ARELLANO v. PASCUAL G.R. No. 189776|December 15, 2010

CASE DIGEST:

ARELLANO v. PASCUAL 

G.R. No. 189776|December 15, 2010 

Topic: Collation has two distinct Concept; Siblings are collateral relatives and, therefore not entitled to any legitime 

Facts:

Angel N. Pascual Jr. died intestate leaving only as his heirs his siblings, which were the respondents in the case at bar. In a petition for "Judicial Settlement of Intestate Estate and Issuance of Letters of Administration," filed by respondents before the RTC of Makati, respondents alleged, that a parcel of land (the donated property) located in Teresa Village, Makati, by way of Deed of Donation, was transferred by the decedent to petitioner; additionally, it also alleged the validity of the donation, stating that it "may be considered as an advance legitime" of petitioner. Respondent’s nephew Victor was (as they prayed for in their petition), appointed as Administrator of the estate by Makati RTC. The probate court found the donation valid hence said property is subject to collation. The CA sustained the probate court‘s ruling that the property donated to petitioner is subject to collation. 

Issue: 

1. WON the property donated to petitioner is subject to collation. - NO 

2. WON appellees who are merely collateral relatives of deceased Angel Pascual Jr. as his compulsory heirs entitled to legitimes. – NO 

Held: 

1. The term collation has two distinct concepts: first, it is a mere mathematical operation by the addition of the value of donations made by the testator to the value of the hereditary estate; and second, it is the return to the hereditary estate of property disposed of by lucrative title by the testator during his lifetime. The purposes of collation are to secure equality among the compulsory heirs in so far as is possible, and to determine the free portion, after finding the legitime, so that inofficious donations may be reduced. Collation takes place when there are compulsory heirs, one of its purposes being to determine the legitime and the free portion. If there is no compulsory heir, there is no legitime to be safeguarded. 

The decedent not having left any compulsory heir who is entitled to any legitime, he was at liberty to donate all his properties, even if nothing was left for his siblings-collateral relatives to inherit. His donation to petitioner, assuming that it was valid, is deemed as donation made to a stranger, chargeable against the free portion of the estate. There being no compulsory heir, however, the donated property is not subject to collation. 

2. The records do not show that the decedent left any primary, secondary, or concurring compulsory heirs. He was only survived by his siblings, who are his collateral relatives and, therefore, are not entitled to any legitime that part of the testators property which he cannot dispose of because the law has reserved it for compulsory heirs. 

The compulsory heirs may be classified into (1) primary, (2) secondary, and (3) concurring. The primary compulsory heirs are those who have precedence over and exclude other compulsory heirs; legitimate children and descendants are primary compulsory heirs. The secondary compulsory heirs are those who succeed only in the absence of the primary heirs; the legitimate parents and ascendants are secondary compulsory heirs. The concurring compulsory heirs are those who succeed together with the primary or the secondary compulsory heirs; the illegitimate children, and the surviving spouse are concurring compulsory heirs.