perez v. Perez, GR L-14781. July 15, 1959, 105 Phil. 1132
  1. Service of notice to the heirs not a jurisdictional requirement
  • Abut v. Abut, GR L-26743. May 31, 1972, 45 SCRA 326

RULE 73. VENUE AND PROCESS

SECTION 1, RULE 73. WHERE ESTATE OF DECEASED PERSONS SETTLED

  1. Venue for ordinary civil actions and for special proceedings have the same meaning; residence defined
  • Jao v. CA, GR 128314. May 29, 2002, 382 SCRA 407
  1. Distinction between “residence” under election laws and for purposes of fixing the venue of actions under the Rules of Court
  • Romualdez v. RTC, Br. 7, Tacloban City, GR 104960, Sept. 14, 1993, 226 SCRA 408
  1. What determines venue?
  2. Venue distinguished from jurisdiction
  • Malig v. Bush, GR L-22761. May 31, 1969, 28 SCRA 449
  1. Rule refers to venue and not to jurisdiction
  2. Rules on venue and jurisdiction in probate proceedings
  • Lim v. CA, GR 124715. Jan. 24, 2000, 323 SCRA 102
  • Fule v. CA, GR L-40502. Nov. 29, 1976
  1. Court which has jurisdiction over probate cases
  • Lim v. CA, GR 124715. Jan. 24, 2000, 323 SCRA 102\
  • Mendoza v. Teh, GR 122646. Mar. 14, 1997, 269 SCRA 764
  1. Court first taking cognizance excludes all others; Domicile of the testator affects only the venue but not the jurisdiction
  • Rodriguez v. De Borja, GR L-21993. June 21, 1966, 17 SCRA 41
  1. When the administrator cannot enter into any transaction without prior court approval
  • Estate of Olave v. Reyes, GR L-29407. July 29, 1983, 123 SCRA 767
  1. Instances where two cases are filed, one testate and the other intestate: which courts should exercise jurisdiction; case laws
  • Roberts v. Leonidas, GR L-55509. Apr. 27, 1984, 129 SCRA 33
  • Cuenco v. CA, GR L-24742. Oct. 26, 1973, 53 SCRA 360
  1. Wrong venue in probate a waivable procedural defect
  • Uriarte v. CFI of Negros Occidental, GR L-21938. May 29, 1970, 33 SCRA 252
  1. Jurisdiction over probate proceedings
  2. Limited jurisdiction of probate courts
  • Coca v. Borromeo, GR L-29545. Jan. 31, 1978, 81 SCRA 278
  1. Powers and duties of the probate court
  • Sec. 3, Rule 73, RoC
  • Sec. 3, Rule 77, RoC
  • Sec. 5, Rule 79, RoC
  • Sec. 11, Rule 86, RoC
  • Sec. 11, Rule 88, RoC
  • Sec. 2, Rule 89, RoC
  • 1, Rule 90, RoC
  1. Probate court powerless to act on property rights from contracts
  1. Probate court as a trustee
  • Tambunting De Tengco v. San Jose, GR L-8162. Aug. 30, 1955, 97 Phil. 491
  1. Probate courts cannot determine the issue of ownership except provisionally
  • Bernardo v. CA, GR L-18148. Feb. 28, 1963, 7 SCRA 367
  1. Rationale for the rule
  • Agtarap v. Agtarap, GR 177099. June 8, 2011, 651 SCRA 455
  1. Probate court may pass upon the issue of ownership with the consent of the parties
  • Pascual v. Pascual, GR L-48140. May 4, 1942, 73 Phil. 561
  • Cunanan v. Amparo, GR L-1313. Feb. 16, 1948, 80 Phil. 229
  1. Probate court to distribute the estate and determine the heirs
  • Solivio v. CA, GR 83484. Feb. 12, 1990, 182 SCRA 119
  • Litam v. Espiritu, GR L-7644. Nov. 27, 1956, 100 Phil. 364
  • Pimentel v. Palanca, GR 2108. Dec. 19, 1905, 5 Phil. 436
  1. Probate court generally cannot issue a writ of execution; exceptions
  • Sec. 6, Rule 88, RoC
  • Sec. 3, Rule 90, RoC
  • Sec. 13, Rule 142, RoC
  • De Valera v. Ofilada, GR L-27526. Sept. 12, 1974, 59 SCRA 96
  1. Probate courts vested with jurisdiction to try controversies between heirs regarding ownership of property allegedly belonging to deceased
  • Flores v. Flores, GR L-24173. Nov. 24, 1925, 48 Phil. 982
  1. Probate court vested with jurisdiction to determine if properties belong to conjugal partnership
  • Bernardo v. CA, GR L-18148. Feb. 28, 1963, 117 Phil. 385
  • Probate court has no jurisdiction over an encumbrance
  • Register of Deeds of Pampanga v. PNB, GR L-1781. Sept. 27, 1949, 47 OG 1157
  • Diaz v. Sawamoto, GR L-22085. Apr. 30, 1966, 16 SCRA 937
  • Attorney’s fees; against whom chargeable
  • Albino v. Borromeo, GR L-19722. Feb. 28, 1966, 16 SCRA 247
  1. Exclusionary rule
  2. Publication of the filing of the application and of the date of hearing
  • Pilapil v. Heirs of Briones, GR 150175. Feb. 5, 2007, 514 SCRA 197
  1. Recourse in case the venue is improperly laid
  • Eusebio v. Eusebio, GR L-8409. Dec. 28, 1956, 100 Phil. 593

SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR AUGUST 25, 2017


SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR AUGUST 25, 2017

RULES ON SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS: Rules 72 to 109 of the Rules of Court

 

RULE 72. SUBJECT MATTER AND APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL RULES

 

  1. Special proceeding: Definition; Section 3, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court

 

  1. Distinctions between ordinary action and special proceeding

 

  • Pacific Banking Corp. Employees Org. v. CA, GR 109373. Mar. 20, 1995; 242 SCRA 492

 

  1. Special proceeding as a distinct and independent proceeding

 

  • Natcher v. CA, GR 133000. Oct. 2, 2001, 366 SCRA 385

 

  1. Nature of special proceedings

 

  1. Petition for liquidation of an insolvent corporation a special proceeding

 

  • Pacific Banking Corp. Employees Org. v. CA, supra

 

  1. Petition for corporate rehabilitation a special proceeding

 

Sec. 1, Rule 4, Interim Rules on Corporate Recovery

 

SECTION 1, RULE 72. SUBJECT MATTER OF SPECIAL

PROCEEDINGS

 

  1. Cases covered by special proceedings

 

  1. Other cases involving special proceedings

 

  1. Petition for corporate rehabilitation

 

  • 1, Rule 4 of the Interim Rules of Procedure on Corporate Rehabilitation, AM 00-8-10-SC

 

  1. Proceedings for recognition and enforcement of arbitration agreement, etc.

 

  • Sec. 47, RA 9285

 

  1. Commencement of special proceedings

 

  1. Applicable rules in special proceedings

 

  • Sec. 2, Rule 72, RoC);
  • Matute v. CA, GR L-26751. Jan. 31, 1969, 26 SCRA 768

 

  1. Jurisdiction over special proceedings cases

 

  1. Distinction between final and interlocutory orders not strictly applicable

 

SECTION 2, RULE 72. APPLICABILITY OF RULES OF CIVIL ACTIONS

 

  1. Applicability of the rules in ordinary civil actions in special proceedings

 

  • Sec. 2, Rule 72, RoC

 

  1. Specific rules in civil actions that apply to special proceedings

 

  1. Certain rules in ordinary actions may be applied in special proceedings

 

  • Sheker v. Sheker, GR 157912. Dec. 13, 2007, 534 SCRA 62

 

  1. Intervention not available to creditor with a contingent, not actual, claim

 

  • Hilado. v. CA, GR 164108. May 8, 2009, 587 SCRA 464

 

  1. Legal interest required of an intervenor

 

  • Batama Farmers’ Coop. Marketing Assoc., Inc. v. Rosal, GR L-30526. Nov. 29, 1971, 149 Phil. 514

 

SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DECEASED PERSONS

 

  1. What settlement of estate of deceased persons intends to achieve and what it seeks to establish

 

  1. Transmission of rights to succession

 

  • Article 777 of the Civil Code.

