Ajero vs. Ca

SPS. AJERO VS.
CA and SAND
G.R. No. 106720. September 15, 1994.
Facts
Annie Sand, who died on Nov. 25, 1982, purportedly executed a holographic will. In the will, she named
as devisees petitioners Roberto and Thelma Ajero, and private respondents all surnamed ‘Sand’ and their
children. On January 20, 1983, petitioners filed for the allowance of decedent's holographic will, alleging
that at the time of its execution, she was of sound and disposing mind, not acting under duress, fraud or
undue influence, and was in every respect capacitated to dispose of her estate by will.
The Oppositors:
1. Private respondent Clemente Sand
 Averred that neither the testament's body nor the signature therein was in decedent's
handwriting;
 That it contained alterations and corrections which were not duly signed by decedent; and
 That the will was procured by petitioners through improper pressure and undue influence
2. Dr. Jose Ajero

 He contested the disposition in the will of a house and lot located in Cabadbaran, Agusan Del
Norte. He claimed that said property could not be conveyed by decedent in its entirety, as she
was not its sole owner.
TC: Admitted the will to probate for its due execution, for lack of evidence to the contrary.
CA: Reversed and denied the allowance of the will for probate.
 The holographic will fails to meet the requirements for its validity pursuant to Arts. 813 and 814,
NCC.
 Certain dispositions in the will which were either unsigned and undated, or signed but not dated.
 The erasures, alterations and cancellations made thereon had not been authenticated by
decedent.
ISSUE: W/N THE WILL IS EXECUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW

HELD: YES.
For purposes of probating non-holographic wills, these formal solemnities include the subscription,
attestation, and acknowledgment requirements under Articles 805 and 806 of the New Civil Code. In the
case of holographic wills, on the other hand, what assures authenticity is the requirement that they be
totally autographic or handwritten by the testator himself, as provided under Article 810 of the New Civil
Code, thus:
"A person may execute a holographic will which must be entirely written, dated, and
signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is subject to no other form, and may be
made in or out of the Philippines, and need not be witnessed."
The failure to strictly observe other formalities will not result in the disallowance of a holographic will that
is unquestionably handwritten by the testator.
Then, the CA [erroneously] held that the decedent did not comply with Articles 813 and 814 of the New
Civil Code, which read, as follows:
"Article 813: When a number of dispositions appearing in a holographic will are signed
without being dated, and the last disposition has a signature and date, such date
validates the dispositions preceding it, whatever be the time of prior dispositions."
"Article 814: In case of insertion, cancellation, erasure or alteration in a holographic will,

the testator must authenticate the same by his full signature."
A reading of Article 813 of the New Civil Code shows that its requirement affects the validity of the
dispositions contained in the holographic will, but not its probate. If the testator fails to sign and
date some of the dispositions, the result is that these dispositions cannot be effectuated. Such failure,
however, does not render the whole testament void. Likewise, a holographic will can still be admitted
to probate, notwithstanding noncompliance with the provisions of Article 814.
Thus, unless the unauthenticated alterations, cancellations or insertions were made on the date of the
holographic will or on testator's signature, their presence does not invalidate the will itself. The lack of
authentication will only result in disallowance of such changes.
ISSUE 2: W/N decedent could validly dispose of the lot in Cabadbaran in its entirety
HELD: NO.
As a general rule, courts in probate proceedings are limited to pass only upon the extrinsic validity of the
will sought to be probated. However, in exceptional instances, courts are not powerless to do what the
situation constrains them to do, and pass upon certain provisions of the will. In the case at bench,
decedent herself indubitably stated in her holographic will that the Cabadbaran property is in the name of
her late father, John H. Sand (which led oppositor Dr. Jose Ajero to question her conveyance of the same
in its entirety.). Thus, as correctly held by respondent court, she cannot validly dispose of the whole
property, which she shares with her father's other heirs.
Disposition: Petition Granted. CA decision is reversed and set aside.

Ajero vs. Ca

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ajero vs. Ca

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Ajero vs. Ca

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SPS. AJERO VS.

2. Dr. Jose Ajero

ISSUE: W/N THE WILL IS EXECUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW

"Article 814: In case of insertion, cancellation, erasure or alteration in a holographic will,

Disposition: Petition Granted. CA decision is reversed and set aside.

You might also like