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

Borja v. Borja, 46 SCRA 577

Francisco de Borja filed to probate the will of his deceased wife Josefa Tangco. After Francisco died, his son Jose became the sole administrator of Josefa's estate. Francisco had remarried Tasiana before he died. Tasiana instituted probate proceedings for Francisco's estate and was appointed special administratrix. Jose and Tasiana entered a compromise agreement, but Tasiana opposed its approval, arguing it was invalid since Francisco's will had not been probated. The court held the agreement valid, as it merely conveyed Tasiana's share in the estates and did not attempt to settle or distribute Francisco's estate before his will was probated, which is allowed since one's hereditary share vests at death.

Uploaded by

Abby
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
84 views1 page

Borja v. Borja, 46 SCRA 577

Francisco de Borja filed to probate the will of his deceased wife Josefa Tangco. After Francisco died, his son Jose became the sole administrator of Josefa's estate. Francisco had remarried Tasiana before he died. Tasiana instituted probate proceedings for Francisco's estate and was appointed special administratrix. Jose and Tasiana entered a compromise agreement, but Tasiana opposed its approval, arguing it was invalid since Francisco's will had not been probated. The court held the agreement valid, as it merely conveyed Tasiana's share in the estates and did not attempt to settle or distribute Francisco's estate before his will was probated, which is allowed since one's hereditary share vests at death.

Uploaded by

Abby
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

Borja v.

Borja, 46 SCRA 577


FACTS: Francisco de Borja filed a petition for probate of the will of his wife who died, Josefa Tangco, with the CFI of Rizal. He
was appointed executor and administrator, until he died; his son Jose became the sole administrator. Francisco had taken a
2nd wife Tasiana before he died; she instituted testate proceedings with the CFI of Nueva Ecija upon his death and was
appointed special administatrix. Jose and Tasiana entered upon a compromise agreement, but Tasiana opposed the approval
of the compromise agreement. She argues that it was no valid, because the heirs cannot enter into such kind of agreement
without first probating the will of Francisco, and at the time the agreement was made, the will was still being probated with
the CFI of Nueva Ecija.
ISSUE: W/N the compromise agreement is valid, even if the will of Francisco has not yet been probated.
HELD: YES, the compromise agreement is valid. The agreement stipulated that Tasiana will receive P800,000 as full payment
for her hereditary share in the estate of Francisco and Josefa. There was here no attempt to settle or distribute the estate of
Francisco de Borja among the heirs thereto before the probate of his will. The clear object of the contract was merely the
conveyance by Tasiana Ongsingco of any and all her individual share and interest, actual or eventual, in the estate of
Francisco de Borja and Josefa Tangco. There is no stipulation as to any other claimant, creditor or legatee. And as a
hereditary share in a decedent’s estate is transmitted or vested immediately from the moment of the death of such causante
or predecessor in interest (Civil Code of the Philippines, Art. 777) there is no legal bar to a successor (with requisite
contracting capacity) disposing of her or his hereditary share immediately after such death, even if the actual extent of such
share is not determined until the subsequent liquidation of the estate.

You might also like