Note.

—The basis for fixing the minimum term is the

prescribed penalty, and not the imposable penalty. (People
vs. Temporada, 574 SCRA 258 [2008])

——o0o——

G.R. No. 189776.  December 15, 2010.*

AMELIA P. ARELLANO, represented by her duly

appointed guardians, AGNES P. ARELLANO and NONA
P. AREL­LANO, petitioner, vs. FRANCISCO PASCUAL
and MIGUEL PASCUAL, respondents.

Succession; Collation; Words and Phrases; The term collation

has two distinct concepts: first, it is a mere mathematical
operation by the addition of the value of donations made by the
testator to the value of the hereditary estate;  and second, it is the
return to the hereditary estate of property disposed of by lucrative
title by the testator during his lifetime.—The term collation has
two distinct concepts: first, it is a mere mathematical operation by
the addition of the value of donations made by the testator to the
value of the hereditary estate; and second, it is the return to the
hereditary estate of property disposed of by lucrative title by the
testator during his lifetime. The purposes of collation are to
secure equality among the compulsory heirs in so far as is
possible, and to determine the free portion, after finding the
legitime, so that inofficious donations may be reduced. Collation
takes place when there are compulsory heirs, one of its purposes
being to determine the legitime and the free portion. If there is no
compulsory heir, there is no legitime to be safeguarded.
Same; Same; Siblings are collateral relatives and, therefore,
are not entitled to any legitime—that part of the testator’s property
which he cannot dispose of because the law has reserved it for
compulsory heirs.—The records do not show that the decedent left
any primary, secondary, or concurring compulsory heirs. He was
only survived by his siblings, who are his collateral relatives and,
therefore, are not entitled to any legitime—that part of the
testator’s property which he cannot dispose of because the law has
reserved it for compulsory heirs. The compulsory heirs may be
classified into (1) pri-
_______________

* THIRD DIVISION.

827

VOL. 638, DECEMBER 15, 2010 827

Arellano vs. Pascual

mary, (2) secondary, and (3) concurring. The primary compulsory

heirs are those who have precedence over and exclude other
compulsory heirs; legitimate children and descendants are
primary compulsory heirs. The secondary compulsory heirs are
those who succeed only in the absence of the primary heirs; the
legitimate parents and ascendants are secondary compulsory
heirs. The concurring compulsory heirs are those who succeed
together with the primary or the secondary compulsory heirs; the
illegitimate children, and the surviving spouse are concurring
compulsory heirs.
Same; Same; Where a person does not have any compulsory
heirs entitled to legitime, he is at liberty to donate all his
properties, even if nothing is left for his siblings-collateral relatives
to inherit.—The decedent not having left any compulsory heir who
is entitled to any legitime, he was at liberty to donate all his
properties, even if nothing was left for his siblings-collateral
relatives to inherit. His donation to petitioner, assuming that it
was valid, is deemed as donation made to a “stranger,” chargeable
against the free portion of the estate. There being no compulsory
heir, however, the donated property is not subject to collation.

PETITION for review on certiorari of a decision of the

Court of Appeals.
   The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
  Ruben Purisima for petitioner.
  Danilo P. Cariaga for respondents.

CARPIO-MORALES,  J.:
Angel N. Pascual Jr. died intestate on January 2, 1999
leaving as heirs his siblings, namely: petitioner Amelia P.
Arellano who is represented by her daughters1 Agnes P.
Arellano (Agnes) and Nona P. Arellano, and respondents
Francisco Pascual and Miguel N. Pascual.2
In a petition for “Judicial Settlement of Intestate Estate
and Issuance of Letters of Administration,” docketed as
Special Proceeding Case No. M-5034, filed by respondents
on April 28, 2000 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
Makati, respondents alleged, inter alia,