 

  1. Right to the property transmitted from the moment of death

 

  • Bunyi v. Factor. GR 172547. June 30, 2009, 591 SCRA 350

 

  1. Modes of settlement of the estate of a deceased person

 

  1. Prompt filing of money claims against the decedent arising from contract

 

  • Secs. 2 and 5, Rule 87
  • Tan Sen Guan v. Go Sui San, GR 22451. Dec. 22, 1924, 47 Phil. 89

 

  1. Purpose of presentation of claims against decedents of estate in the probate court

 

  • Estate of Olave v. Reyes, GR L-29407. July 29, 1983, 123 SCRA 767

 

  1. Complaint against person/s suspected of keeping properties belonging to the estate; probate court has no authority to decide the issue of ownership

 

  • Modesto v. Modesto, GR L-11801. June 30, 1959, 105 Phil. 1379
  • Adapon v. Maralit, GR 46898. Jan. 20, 1940, 69 Phil 383

 

  1. Jurisdiction acquired through publication

 

  • Perez v. Perez, GR L-12359. July 15, 1959, 105 Phil. 1132

 

  1. Service of notice to the heirs not a jurisdictional requirement

 

  • Abut v. Abut, GR L-26743. May 31, 1972, 45 SCRA 326

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR APRIL 28 AND MAY 5, 2017


ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (NEW ERA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW) ASSIGNMENT FOR APRIL 28 AND MAY 5, 2017

Right of Suffrage

  1. Definition and historical background
  2. Cases:
  • Moya v. Del Fierro, GR L-46863. Nov. 18, 1939, 69 Phil. 199
  • Badelles v. Cabili, GR L-29333, Feb. 27, 1969
  • Dissenting Opinion of Justice Puno in Tolentino v. Comelec, GR 148334, Jan. 21, 2004

Commission on Elections (Comelec)

  1. History, Composition, Qualifications of Members, Powers and Functions under the 1987 Constitution and the Omnibus Election Code, and Field Offices
  2. Laws and Cases:
      • Batas Pambansa Bilang 881 or the Omnibus Election Code of 1985, as amended
      • Roque v. Comelec, GR 188456, Sept. 10, 2009 (Read the ponencia and separate concurring opinion of CJ Puno and the Resolution of the Motion for Reconsideration dated 10 Feb. 2010)
      • Arroyo v. DOJ and Comelec, GR 199082, Sept. 18, 2012 and 23 July 2013
      • Ongsioko Reyes v. Comelec, GR 207264, June 25, 2013 and Oct. 22, 2013

Voters

  1. Qualifications for Suffrage, Disqualifications, Local Absentee Voters, Overseas Absentee Voters, and Detainees, Person With Disabilities, Indigenous Peoples, and Media
  2. Laws and Cases
      • Section 118, Omnibus Election Code
      • E.O. 157 (Local Absentee Voting Law)
      • Section 12 of R.A. 7166
      • R.A. 9189 (Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003), as amended by R.A. 10590 or “The Overseas Voting Act of 2013”
      • R.A. 10380 (Local Absentee Voting for Media)
      • People v. Corral, GR L-42300. Jan. 31, 1936, 62 Phil. 945
      • Macalintal v. Comelec, GR 157013. July 10, 2003

Registration of Voters

  1. Qualifications of Voters, Disqualifications, Election Registration Board, Deactivation, Reactivation and Cancellation of Registration, Inclusion and Exclusion Proceedings, and Jurisdiction
  2. Laws and Cases
      • Omnibus Election Code
      • R.A. 8189 (The Voters Registration Act of 1996)
      • Yra v. Abano, GR 30187. Nov. 15, 1928
      • Akbayan Youth v. Comelec, GR 147066. March 26, 2001

Candidates

  1. Qualifications, Disqualifications, Certificates of Candidacy, and Nuisance Candidates
  2. Laws and Cases
      • Sections 63-78, Article XI, Omnibus Election Code
  • Section 40, R.A. 7160
  • Risos-Vidal v. Comelec, GR 206666, Jan. 21, 2015
  • Arnado v. Comelec, GR 210164, Aug. 18, 2015
  • Caballero v. Comelec, GR 209835, Sept. 22, 2015

Campaign, Election Propaganda, etc.

