Austria v. Reyes Digest

Austria v. Reyes 

Facts:

1. Basilia Austria executed a will wherein the bulk of her estate was given to the respondents, alll have been declared by the former as her legally adopted children.

2. During her lifetime, Basilia filed a petition for the probate of her will. It was opposed by the petitioners who are the nephews and nieces. The opposition was dismissed and the will was allowed.

3. In 1954, the petitioners filed a petition for intervention for partition alleging that they were the nearest kin of Basilia and that the respondent had not been in fact adopted by the decedent in accordance with law, hence the latter were strangers with no right to succeed as heirs.

4. The lower court held that the validity or invalidity is not material to the institution of heirs. It held that the testator was possessed of testamentary capacity and her last will was executed free from falsification, fraud, trickery or undue influence.

Issue: Whether or not the institution of the heir is valid

RULING: Yes. The general rule is that the falsity of the stated cause for the testamentary institution does not affect the validity or efficacy of the institution. An exception to the rule is that the falsity will set aide the institution if certain factors are present. Before the institution of the heirs will be annulled under Art. 850 the following requisites must concur; 1) the cause must be stated in the will, 2) the cause is shown to be false, and 3) it must appear from the face of the will that the testator would not have made such institution if he had known the falsity. Moreover, testacy is favored and doubts are resolved on its side especially when the will shows a clear intention on the part of the testator to dispose of practically his whole estate as in this case.