_______________

1 Records (Vol. II), p. 646.

2 Id., at p. 542.

828

828 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Arellano vs. Pascual

that a parcel of land (the donated property) located in

Teresa Village, Makati, which was, by Deed of Donation,
transferred by the decedent to petitioner the validity of
which donation respondents assailed, “may be considered
as an advance legitime” of petitioner.
Respondent’s nephew Victor was, as they prayed for,
appointed as Administrator of the estate by Branch 135 of
the Makati RTC.3
Respecting the donated property, now covered in the
name of petitioner by Transfer Certificate of Title No.
181889 of the Register of Deeds of Makati, which
respondents assailed but which they, in any event, posited
that it “may be considered as an advance legitime” to
petitioner, the trial court, acting as probate court, held that
it was precluded from determining the validity of the
donation.
Provisionally passing, however, upon the question of
title to the donated property only for the purpose of
determining whether it formed part of the decedent’s
estate,4 the probate court found the Deed of Donation valid
in light of the presumption of validity of notarized
documents. It thus went on to hold that it is subject to
collation following Article 1061 of the New Civil Code
which reads:5

“Every compulsory heir, who succeeds with other compulsory

heirs, must bring into the mass of the estate any property or right
which he may have received from the decedent, during the
lifetime of the latter, by way of donation, or any other gratuitous
title in order that it may be computed in the determination of the
legitime of each heir, and in the account of the partition.”

The probate court thereafter partitioned the properties

of the intestate estate. Thus it disposed:
 “WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered
declaring that:
1.  The property covered by TCT No. 181889 of the Register of Deeds
of Makati as part of the estate of Angel N. Pascual;

_______________

3 Records (Vol. I), p. 137.

4 CA Rollo at p. 29.
5 Id., at p. 30.

829

VOL. 638, DECEMBER 15, 2010 829

Arellano vs. Pascual

2.  The property covered by TCT No. 181889 to be subject to

collation;
3.   1/3 of the rental receivables due on the property at the mezzanine
and the 3rd floor of Unit 1110 Tanay St., Makati City form part of
the estate of Angel N. Pascual;
4.  The following properties form part of the estate of Angel N.
 Pascual:
a.   1/3 share in the House and Lot at 1110 Tanay St., Rizal
Village Makati TCT No. 348341 and 1/3 share in the rental
income thereon;
b.   1/3 share in the Vacant Lot with an area of 271 square
meters located at Tanay St., Rizal Village, Makati City,
TCT No. 119063;
c.  Agricultural land with an area of 3.8 hectares located at
Puerta Galera Mindoro covered by OCT No. P-2159;
d.   Shares of stocks in San Miguel Corporation covered by the
following Certificate Numbers: A0011036, A006144,
A082906, A006087, A065796, A11979, A049521, C86950,
C63096, C55316, C54824, C120328, A011026, C12865,
A10439, A021401, A007218, A0371, S29239, S40128,
S58308, S69309;
e.   Shares of stocks in Paper Industries Corp. covered by the
following Certificate Numbers: S29239, S40128, S58308,
S69309, A006708, 07680, A020786, S18539, S14649;
f.  ¼ share in Eduardo Pascual’s shares in Baguio Gold Mining
Co.;
g.  Cash in Banco De Oro Savings Account No. 2 014 12292 4
in the name of Nona Arellano;
h.  Property previously covered by TCT No. 119053 now
covered by TCT No. 181889, Register of Deeds of Makati
City;
 i.  Rental receivables from Raul Arellano per Order issued by
Branch 64 of the Court on November 17, 1995.
5.  AND the properties are partitioned as follows:
a.  To heir Amelia P. Arellano—the property covered by TCT
No. 181889;
b.   To heirs Francisco N. Pascual and Miguel N. Pascual—the
real properties covered by TCT Nos. 348341 and 119063 of
the Register of Deeds of Makati City and the property cov-

830

830 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Arellano vs. Pascual

ered by OCT No. 2159, to be divided equally between them

up to the extent that each of their share have been
equalized with the actual value of the property in 5(a) at
the time of donation, the value of which shall be
determined by an independent appraiser to be designated
by Amelia P. Arellano, Miguel N. Pascual and Francisco N.
Pascual. If the real properties are not sufficient to equalize
the shares, then Francisco’s and Miguel’s shares may be
satisfied from either in cash property or shares of stocks, at
the rate of quotation. The remaining properties shall be
divided equally among Francisco, Miguel and Amelia.”
(emphasis and underscoring supplied)

