CASE DIGEST

Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

Court Supreme Court, First Division

Citation G.R. No. 6878.

Date September 13, 1913

Plaintiff-Appellant MARCELINA EDROSO

Defendant-Appellant PABLO and BASILIO SABLAN

Ponente Arellano, CJ.

Relevant topic Legitimes

Page 1 of 10
CASE DIGEST
Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

Prepared by

FACTS:

 Spouses Marcelina Edroso (Marcelina) and Victoriano Sablan (Victoriano) had a son named, Pedro Sablan
(Pedro).

 Pedro inherited two parcels of land from Victoriano, upon the latter’s death.

 Subsequently, Pedro died, unmarried and without issue. The two parcels of land passed through inheritance
to his mother, Marcelina.

Page 2 of 10
CASE DIGEST
Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

 Marcelina applied for registration and issuance of titles to the said parcels of land.

 However, the 2 uncles of Pedro, Pablo and Basilio Sablan (legitimate brothers of Victoriano) opposed the
registration claiming that either the registration be denied or if granted to her, the right reserved by law to them
be recorded in the registration of each parcel.

 The Court of Land Registration denied the registration holding that the lands in question partake of the nature
of property required by law to be reserved and that in such a case application could only be presented jointly
in the names of the mother and the said two uncles.

ISSUE – HELD – RATIO:

Page 3 of 10
CASE DIGEST
Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

ISSUE HELD

W/N the real properties subject of this case are required by law to be reserved? YES

RATIO:

 Marcelina acquired said lands from her descendant Pedro by inheritance; Pedro had acquired them from his
ascendant Victoriano, likewise by inheritance; Victoriano had likewise acquired them by inheritance from his
parents, Mariano Sablan and Maria Rita Fernandez, they having been adjudicated to him in the partition of
hereditary property between him and his brothers (the uncles).

Mariano & Ma. Rita –> Victoriano –> Pedro  Marcelina.

 The law provides that the hereditary title is one without a valuable consideration (gratuitous title), and it is so
characterized in Art. 968 of the Civil Code, for he who acquires by inheritance gives nothing in return for what he
receives; the law also recognizes that the two uncles of Pedro are within the third degree of blood relationship.

Page 4 of 10
CASE DIGEST
Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

 The law further states under Civil Code Art. 811 that:

“The ascendant who inherits from his descendant property which the latter acquired without a valuable
consideration from another ascendant, or from a brother or sister, is under obligation to reserve what he has
acquired by operation of law for the relatives who are within the third degree and belong to the line whence the
property proceeded."

 Thus, since Marcelina acquired the subject properties by operation of law, she is obligated to reserve them intact
for the claimants, who are, in this case, uncles within the 3 rd degree and belong to the line of Victoriano’s parents
from whom the lands proceeded.

 Moreover, although Marcelina contends that it is not proven that the 2 parcels of land in question have been
acquired by operation of law, the Court noted that this defense was not alleged nor discussed in the lower court.

- Even if it was discussed, the same contention would still not stand. This is because when Pedro died without

Page 5 of 10
CASE DIGEST
Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

issue, his mother became his heir by virtue of her right to her son's legal portion under Art. 935 of the Civil
Code1.

- The contrary could only have occurred if Marcelina had demonstrated that any of these lands had passed into
her possession by free disposal in her son's will; but the case presents no testamentary provision that
demonstrates any transfer of property from Pedro to Marcelina by former’s wish.
- Thus, the legal presumption is that the transfer of the two parcels of land was ab intestate or by operation of
law, and not by will or the wish of the predecessor in interest.

 All the provisions of article 811 of the Civil Code have therefore been fully complied with. The lower was correct in
holding that the two parcels of land are required by law to be reserved, because Marcelina has not proved that
either of them became her inheritance through the free disposal of her son.

ISSUE HELD

W/N Marcelina can register the two parcels of land under her name? YES

1
Art. 935. "In the absence of legitimate children and descendants of the deceased, his ascendants shall inherit from him, to the
exclusion of collaterals."

Page 6 of 10
CASE DIGEST
Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

 The lower court denied the registration because of the finding that the absolute title to the two parcels of land
undoubtedly belongs to Marcelina and the 2 uncles, thereby the application cannot be made except in the name of
all of them in common.

 The Court first noted that absolute title consists of the rights to use, enjoy, dispose of, and recover. The person
who has in himself all these rights has the absolute or complete ownership of the thing; otherwise, the person
who has the rights to use and enjoy will have the usufruct, and the person who has the rights of disposal and
recovery the direct title.

 According to the Court, the question to be answered here is “What are the rights in the property of the person
who holds it subject to the reservation of article 811 of the Civil Code?"

Page 7 of 10
CASE DIGEST
Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

 After considering the opinion of various legal scholars, the Court reached the conclusion that the person required
by Art. 811 to reserve the right has, beyond any doubt at all, the rights of use and usufruct.

- He/She has, moreover, the legal title and dominion, although under a condition subsequent, which is the
reversion of the property to the relatives for whom it is reserved upon his/her death.
- Clearly he/she has, under an express provision of the law, the right to dispose of the property reserved,
although under the said condition.
- He/She has the right to recover it, because he is the one who possesses or should possess it and have title to
it, although a limited and revocable one.
- In a word, the legal title and dominion, even though under a condition, reside in him/her while he/she lives.
- After the right required by law to be reserved has been assured, he can do anything that a genuine owner can
do.

 On the other hand, the relatives within the third degree in whose favor the right is reserved cannot dispose of the
property.

- First because it is no way, either actually, constructively or formally, in their possession; and, moreover,
because they have no title of ownership or of fee simple which they can transmit to another, on the hypothesis

that only when the person who must reserve the right should die before them will they acquire it, thus creating
a fee simple, and only then will they take their place in the succession of the descendant of whom they are

Page 8 of 10
CASE DIGEST
Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

relatives within the third degree, that is to say, a second contingent place in said legitimate succession in the
fashion of aspirants to a possible future legacy.

- If any of the persons in whose favor the right is reserved should, after their right has been assured in the
registry, dare to dispose of even nothing more than the fee simple of the property to be reserved his act would
be null and void, for it is impossible to determine the part "that might pertain therein to the relative at the time
he exercised the right, because in view of the nature and scope of the right required by law to be reserved the
extent of his right cannot be foreseen, for it may disappear by his dying before the person required to reserve
it, just as it may eve become absolute should that person die.

 No act of disposal inter vivos of the person required by law to reserve the right can be impugned by him in whose
favor it is reserved, because the former has absolutely all, the rights inherent in ownership, except that the legal
title is burdened with a condition that the third party acquirer may ascertain from the registry in order to know that
he is acquiring a title subject to a condition subsequent.

 Accordingly the only prohibition that applies to Marcelina is that she cannot dispose the 2 parcels of land mortis
causa in favor of persons other than the two uncles of Pedro.

Page 9 of 10
CASE DIGEST
Edroso v. Sablan
Law 105 - Succession

- This alone has been the object of the law, that is, "to prevent persons outside a family from securing, by some
special accident of life, property that would otherwise have remained therein."

RULING:

Therefore, we reverse the judgment appealed from, and in lieu thereof decide and declare that the applicant is entitled
to register in her own name the two parcels of land which are the subject matter of the application, recording in the
registration the right required by article 811 to be reserved to either or both of the opponents, Pablo Sablan and
Basilio Sablan, should they survive her; without special finding as to costs.

SEPARATE OPINIONS:
N/A

Page 10 of 10