488 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED right to make a will.

So when an interpretation already given

Ajero vs. Court of Appeals assures such ends, any other interpretation whatsoever, that adds
nothing but demands more requisites entirely unnecessary, useless
G.R. No. 106720. September 15, 1994. *

and frustrative of the testators last will, must be disregarded. For

SPOUSES ROBERTO AND THELMA AJERO, purposes of probating non-holographic wills, these formal
petitioners, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS AND CLEMENTE solemnities include the subscription, attestation, and
SAND, respondents. acknowledgment requirements under Articles 805 and 806 of the
Succession; Wills; Holographic Wills; Probate Proceedings; The New Civil Code.
grounds enumerated in the Civil Code and Rules of Court for the Same; Same; Same; Same; Failure to strictly observe other
disallowance of wills are exclusive; Issues in a petition to admit a formalities will not result in the disallowance of a holographic will
holographic will to probate.Section 9, Rule 76 of the Rules of Court that is unquestionably handwritten by the testator.In the case of
provides the cases in which wills shall be disallowed. In the same holographic wills, on the other hand, what assures authenticity is
vein, Article 839 of the New Civil Code enumerates the grounds for the requirement that they be totally autographic or handwritten by
disallowance of wills. These lists are exclusive; no other grounds can the testator himself, as provided under Article 810 of the New Civil
serve to disallow a will. Thus, in a petition to admit a holographic Code. Failure to strictly observe other formalities will not result in
will to probate, the only issues to be resolved are: (1) whether the the disallowance of a holographic will that is unquestionably
instrument submitted is, indeed, the decedents last will and handwritten by the testator.
testament; (2) whether said will was executed in accordance with Same; Same; Same; Same; The requirement of Article 813 of the
the formalities prescribed by New Civil Code affects the validity of the dispositions contained in
_________________
the holographic will, but not its probate.A reading of Article 813
*SECOND DIVISION. of the New Civil Code shows that its requirement affects the validity
489 of the dispositions contained in the holographic will, but not its
VOL. 236, SEPTEMBER 15, 1994 489 probate. If the testator fails to sign and date some of the
Ajero vs. Court of Appeals dispositions, the result is that these dispositions cannot be
effectuated. Such failure, however, does not render the whole
law; (3) whether the decedent had the necessary testamentary
testament void.
capacity at the time the will was executed; and, (4) whether the
Same; Same; Same; Same; Unauthenticated alterations,
execution of the will and its signing were the voluntary acts of the
cancellations or insertions do not invalidate a holographic will,
decedent.
unless they were made on the date or on testators signature.
Same; Same; Same; Same; Statutory Construction; The object
Likewise, a holographic will can still be admitted to probate,
of the solemnities surrounding the execution of wills is to close the
notwithstanding non-
door against bad faith and fraud, accordingly, laws on this subject 490
should be interpreted to attain these primordial ends.We reiterate
490 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
what we held in Abangan vs. Abangan, 40 Phil. 476, 479 (1919),
that: The object of the solemnities surrounding the execution of Ajero vs. Court of Appeals
wills is to close the door against bad faith and fraud, to avoid compliance with the provisions of Article 814. Thus, unless the
substitution of wills and testaments and to guaranty their truth and unauthenticated alterations, cancellations or insertions were made
authenticity. Therefore, the laws on this subject should be on the date of the holographic will or on testators signature, their
interpreted in such a way as to attain these primordial ends. But, presence does not invalidate the will itself. The lack of
on the other hand, also one must not lose sight of the fact that it is authentication will only result in disallowance of such changes.
not the object of the law to restrain and curtail the exercise of the
 Same; Same; Same; Same; Only the requirements of Article 810 PUNO, J.:
of the New Civil Codeand not those found in Articles 813 and
814are essential to the probate of a holographic will.It is also This is an appeal by certiorari from the Decision of the Court
proper to note that the requirements of authentication of changes of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 22840, dated March 30, 1992,
1