Before the Court of Appeals, petitioner faulted the trial

court in holding that

I
. . . THE PROPERTY DONATED TO APPELLANT AMELIA
PASCUAL ARELLANO IS PART OF THE ESTATE OF ANGEL
PASCUAL, JR.
II
. . . THE PROPERTY DONATED TO APPELLANT IS SUBJECT
TO COLLATION UNDER ARTICLE 1061 OF THE NEW CIVIL
CODE.
III
. . . APPELLEES WHO ARE MERELY COLLATERAL
RELATIVES OF DECEASED ANGEL N. PASCUAL JR. AS HIS
COMPULSORY HEIRS ENTITLED TO LEGITIMES.
x x x x
and
V
. . . IN NOT PARTITIONING THE ESTATE OF ANGEL N.
PASCUAL JR. EQUALLY AMONG HIS LEGAL OR INTESTATE
HEIRS.6 (underscoring supplied)
_______________

6 CA Rollo at p. 47.

831

VOL. 638, DECEMBER 15, 2010 831

Arellano vs. Pascual

By Decision7 of July 20, 2009, the Court of Appeals

found petitioner’s appeal “partly meritorious.” It sustained
the probate court’s ruling that the property donated to
petitioner is subject to collation in this wise:

“Bearing in mind that in intestate succession, what governs is

the rule on equality of division, We hold that the property
subject of donation inter vivos in favor of Amelia is subject
to collation. Amelia cannot be considered a creditor of the
decedent and we believe that under the circumstances, the value
of such immovable though not strictly in the concept of advance
legitime, should be deducted from her share in the net hereditary
estate. The trial court therefore committed no reversible error
when it included the said property as forming part of the estate of
Angel N. Pascual.”8 (citation omitted; emphasis and underscoring
supplied)

The appellate court, however, held that, contrary to the

ruling of the probate court, herein petitioner “was able to
submit prima facie evidence of shares of stocks owned by
the [decedent] which have not been included in the
inventory submitted by the administrator.”
Thus, the appellate court disposed, quoted verbatim:

“WHEREFORE, premises considered, the present appeal is

hereby PARTLY GRANTED. The Decision dated January 29,
2008 of the Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 135 in
Special Proceeding Case No. M-5034 is hereby REVERSED and
SET ASIDE insofar as the order of inclusion of properties of the
Intestate Estate of Angel N. Pascual, Jr. as well as the partition
and distribution of the same to the co-heirs are concerned.
The case is hereby REMANDED to the said court for further
proceedings in accordance with the disquisitions herein.”9
(underscoring supplied)

Petitioner’s Partial Motion for Reconsideration10 having

been denied by the appellate court by Resolution11 of
October 7, 2009, the

_______________
 7  Penned by now Supreme Court Associate Justice Martin S.
Villarama, Jr., and concurred in by Associate Justices Jose C. Reyes, Jr.
and Normandie B. Pizarro, Rollo, pp. 21-41.
8  Id., at p. 37.
9  Id., at pp. 40-41.
10 CA Rollo at p. 138.

832

832 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Arellano vs. Pascual

present petition for review on certiorari was filed,

ascribing as errors of the appellate court its ruling

I
. . . THAT THE PROPERTY DONATED BY ANGEL N.
PASCUAL, JR. TO PETITIONER AMELIA PASCUAL
ARELLANO IS PART OF HIS ESTATE AT THE TIME OF HIS
DEATH.
II
. . . THAT THE PROPERTY DONATED TO PETITIONER IS
SUBJECT TO COLLATION UNDER ARTICLE 1061 OF THE
NEW CIVIL CODE.
III
. . . THAT RESPONDENTS ARE COMPULSORY HEIRS OF
THEIR DECEASED BROTHER ANGEL N. PASCUAL JR. AND
ARE ENTITLED TO LEGITIMES.
IV
  . . . IN NOT PARTITIONING THE ESTATE OF ANGEL N.
PASCUAL, JR. EQUALLY AMONG PETITIONER AND
RESPONDENTS, AS HIS LEGAL OR INTESTATE HEIRS.12
(underscoring supplied)

Petitioners thus raise the issues of whether the property

donated to petitioner is subject to collation; and whether
the property of the estate should have been ordered equally
distributed among the parties.
On the first issue:
The term collation has two distinct concepts: first, it is a
mere mathematical operation by the addition of the value
of donations made by the testator to the value of the
hereditary estate; and second, it is the return to the
hereditary estate of property disposed of by lucrative title
by the testator during his lifetime.13

_______________
 11 Rollo at p. 43.
12 Id., at pp. 13-14.
13 III Tolentino, 1992 Edition, p. 332, citing 10 Fabres 295-299 Colin &
Capitant 526-528;2-11 Ruggiero 394; 5 Planiol & Ripert 67; De Buen; 8
Colin & Capitant 340.

833

VOL. 638, DECEMBER 15, 2010 833

Arellano vs. Pascual

The purposes of collation are to secure equality among

the compulsory heirs in so far as is possible, and to
determine the free portion, after finding the legitime, so
that inofficious donations may be reduced.14
Collation takes place when there are compulsory heirs,
one of its purposes being to determine the legitime and the
free portion. If there is no compulsory heir, there is no
legitime to be safeguarded.15
The records do not show that the decedent left any
primary, secondary, or concurring compulsory heirs. He
was only survived by his siblings, who are his collateral
relatives and, therefore, are not entitled to any legitime—
that part of the testator’s property which he cannot dispose
of because the law has reserved it for compulsory heirs.16

“The compulsory heirs may be classified into (1) primary, (2)

secondary, and (3) concurring. The primary compulsory heirs are
those who have precedence over and exclude other compulsory
heirs; legitimate children and descendants are primary
compulsory heirs. The secondary compulsory heirs are those who
succeed only in the absence of the primary heirs; the legitimate
parents and ascendants are secondary compulsory heirs. The
concurring compulsory heirs are those who succeed together with
the primary or the secondary compulsory heirs; the illegitimate
children, and the surviving spouse are concurring compulsory
heirs.”17

The decedent not having left any compulsory heir who is

entitled to any legitime, he was at liberty to donate all his
properties, even if nothing was left for his siblings-
collateral relatives to inherit. His donation to petitioner,
assuming that it was valid,18 is deemed as donation made
to a “stranger,” chargeable against the free portion of

_______________

14 III Tolentino, 1992 Edition, pp. 331-332, citing 6 Manresa 406.

 15 III Tolentino, 1992 Edition, p. 337, citing 6 Manresa 413.
16 Article 886, Civil Code.
17 III Tolentino, 1992 Edition, p.252.
18  It appears that its validity is in issue in Sp. Proc. No. M-3893 (for
guardianship over the person and estate of Angel N. Pascual, Jr.) before
Br. 139 of the Makati RTC, vide petition, par. 6, Record, pp. 1-4.

834

834 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Arellano vs. Pascual

the estate.19 There being no compulsory heir, however, the

donated property is not subject to collation.
On the second issue:
The decedent’s remaining estate should thus be
partitioned equally among his heirs-siblings-collateral
relatives, herein petitioner and respondents, pursuant to
the provisions of the Civil Code, viz:

Art. 1003.  If there are no descendants, ascendants,

illegitimate children, or a surviving spouse, the collateral
relatives shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased in
accordance with the following articles. (underscoring supplied)
Art. 1004.  Should the only survivors be brothers and sisters
of the full blood, they shall inherit in equal shares. (emphasis
and underscoring supplied)

WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Court of

Appeals Decision ordering the collation of the property
donated to petitioner, Amelia N. Arellano, to the estate of
the deceased Angel N. Pascual, Jr. is set aside.
Let the records of the case be REMANDED to the court
of origin, Branch 135 of the Makati Regional Trial Court,
which is ordered to conduct further proceedings in the case
for the purpose of determining what finally forms part of
the estate, and thereafter to divide whatever remains of it
equally among the parties.
SO ORDERED.

Peralta,** Bersamin, Mendoza*** and Sereno, JJ.,

concur.

Petition granted, judgment set aside.

Note.—Property received by compulsory heirs from the

decedent under an implied trust is subject to collation.
(Nazareno vs. Court of Appeals, 343 SCRA 637 [2000])
——o0o—— 
 _______________

19 Vide III Tolentino, 1992 Edition, p. 341.

**  Additional member per raffle dated January 6, 2010.
***  Additional member per Special Order No. 921 dated December 13,
2010.

© Copyright 2023 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.