Article 65 family code of the Philippines MARIA GERVACIO BLAS, MANUEL GERVACIO BLAS, LEONCIO GERVACIO BLAS and LOIDA GERVACIO BLAS, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

Related case Article 65 family code of the Philippines

MARIA GERVACIO BLAS, MANUEL GERVACIO BLAS, LEONCIO GERVACIO BLAS and LOIDA GERVACIO BLAS, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

vs.

ROSALINA SANTOS, in her capacity as Special Administratrix of the Estate of the deceased MAXIMA SANTOS VDA. DE BLAS, in Sp. Proc. No. 2524, Court of First Instance of Rizal, defendants-appellants. MARTA GERVACIO BLAS and DR. JOSE CHIVI, Defendants-Appellants.

LABRADOR, J.:

FACTS: This action was instituted by plaintiffs against the administration of the estate of Maxima Santos, to secure a judicial declaration that one-half of the properties left by Maxima Santos Vda. de Blas, the greater bulk of which are set forth and described in the project of partition presented in the proceedings for the administration of the estate of the deceased Simeon Blas, had been promised by the deceased Maxima Santos to be delivered upon her death and in her will to the plaintiffs, and requesting that the said properties so promised be adjudicated to the plaintiffs. The complaint also prays for actual damages in the amount of P50,000. The alleged promise of the deceased Maxima Santos is contained in a document executed by Maxima Santos on December 26, 1936 attached to the complaint as Annex “H” and introduced at the trial as Exhibit “A”. The complaint also alleges that the plaintiffs are entitled to inherit certain properties enumerated in paragraph 3 thereof, situated in Malabon, Rizal and Obando, Bulacan, but which properties have already been included in the inventory of the estate of the deceased Simeon Blas and evidently partitioned and conveyed to his heirs in the proceedings for the administration of his estate. Spouses Simeon Blas and Marta Cruz have three children they also have grandchildren. One year after Marta Cruz died, Blas married Maxima Santos but they don’t have children and the properties that he and his former wife acquired during the first marriage were not liquidated. Simeon Blas executed a will disposing half of his properties in favor of Maxima the other half for payment of debts, Blas also named a few devisees and legatees therein. In lieu of this, Maxima executed a document whereby she intimated that she understands the will of her husband; that she promises that she’ll be giving, upon her death, one-half of the properties she’ll be acquiring to the heirs and legatees named in the will of his husband; that she can select or choose any of them depending upon the respect, service, and treatment accorded to her by said heirs. On 1937 Simeon Blas died while Maxima died on 1956 and Rosalina Santos became administrator of her estate. In the same year, Maria Gervacio Blas, child of Simeon Blas in his first marriage, together with three other grandchildren of Simeon Blas (heirs of Simeon Blas), learned that Maxima did not fulfill her promise as it was learned that Maxima only disposed not even one-tenth of the properties she acquired from Simeon Blas. The heirs are now contending that they did not partition Simeon Blas’ property precisely because Maxima promised that they’ll be receiving properties upon her death.

ISSUE: Whether or not the heirs can acquire the properties that Maxima promised with them.

HELD: Yes, they can acquire the properties that Maxima promised with them because it was stated in Art. 1347 that “No contract may be entered into upon future inheritance except in cases expressly authorized by law.”. In this case the contract was authorized by law because the promised made by Maxima to their heirs before she died is a valid reason and it should be enforceable upon her death and her heirs can now acquire the succession of the properties in issue.