[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
3K views1 page

Miciano vs. Brimo 50 Phil 867

The testator Joseph Brimo was a Turkish national who owned property in the Philippines. In his will, he stated that his Philippine estate should be distributed according to Philippine law. He also stated that anyone who failed to comply with distributing the estate according to Philippine law would forfeit their inheritance. However, the court ruled that a foreigner's estate must be distributed according to their national law, not local law, per the Philippine Civil Code. Therefore, Joseph Brimo's estate would be distributed according to Turkish law, and Andre Brimo would not forfeit his inheritance as the condition in the will was not valid.

Uploaded by

Ross Camille Salazar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
3K views1 page

Miciano vs. Brimo 50 Phil 867

The testator Joseph Brimo was a Turkish national who owned property in the Philippines. In his will, he stated that his Philippine estate should be distributed according to Philippine law. He also stated that anyone who failed to comply with distributing the estate according to Philippine law would forfeit their inheritance. However, the court ruled that a foreigner's estate must be distributed according to their national law, not local law, per the Philippine Civil Code. Therefore, Joseph Brimo's estate would be distributed according to Turkish law, and Andre Brimo would not forfeit his inheritance as the condition in the will was not valid.

Uploaded by

Ross Camille Salazar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

30. Miciano vs.

Brimo 50 Phil 867

G.R. No. L-22595

November 1, 1927

Testate Estate of Joseph G. Brimo, JUAN MICIANO, administrator, petitioner-appellee,


vs.
ANDRE BRIMO, opponent-appellant.

FACTS:
A will of a Turkish testator (Joseph Brimo) provided that his Philippine
estate is disposed of in accordance with the Philippine Law. The testator further
provided that whoever fails to comply with this request (that his estate be distributed
in accordance with Philippine law) would forfeit his inheritance.
The Appellant (Andre Brimo), one of the brothers of the deceased Joseph Brimo,
opposed the Appellee (Juan Miciano)'s partition scheme of the estate which denies
his participation in the inheritance.
ISSUE: Whether the Turkish Law or Philippine Law be the basis on the distribution of
Joseph Brimo's estates. Will Andre Brimo forfeit his inheritance?
RULING: The court held that the provision of a foreigner's will that his properties
shall be distributed according to Philippine law and not his national law is NOT LEGAL

because it expressly ignores the testator's national law when, according to article
16 of the civil Code, such national law of the testator is the one to govern his
testamentary dispositions.

Testators estate shall be distributed according to his national (Turkish) law. He


cannot provide otherwise. The appellant's inheritance will not be forfeited because
the provision is not legal.

You might also like