Padura v. Baldovino

71. Padura v.
Baldovino RTC:
G.R. NO. 11960, 27 December 1958 The lower court rendered judgment
declaring all the reservees (without distinction)
NATURE: Appeal on a pure question of law from "co-owners, pro-indiviso, equal shares of the
an order of the Court of First Instance of Laguna parcels of land" subject matter of the suit.
FACTS: APPELLANTS CONTENTION (whole blood):

Agustin Padura contracted two marriages The appellants contend that notwithstanding
during his lifetime. With his first wife, Gervacia the reservable character of the property under Art,
Landig, he had one child whom they named Manuel 891 of the new Civil Code (Art. 811 of the Code of
Padura, and with his second, Benita Garing; he had 1889) the reservatarios nephews of the whole
blood are entitled to a share twice as large as that
two children named Fortunato Padura and
of the others, in conformity with Arts, 1006, 1008
Candelaria Padura. of the Civil Code of the Philippines (Arts. 949 and
951 of the Code of 1889) on intestate succession.
Agustin Padura died on April 26, 1908,
leaving a last will and testament, duly probated in ISSUE:
the Court of First Instance of Laguna, wherein he In a case of RESERVA TRONCAL, where
bequeathed his properties among his children, the only reservatarios (reservees) surviving the
Manuel, Candelaria and Fortunato, and his reservista, and belonging to the line of origin, are
surviving spouse, Benita Garing. Under the probate nephews of the descendant (prepositus), but some
proceedings, Fortunato was adjudicated four parcels are nephews of the half blood and the others are
of land. nephews of the whole blood,
1. Should the reserved properties be
Fortunato Padura died unmarried, without apportioned among them EQUALLY?; or
having executed a will; and not having any issue; 2. Should the nephews of the whole blood take
the said parcels of land were inherited exclusively a share twice as large as that of the nephews
by her mother, Benita Garing. She applied for and of the half-blood?
later was issued a Torrens Certificate of Title in her
name, but subject to the condition that the RULING:
properties were reservable in favor of relatives After mature reflection, we have concluded
within the third degree belonging to the line from
that the position of the appellants is correct.
which said property came.
The RESERVA TRONCAL is a special rule
Candelaria Padura died leaving as her only designed primarily to assure the return of the
heirs, her four legitimate children, Cristeta, reservable property to the third degree relatives
Melania, Anicia and Pablo, all surnamed Baldovino. belonging to the line from which the property
Six years later, Manuel Padura also died. Surviving originally came, and avoid its being dissipated into
him are his legitimate children, Dionisia, Felisa, and by the relatives of the inheriting ascendant
Flora, Gornelio, Francisco, Juana, and Severino, all
(reservista).
surnamed Padura.
Upon the death of Benita Garing (the To this end, the Code provides:
reservista), appellants and appellees took possession "Art. 891. The ascendant who inherits from
of the reservable properties. The legitimate children his descendant any property which the latter may
of the deceased Manuel Padura and Candelaria have acquired by gratuitous title from another
Baldovino were declared to be the rightful ascendant, or a brother or sister, is obliged to
reservees, and as such, entitled to the reservable reserve such property as he may have acquired by
properties (the original reservees Candelaria Padura operation of law for the benefit of relatives who are
and Manuel Padura, having predeceased the within the third degree and who belong to the line
reservista). from which said property came. (811)"
The stated purpose of the reserva is There is a THIRD POINT that deserves
accomplished once property has devolved to the consideration. Even during the reservista's lifetime,
specified relatives of the line of origin. the reservatarios, who are the ultimate acquirers of
the property, can already assert the right to prevent
HOWEVER, there is no further occasion
for its application. the reservista from doing anything that might
frustrate their reversionary right: and for this
In the relations between one reservatario and purpose they can compel the annotation of their
another of the same degree, there is no call for right in the Registry of Property even while the
applying Art. 891 any longer; wherefore, the reservista is alive. This right is incompatible with
respective share of each in the reversionary the mere expectancy that corresponds to the natural
property should be governed by the ordinary rules
heirs of the reservista. It is likewise clear that the
of INTESTATE SUCCESSION.
reservable property is no part of the estate of
Therefore, upon the death of the the reservista, who may not dispose of them by will,
ascendant reservista, the reservable property should so long as there are reservatarios existing. The
pass, not to all the reservatorios as a class, but only latter, therefore, do not inherit from the reservist,
to those nearest in degree to the descendant but from the descendant prepositus, of whom
(prepositus) , excluding those reservatarios of more the reservatarios are the heirs mortis causa, subject
remote degree. And within the third degree of
to the condition that they must survive the
relationship from the descendant (prepositus), the
right of representation operates in favor of reservista. Had the nephews of whole and half-
nephews. (Note: you can end here sa recits) blood succeeded the prepositus directly, those of
full-blood would undoubtedly receive a double
FURTHER RULING (and/or questions for recits): share compared to those of the half-blood. Why
Proximity of degree and right of then should the latter receive equal shares simply
representation are basic principles of ordinary because the transmission of the property was
intestate succession; so is the rule that whole blood delayed by the interregnum of the reserva? The
brothers and nephews are entitled to a share double decedent (causante) the heirs and their relationship
that of brothers and nephews of half-blood. being the same, there is no cogent reason why the
If in determining the rights of hereditary portions should vary.
the reservatarios inter se, proximity of degree and
the right of representation of nephews are made to FINALLY, the SC said that the trial
apply, the rule of double share for immediate court’s opinion is supported by distinguished
collaterals of the whole blood should be likewise commentators of the Civil Code of 1889, among
operative. them Sanchez Román and Mucius Scaevola. The
reason given by these authors is that
In other words, the reserva troncal merely the reservatarios are called by law to take the
determines the group of relatives (reservatarios) reservable property because they belong to the line
to whom the property should be returned; of origin; and not because of their relationship.
but within that group, the individual right to the BUT the argument would lead to the conclusion
property should be decided by the applicable rules that the property should pass to any and all
of ordinary intestate succession, since Art. 891 the reservatarios, as a class, and in equal shares,
does not specify otherwise. This conclusion is regardless of lines and degrees. In truth, such is the
strengthened by the circumstance that thesis of Scaevola, that later became known as the
the reserva being an exceptional case, its theory of reserva integral.
application should be limited to what is strictly
needed to accomplish the purpose of the law.
BUT, as we have seen, the Supreme Courts
of Spain and of the Philippines have REJECTED
that view, and consider that the reservable property
should be succeeded by the reservatario who is
nearest in degree, according to the basic rules of
intestacy.

Padura v. Baldovino

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Padura v. Baldovino

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

Padura v. Baldovino

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

71. Padura v.

FACTS: APPELLANTS CONTENTION (whole blood):

You might also like