Intransmissble by express provision of law 5 Obligation to pay taxes because

Intransmissble by express provision of law 5

This preview shows page 5 - 6 out of 91 pages.

Intransmissble by express provision of law; 5. Obligation to pay taxes – because the claim is against the estate; 6. Criminal liability – the civil liability arising from the crime, however, is transmissible 7. Obligation to give support – it is extinguished by the death of the person obliged to give support. Monetary obligations or debts (2 views) 1. Not transmissible since it is actually the estate of the deceased which pays the debts 2. Transmissible because the shares of the heirs are reduced by the payment of the debts – aka. progressive 'depersonalization' – rights and obligations attach to whoever has possession of the property (preferred view). In the case of: ALVAREZ v IAC 185 SCRA 8 May 7, 1990 FACTS: Aniceto Yanes was survived by his children, Rufino, Felipe and Teodora. Herein private respondents, Estelita, Iluminado and Jesus, are the children of Rufino who died in 1962 while the other private respondents, Antonio and Rosario Yanes, are children of Felipe. Teodora was survivedby her child, Jovita (Jovito) Alib. There are two parcels of land which are involved in this case. Said lots were registered in the names of the heirs of Aniceto Yanes. Fortunato D. Santiago was issued a Transfer Certificate of Title. Santiago then sold the lots to Monico B. Fuentebella, Jr. The lots were sold thereafter Rosendo Alvarez. The Yaneses filed a complaint against Santiago, Arsenia Vda. de Fuentebella, Alvarez and the Register of Deeds of Negros Occidental for the “return” of the ownership and possession of the lots, and prayed for an accounting of the produce of the land from 1944 up to the filing of the complaint, and that the share or money equivalent due the heirs be delivered to them, and damages. During the pendency of the case, Alvarez sold the lots to Dr. Rodolfo Siason. ISSUE: Whether the liability arising from the sale of the lots made by Rosendo Alvarez to Dr.Rodolfo Siason should be the sole liability of the late Rosendo Alvarez or of his estate, after his death. RULING: As a general rule is that a party’s contractual rights and obligations are transmissible to the successors. However, in this case Petitioners being the heirs of the late Rosendo Alvarez, cannot escape the legal consequences of their father’s transaction, which gave rise to the present claim for damages. That petitioners did not inherit the property involved herein is of no moment because by legal fiction, the monetary equivalent thereof devolved into the mass of their father’s hereditary estate, and we have ruled that the hereditary assets are always liable in their totality for the payment of the debts of the estate. It must, however, be made clear that petitioners are liable only to the extent of the value of their inheritance. Other cases: VIARDO VS BELMONTE, ET AL.
Image of page 5
Image of page 6

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture