Article 992 of the Civil Code bars the illegitimate child from inheriting ab intestato (intestate or without a will) from the legitimate children and relatives of his father or mother. This case involving the couple Rene and Gina, however, is an exception.
During their marriage, Rene and Gina had accumulated vast real and personal properties but begot only one son, Randy. When son Randy was old enough, he got married to Betty and begot three children, Lisa, Mely and Randy Jr. Randy’s marriage to Betty was, however, subsequently annulled. Thus, the three children lived with their mother Betty separately from their father Randy and grandparents Rene and Gina. Thereafter, Randy co-habited with two other women, with whom he had a son Randy II and a daughter Naty.
Unfortunately, Randy died ahead of his parents, Rene and Gina. Upon his death, his parents took care of his acknowledged illegitimate natural children, Naty and Randy II, who was then a mere 9-month-old baby. Rene also asked the court for visitation rights to his other legitimate grandchildren Lisa, Mely and Randy Jr. Initially it was granted but eventually it stopped because Betty did not want it anymore.
Gina also died, leaving an estate of real and personal properties with a probable gross value of P29 million which formed part of the conjugal partnership of properties with Rene. At the time of her death, Gina was survived by her husband Rene and legitimate grandchildren Lisa, Mely, Randy Jr., as well as illegitimate grandchildren Randy II and Naty. Rene continued taking care of Randy II and Naty, later on adopting them.
Five years after the death of Gina, her legitimate granddaughter Lisa filed a petition for letters of administration in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), praying that she be appointed administrator of Gina’s estate. Rene, who was then already 89 years old, opposed the petition. He contended that, as the surviving spouse of Gina, he should be the one appointed administrator and must be accorded legal preference as part owner of the mass of conjugal properties left by Gina. He alleged that he was still capable of administering them despite his age.
Later on, after a failed attempt at settling the proceedings amicably, Rene filed a manifestation nominating his adopted son, Randy II, to act as administrator in the event that he would be appointed administrator of Gina’s estate.
Thus, Randy II subsequently filed an Opposition-in-Intervention echoing the allegations of Rene’s opposition and presenting his own qualifications to administer the estate. In the course of the proceedings, however, Rene died.
After the testimonies of both parties were heard and evidence adduced, the RTC rendered a decision appointing Randy II as administrator of Gina’s estate. On appeal, however, the Court of Appeals (CA) reversed and set aside the said decision and instead appointed Lisa as administratrix. The CA zeroed in on Randy II’s status as an illegitimate child of Randy and thus barred from representing him in the estate of the latter’s legitimate mother Gina. Citing Article 992, the CA ruled that Randy II, who is barred from inheriting from his grandmother Gina, cannot be preferred over Lisa in the administration of Gina’s estate. Was the CA correct?
No. The basis for Article 992 of the Civil Code, referred to as the iron curtain rule, is quite the opposite scenario of the facts obtaining herein because the actual relationship between Rene and Gina, on one hand, and Randy II, on the other, was akin to the normal relationship of legitimate relatives. Randy II was reared from infancy by Gina and Rene, who both acknowledged him as their grandchild. In fact, Randy II is a legally adopted child of Rene, entitled to share in the distribution of the latter’s estate as direct heir, not simply representing his deceased illegitimate father, Randy. Half of the properties included in Gina’s estate were claimed by Rene as forming part of their conjugal partnership of gains during the subsistence of their marriage which remained undetermined, un-liquidated and thus still comingled with that of Rene.
Thus, it is patently clear that the CA erred in excluding Randy II from the administration of Gina’s estate. As Rene’s adopted son, his interest in Gina’s estate is as apparent as the interest of Lisa, considering that under the law, Rene, being the surviving spouse, would have the right of succession over a portion of the exclusive property of Gina, aside from his share in the conjugal partnership.
In the main, the attendant facts and circumstances of this case necessitate, at least, a joint administration by both Lisa and Randy II of their grandmother Gina’s estate (Intestate estate of Suntay etc. vs. Suntay, G.R. 183053, June 16, 2010).
* * *
Email: js0711192@gmail.com