CASE DIGEST
Kucskar v. Sekito, Jr.
G.R. No. 237449, [December 2, 2020]
THIRD, LOPEZ, M.
Succession; Wills; Probate of Foreigner's Will; Doctrine of Processual Presumption
A foreign will to be considered for
probate in the Philippines, it must comply with the formalities prescribed by
the law of the place where it was executed or with Philippine laws. the
doctrine of "processual presumption," stating that the party invoking
a foreign law has the burden of proving it, and the foreign law must be
properly pleaded and proved. In the absence of proof of the foreign law's
content, the presumption is that the foreign law is the same as Philippine law.
Aida A. Bambao, a naturalized American
citizen, executed a Last Will and Testament (will) in California on October 28,
1999. In the will, she nominated her cousin, Cosme B. Sekito, Jr., as a special
independent executor over her assets located in the Philippines. Aida passed
away on February 5, 2000, in Long Beach, California. Cosme filed a Petition for
the Allowance of Will before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City.
Linda A. Kucskar, Aida's sister and one of the heirs, opposed the petition, claiming
expenses for Aida's adopted minor child, Elsa Bambao.
Whether or not Aida's will, executed in California, meets the formalities required for its probate in the Philippines.
NO. The Court, in remanding the case, held that Aida's will failed to comply with the legal formalities required for its probate in the Philippines. Philippine laws do not prohibit the probate of wills executed by foreigners abroad, but such wills must conform to the formalities prescribed by the law of the place of execution or Philippine laws. Aida's will, executed in California, should have been examined based on California law. However, the petitioner failed to present a copy of the pertinent California law as required by the rules.
The Court emphasized that the doctrine
of "processual presumption" applies, and foreign laws must be pleaded
and proven in accordance with the Rules of Court. The will did not meet the
requirements for acknowledgment and attestation under Philippine law. Even if
the substantial compliance rule was applied to the attestation clause, it could
not remedy the lack of acknowledgment. The living trust presented by the
proponent did not fill the void, and Linda's failure to object during the
probate proceedings did not relieve the proponent from establishing compliance
with legal formalities. The case was remanded to the RTC for compliance with
the rules on proving foreign laws.
No comments:
Post a Comment