‣
If in determining the rights of the
reservatarios inter se,
proximity of degree and the right of representation of
nephews are made to apply, the rule of double share for immediate collaterals, of the whole blood should
be likewise operative.
‣
In other words,
the reserva troncal merely determines the group of relatives (reservatarios) to whom the
property should be returned; but within
that group
the individual right to the property should be decided
by the applicable rules of ordinary intestate succession, since Art. 891 does not specify otherwise
.
‣
This conclusion is strengthened by the circumstance that the
reserva
being an exceptional case, its
application should be limited to what is strictly needed to accomplish the purpose of the law.
‣
The restrictive interpretation is the more imperative in view of the new Civil Code’s hostility to successional
reservas
and reversions, as exemplified by the suppression of the
reserva viudal
and the
reversion legal
of the
Code of 1889
‣
Even during the
reservista’s
lifetime, the reservatarios, who are the ultimate acquirers of the property, can
already assert the right to prevent the reservista from doing anything that might frustrate their reversionary
right; and for this purpose they can compel the annotation of their right in the Registry of Property even while
the reservista is alive. This right is incompatible with the mere expectancy that corresponds to the natural heirs
of the
reservista.
It is likewise clear that the reservable property is no part of the estate of the
reservista,
who
may not dispose of them by will, so long as there are
reservatarios
existing. The latter, therefore, do not inherit
from the
reservista,
but from the descendant
prepositus,
of whom the reservatarios are the heirs
mortis causa,
subject of the condition that they must survive the
reservista.
‣
Had the nephews of whole and half-blood succeeded the
prepositus
directly, those of full-blood
would undoubtedly receive a double share compared to those of the half blood, why then should the
latter receive equal shares simply because the transmission of the property was delayed by the
interregnum of the
reserva?
The decedent (causante) the heirs and their relationship being the same,
there is no cogent reason why the hereditary portions should vary.
‣
Is there representation among the reservatarios?
‣
YES, as in intestate succession, the rule of preference of degree among
reservatarios
is qualified by the rule of
representation.
‣
BALANE: Actually, there will be only one instance of representation among the reservatarios, a case of the
Prepositus being survived by brothers/sisters and children of a predeceased or incapacitated brother/sister.
‣
F
LORENTINO
VS
. F
LORENTINO
40 P
HIL
. 480 (1919)
CLARENCE TIU
A
TENEO
L
AW
4B, B
ATCH
2017
OF
110
217
WILLS AND SUCCESSION
C
IVIL
L
AW
R
EVIEWER
C
HAPTER
2: T
ESTAMENTARY
S
UCCESSION
S
ECTION
5: L
EGITIME
‣
Property disputed in this case belonged to Apolonio II. He had 11 children, 9 from his first marriage and 2 from
his second.The child with the second wife are Mercedes and Apolonio III. When Apolonio II died, his estate was