and signing and dating of dispositions appear in provisions (Articles the dispositive portion of which reads:
813 and 814) separate from that which provides for the necessary PREMISES CONSIDERED, the questioned decision of November
conditions for the validity of the holographic will (Article 810). The 19, 1988 of the trial court is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE,
distinction can be traced to Articles 678 and 688 of the Spanish Civil and the petition for probate is hereby DISMISSED. No costs.
Code, from which the present provisions covering holographic wills The earlier Decision was rendered by the RTC of Quezon City,
are taken. This separation and distinction adds support to the
Branch 94, in Sp. Proc. No. Q-37171, and the instrument
2

interpretation that only the requirements of Article 810 of the New

submitted for probate is the holographic will of the late Annie
Civil Codeand not those found in Article 813 and 814 of the same
Codeare essential to the probate of a holographic will. Sand, who died on November 25, 1982.
Same; Same; Same; Same; Probate Courts; While courts in In the will, decedent named as devisees, the following:
probate proceedings are generally limited to pass only upon the petitioners Roberto and Thelma Ajero, private respondent
extrinsic validity of the will sought to be probated, in exceptional Clemente Sand, Meriam S. Arong, Leah Sand, Lilia Sand,
cases, courts are not powerless to do what the situation constrains Edgar Sand, Fe Sand, Lisa S. Sand, and Dr. Jose Ajero, Sr.,
them to do, and pass upon certain provisions of the will.As a and their children.
general rule, courts in probate proceedings are limited to pass only On January 20, 1983, petitioners instituted Sp. Proc. No.
upon the extrinsic validity of the will sought to be probated. Q-37171, for allowance of decedents holographic will. They
However, in exceptional instances, courts are not powerless to do alleged that at the time of its execution, she was of sound and
what the situation constrains them to do, and pass upon certain
disposing mind, not acting under duress, fraud or undue
provisions of the will. In the case at bench, decedent herself
influence, and was in every respect capacitated to dispose of
indubitably stated in her holographic will that the Cabadbaran
property is in the name of her late father, John H. Sand (which led her estate by will.
oppositor Dr. Jose Ajero to question her conveyance of the same in Private respondent opposed the petition on the grounds
its entirety). Thus, as correctly held by respondent court, she cannot that: neither the testaments body nor the signature therein
validly dispose of the whole property, which she shares with her was in decedents handwriting; it contained alterations and
fathers other heirs. corrections which were not duly signed by decedent; and, the
will was procured by petitioners through improper pressure
PETITION for review on certiorari of a decision of the Court and undue influence. The petition was likewise opposed by Dr.
of Appeals. Jose Ajero. He contested the disposition in the will of a house
and lot located in Cabadbaran, Agusan Del Norte. He claimed
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court. that said property could not be conveyed by decedent in its
Miguel D. Larida for petitioners. entirety, as she was not its sole owner.
Montilla Law Office for private respondent. Notwithstanding the oppositions, the trial court admitted
491
the decedents holographic will to probate. It found, inter alia:
VOL. 236, SEPTEMBER 15, 1994 491
Ajero vs. Court of Appeals __________________
 1 Sixteenth Division, composed of Associate Justices Luis L. her during her birthday celebration in 1981, at or around which time
Victor (ponente), Ricardo J. Francisco (chairman), and the holographic will in question was executed by the testatrix. To be
Pacita Caizares-Nye. of sound mind, it is sufficient that the testatrix, at the time of
2 Presided by Judge Filemon H. Mendoza.
making the will, knew the value of the estate to be disposed of, the
492 proper object of her bounty, and the character of the testamentary
492 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED act x x x. The will itself shows that the testatrix even had detailed
knowledge of the nature of her estate. She even identified the lot
Ajero vs. Court of Appeals
number and square meters of the lots she had conveyed by will. The
Considering then that the probate proceedings herein must decide objects of her bounty were likewise identified explicitly. And
only the question of identity of the will, its due execution and the considering that she had even written a nursing book which
testamentary capacity of the testatrix, this probate court finds no contained the law and jurisprudence on will and succession, there is
reason at all for the disallowance of the will for its failure to comply more than sufficient showing that she knows the character of the
with the formalities prescribed by law nor for lack of testamentary testamentary act.
capacity of the testatrix. 493
For one, no evidence was presented to show that the will in VOL. 236, SEPTEMBER 15, 1994 493
question is different from the will actually executed by the testatrix.
The only objections raised by the oppositors x x x are that the will
Ajero vs. Court of Appeals
was not written in the handwriting of the testatrix which properly In this wise, the question of identity of the will, its due execution
refers to the question of its due execution, and not to the question of and the testamentary capacity of the testatrix has to be resolved in
identity of will. No other will was alleged to have been executed by favor of the allowance of probate of the will submitted herein.
the testatrix other than the will herein presented. Hence, in the Likewise, no evidence was presented to show sufficient reason
light of the evidence adduced, the identity of the will presented for for the disallowance of herein holographic will. While it was alleged
probate must be accepted, i.e., the will submitted in Court must be that the said will was procured by undue and improper pressure and
deemed to be the will actually executed by the testatrix. influence on the part of the beneficiary or of some other person, the
x x x xxx xxx evidence adduced have not shown any instance where improper
While the fact that it was entirely written, dated and signed in pressure or influence was exerted on the testatrix. (Private
the handwriting of the testatrix has been disputed, the petitioners, respondent) Clemente Sand has testified that the testatrix was still
however, have satisfactorily shown in Court that the holographic alert at the time of the execution of the will, i.e., at or around the
will in question was indeed written entirely, dated and signed in the time of her birth anniversary celebration in 1981. It was also
handwriting of the testatrix. Three (3) witnesses who have established that she is a very intelligent person and has a mind of
convincingly shown knowledge of the handwriting of the testatrix her own. Her independence of character and to some extent, her
have been presented and have explicitly and categorically identified sense of superiority, which has been testified to in Court, all show
the handwriting with which the holographic will in question was the unlikelihood of her being unduly influenced or improperly
written to be the genuine handwriting and signature of the pressured to make the aforesaid will. It must be noted that the
testatrix. Given then the aforesaid evidence, the requirement of the undue influence or improper pressure in question herein only refer
law that the holographic will be entirely written, dated and signed to the making of a will and not as to the specific testamentary
in the handwriting of the testatrix has been complied with. provisions therein which is the proper subject of another proceeding.
x x x xxx xxx Hence, under the circumstances, this Court cannot find convincing
As to the question of the testamentary capacity of the testatrix, reason for the disallowance of the will herein.
(private respondent) Clemente Sand himself has testified in Court Considering then that it is a well-established doctrine in the law
that the testatrix was completely in her sound mind when he visited on succession that in case of doubt, testate succession should be
preferred over intestate succession, and the fact that no convincing 4. (d)If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and
grounds were presented and proven for the disallowance of the influence, on the part of the beneficiary, or of some other
holographic will of the late Annie Sand, the aforesaid will submitted person for his benefit;
herein must be admitted to probate. (Citations omitted.)
3 5. (e)If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud or
On appeal, said Decision was reversed, and the petition for trick, and he did not intend that the instrument should be
probate of decedents will was dismissed. The Court of Appeals his will at the time of fixing his signature thereto.
found that, the holographic will fails to meet the
requirements for its validity. It held that the decedent did not
4 In the same vein, Article 839 of the New Civil Code reads:
comply with Articles 813 and 814 of the New Civil Code, which Article 839: The will shall be disallowed in any of the following
read, as follows: cases:
Article 813: When a number of dispositions appearing in a
holographic will are signed without being dated, and the last 1. (1)If the formalities required by law have not been complied
disposition has a signature and date, such date validates the with;
dispositions preceding it, whatever be the time of prior dispositions. 2. (2)If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally
__________________ incapable of making a will, at the time of its execution;
3. (3)If it was executed through force or under duress, or the
3Rollo, pp. 37-39. influence of fear, or threats;
4Impugned Decision, p. 5; Rollo, p. 46. 4. (4)If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and
494 influence, on the part of the beneficiary or of some other
494 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED person;
Ajero vs. Court of Appeals 5. (5)If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud;
Article 814: In case of insertion, cancellation, erasure or alteration 6. (6)If the testator acted by mistake or did not intend that the
in a holographic will, the testator must authenticate the same by his instrument he signed should be his will at the time of
full signature. affixing his signature thereto.
It alluded to certain dispositions in the will which were either
unsigned and undated, or signed but not dated. It also found 495
that the erasures, alterations and cancellations made thereon VOL. 236, SEPTEMBER 15, 1994 495
had not been authenticated by decedent. Ajero vs. Court of Appeals
Thus, this appeal is impressed with merit. These lists are exclusive; no other grounds can serve to
Section 9, Rule 76 of the Rules of Court provides that wills disallow a will. Thus, in a petition to admit a holographic will
5

shall be disallowed in any of the following cases: to probate, the only issues to be resolved are: (1) whether the
instrument submitted is, indeed, the decedents last will and
1. (a)If not executed and attested as required by law; testament; (2) whether said will was executed in accordance
2. (b)If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally with the formalities prescribed by law; (3) whether the
incapable to make a will, at the time of its execution; decedent had the necessary testamentary capacity at the time
3. (c)If it was executed under duress, or the influence of fear, or the will was executed; and, (4) whether the execution of the
threats; will and its signing were the voluntary acts of the decedent. 6

In the case at bench, respondent court held that the

holographic will of Anne Sand was not executed in accordance
with the formalities prescribed by law. It held that Articles Failure to strictly observe other formalities will not result in
813 and 814 of the New Civil Code, ante, were not complied the disallowance of a holographic will that is unquestionably
with, hence, it disallowed the probate of said will. This is handwritten by the testator.
erroneous. A reading of Article 813 of the New Civil Code shows that
We reiterate what we held in Abangan vs. Abangan, 40 its requirement affects the validity of
Phil. 476, 479 (1919), that: the dispositionscontained in the holographic will, but not its
The object of the solemnities surrounding the execution of wills is probate. If the testator fails to sign and date some of the
to close the door against bad faith and fraud, to avoid substitution dispositions, the result is that these dispositions cannot be
of wills and testaments and to guaranty their truth and effectuated. Such failure, however, does not render the whole
authenticity. Therefore, the laws on this subject should be testament void.
interpreted in such a way as to attain these primordial ends. But,
Likewise, a holographic will can still be admitted to
on the other hand, also one must not lose sight of the fact that it is
probate, notwithstanding non-compliance with the provisions
not the object of the law to restrain and curtail the exercise of the
right to make a will. So when an interpretation already given of Article 814. In the case of Kalaw vs. Relova, 132 SCRA 237,
assures such ends, any other interpretation whatsoever, that adds 242 (1984), this Court held:
nothing but demands more requisites entirely unnecessary, useless Ordinarily, when a number of erasures, corrections, and
and frustrative of the testators last will, must be disregarded. interlineations made by the testator in a holographic Will have not
For purposes of probating non-holographic wills, these formal been noted under his signature, x x x the Will is not thereby
invalidated as a whole, but at most only as respects the particular
solemnities include the subscription, attestation, and
words erased, corrected or interlined. Manresa gave an identical
acknowledgment requirements under Articles 805 and 806 of
commentary when he said la omision de la salvedad no anula el
the New Civil Code. testamento, segun la regla de jurisprudencia establecida en la
In the case of holographic wills, on the other hand, what sentencia de 4 de Abril de 1895. (Citations omitted.)
8

assures authenticity is the requirement that they be totally Thus, unless the unauthenticated alterations, cancellations or
autographic or handwritten by the testator himself,7 as insertions were made on the date of the holographic will or on
provided _________________
_________________
8 See Velasco vs. Lopez, 1 Phil. 720, 725 (1903), citing a Decision of the

5 Pecson vs. Coronel, 45 Phil. 216 (1923); See 3 EDGARDO L. PARAS, Civil Supreme Court of Spain, dated April 4, 1895; See also, 3 MANRESA,
Code of the Philippines Annotated (1989), pp. 145-146. Commentarios al Codigo Espaol (Quinta ed.), p. 483; See further, 3 ARTURO
6 See Montaano vs. Suesa, 14 Phil. 676 (1909).
M. TOLENTINO, Commentaries & Jurisprudence on the Civil Code (1973), p.
7 See Fernando vs. Villalon, 3 Phil. 386 (1904). 107, citing Castan 341, 5 Valverde 82; 3 AMBROSIO PADILLA, Civil Code
496 Annotated (1987), pp. 157-158; 2 RAMON C. AQUINO and CAROLINA C.
496 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED GRIO-AQUINO (1990), p. 42.
497
Ajero vs. Court of Appeals
VOL. 236, SEPTEMBER 15, 1994 497
under Article 810 of the New Civil Code, thus:
A person may execute a holographic will which must be entirely
Ajero vs. Court of Appeals
written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is testators signature, their presence does not invalidate the
9

subject to no other form, and may be made in or out of the will itself. The lack of authentication will only result in
10

Philippines, and need not be witnessed. (Italics supplied.) disallowance of such changes.
 It is also proper to note that the requirements of The Court of Appeals further held that decedent Annie
authentication of changes and signing and dating of Sand could not validly dispose of the house and lot located in
dispositions appear in provisions (Articles 813 and 814) Cabadbaran, Agusan del Norte, in its entirety. This is correct
separate from that which provides for the necessary conditions and must be affirmed.
for the validity of the holographic will (Article 810). The As a general rule, courts in probate proceedings are limited
distinction can be traced to Articles 678 and 688 of the Spanish to pass only upon the extrinsic validity of the will sought to be
Civil Code, from which the present provisions covering probated. However, in exceptional instances, courts are not
holographic wills are taken. They read as follows: powerless to do what the situation constrains them to do, and
Article 678: A will is called holographic when the testator writes it pass upon certain provisions of the will. In the case at bench,
11

himself in the form and with the requisites required in Article 688. decedent herself indubitably stated in her holographic will
Article 688: Holographic wills may be executed only by persons that the Cabadbaran property is in the name of her late father,
of full age. John H. Sand (which led oppositor Dr. Jose Ajero to question
In order that the will be valid it must be drawn on stamped
her conveyance of the same in its entirety). Thus, as correctly
paper corresponding to the year of its execution, written in its
held by respondent court, she cannot validly dispose of the
entirety by the testator and signed by him, and must contain a
statement of the year, month and day of its execution. whole property, which she shares with her fathers other heirs.
If it should contain any erased, corrected, or interlined words, IN VIEW WHEREOF, the instant petition is GRANTED.
the testator must identify them over his signature. Foreigners may The Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 22840,
execute holographic wills in their own language. dated March 30, 1992, is REVERSED and SET ASIDE, except
This separation and distinction adds support to the with respect to the invalidity of the disposition of the entire
interpretation that only the requirements of Article 810 of the house and lot in Cabadbaran, Agusan del Norte. The Decision
New Civil Codeand not those found in Articles 813 and 814 of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 94 in Sp.
of the Proc. No. Q-37171, dated November 19, 1988, admitting to
__________________ probate the holographic will of decedent Annie Sand, is hereby
REINSTATED, with the above qualification as regards the
9 3 PARAS, op. cit..
10 It must be noted, however, that in Kalaw, this Court laid down an Cabadbaran property.
exception to the general rule, when it invalidated the entire will because of an No costs.
unauthenticated erasure made by the testator. In that case, the will had only SO ORDERED.
one substantial provision. This was altered by substituting the original heir Narvasa (C.J., Chairman) Padilla, Regalado and Mendoza,
with another, with such alteration being unauthenticated. This Court held that
the whole will was void for the simple reason that nothing remains in the Will JJ., concur.
after (the provision is invalidated) which could remain valid. To state that the Petition granted. Judgment reversed and set aside.
Will as first written should be given efficacy is to disregard the seeming change Note.Attestation clause is valid even if in a language not
of mind of the testatrix. But, that change of mind can neither be given effect
known to testator. (Caneda vs. Court of Appeals, 222 SCRA
because she failed to authenticate it in the manner required by law by affixing
her full signature. 781 [1993])o0o________________
11 Nepomuceno vs. Court of Appeals, 139 SCRA 206 (1985); SeeNuguid vs.
498
Nuguid, 17 SCRA 449 (1966); See also Cayetano vs. Leonidas,129 SCRA
498 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 522 (1984).
Ajero vs. Court of Appeals 499
same Codeare essential to the probate of a holographic will. Copyright 2017 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.