SUROZA vs. HONRADO [A.M. No. 2026-CFI, December 19, 1981]

 - CASE DIGEST -

SUROZA vs. HONRADO

A.M. No. 2026-CFI, December 19, 1981

SUBJECT: LAW ON WILLS AND SUCCESSION

Topic: every will must be executed in a language or dialect known to the testator

FACTS: Mauro Suroza and Marcelina Salvador reared a boy named Agapito who used the surname Suroza. Mauro died and Marcelina became the beneficiary of Mauro’s pension. Years after, Agapito married Nenita. Marcelina executed a notarial will. That will which is in English was thumbmarked by her. Marcelina was illiterate. In that will, Marcelina bequeathed all her estate to her supposed granddaughter Marilyn. In the opening paragraph of the will, it was stated that English was a language “understood and known” to the testatrix. But in its concluding paragraph, it was stated that the will was read to the testatrix “and translated into Filipino language”.

ISSUE: Whether or not a will written in another language which is a translation of the language known to the testator is void.

RULING. Yes. Will was written in English and was thumbmarked by an illiterate testatrix. In the opening paragraph of the will, it was stated that English was a language “understood and known” to the testatrix. But in its concluding paragraph, it was stated that the will was read to the testatrix “and translated into Filipino language”. That could only mean that the will was written in a language not known to the illiterate testatrix and, therefore, it is void because of the mandatory provision of article 804 of the Civil Code that every will must be executed in a language or dialect known to the testator.

 

Disciplinary action should be taken against respondent judge for his improper disposition of the testate case which might have resulted in a miscarriage of justice because the decedent’s legal heirs and not the instituted heiress in the void will should have inherited the decedent’s estate. Inefficiency implies negligence, incompetence, ignorance and carelessness. A judge would be inexcusably negligent if he failed in the performance of his duties that diligence, prudence and circumspection which the law requires in the rendition of any public service.

In this case, respondent judge, on perusing the will and noting that it was written in English and was thumbmarked by an obviously illiterate testatrix, could have readily perceived that the will is void.

Click to View Full Text of the Case