  1. Concept, Campaign, Campaign Period, Election Period, Lawful and Prohibited Election Propaganda, Prohibited Contributions, Lawful Expenditures, Limitations on Expenses and Statement of Contributions and Expenses
  2. Laws and Cases
  • R.A. 9006 or the Fair Elections Act of 2007
  • Sections 13 & 14, R.A. 7166
  • GMA Network, Inc. v. Comelec, GR 205357, Sept. 2, 2014
  • Ejercito v. Comelec, GR 212398, Nov. 25, 2014
  • Diocese of Bacolod v. Comelec, GR 205728, Jan. 21, 2015
  • 1-UTAK v. Comelec, GR 206020, April 14, 2015

Political Party and Party-List Organization

  1. Definitions, PP, PLO, Groups Unregistrable as Political Parties, Grounds for Cancellation of Registration, Registration, Participation in the Party-list System, Refusal and/or Cancellation of Registration, Nomination and Qualifications of Party-list nominees, Manner of Voting, Number, and Raffle
  2. Cases
  • Palparan v. HRET, GR 189506, Feb. 11, 2012
  • Paglaum v. COMELEC, GR 203766, April 2, 2013

Automated Elections

  1. History, Automated Election System, Paper-based Election System, Minimum System Capabilities, Continuity Plan, Advisory Council, Joint Congressional Oversight Committee, and National Board of Canvassers
  2. Laws and Cases
  • R.A. 9369
  • Roque v. Comelec, GR 188456, Sept. 10, 2009
  • Capalla v. Comelec, GR 201112, June 13, 2012

Recall

  1. Grounds and Procedure,
  2. Laws and Cases
  • Sections 69-74, R.A. 7160
  • R.A. 9244
  • Comelec Resolution No. 7505
  • Claudio v. Comelec, GR 140560. May 4, 2000, 331 SCRA 388
  • Goh v. Bayron, GR 212584, Nov. 25, 2014

Failure of Elections, Postponement of Elections, Special Elections

  1. Grounds Declaration of Failure and Postponement of Elections and Call for Special Elections
  2. Laws and Cases
  • Sections 6-7, Article I, Omnibus Election Code
  • Sison v. Comelec, GR 134096, 03 March 1999
  • Ampatuan v. Comelec, G. R. No. 149803. Jan. 31, 2002, 375 SCRA 503

Election Offenses

  1. Vote-buying, Vote-selling, Electoral Sabotage, etc., Persons Criminally Liable, Penalties, Prosecution, Prescription, and Jurisdiction
  2. Laws and Cases
  • Sections 261-268, Article CCII, Omnibus Election Code
  • R.A. 9369
  • Comelec v. Tagle, GR 148948 & 148951-60. Feb. 17, 2003, 397 SCRA 618
  • Tapispisan v. CA, GR 157950, June 8, 2005

Election Adjudication System

  1. Jurisdiction of Municipal Trial Courts, Regional Trial Courts and Comelec, Procedure in election contests: Courts, Comelec, and Procedures before the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, Senate Electoral Tribunal and Presidential Electoral Tribunal
  2. Laws and Cases
  • Section 2, Article IX (c), 1987 Constitution
  • Sections 249-252, Article XXI, Omnibus Election Code
  • 2010 Rules of Procedure in Election Contests
  • Rules of Procedure in Election Contests Before the Courts Involving Elective Municipal and Barangay Officials
  • Comelec Resolution No. 8804
  • Comelec Resolution No.9164
  • Jalosjos v. Comelec, GR 192474, June 26, 2012
  • Lokin v. Comelec, GR 179431-321, June 22, 2010

Appeal and Other Election Issues

  1. Quo Warranto, Substitution, Withdrawal of Certificate of Candidacy, Execution of Pending Appeal, and Appeal Fee/Filing Fee
  2. Laws and Cases
  • Sections 73, 76 and 253, Omnibus Election Code
  • Comelec Resolution No. 9518
  • Divinagracia v. COMELEC, GR 186007 & 186016, July 27, 2009
  • Cerafica v. Comelec, GR 205136, Dec. 2, 2014