AQUINO V. AQUINO
G.R. No. 208912, December 7, 2021
FACTS
Miguel Aquino died intestate on July 5, 1999. He was survived by, among others, Rodolfo, his son, and Arturo, his other son who predeceased him). Arturo was survived by Angela. In July 2003, Angela moved that she be included in the distribution and partition of Miguel’s (her grandfather’s) estate. She alleged that she was Arturo’s only child. Arturo was married to Susan. Arturo died in 1978, before Angela was born, her parents yet unmarried, though did not suffer from any impediment to marry, and were planning to marry before Arturo died. Angela claimed that Miguel took care of her mother’s expenses during her pregnancy with her, that she lived with the Aquino family in their ancestral home, that her father’s relatives recognized her as Arturo’s natural child, that Miguel provided for her needs and supported her education. She alleged that before Miguel died, he provided instructions on how his properties were to be distributed, in a July 2, 1999 document titled, “INSTRUCTION OF MIGUEL T. AQUINO,” where she would receive a commercial lot from Miguel, which rentals were paid to her. She also later alleged that as Arturo’s natural child, she has a legal right to a monthly allowance like those given to other heirs. Rodolfo opposed claiming, among others, that since Angela was born 9 months after Arturo died, her filiation to Arturo could not be proved. In 2013, Rodolfo filed a Petition for Review assailing the Court of Appeals’ decision. He argued that even if Angela were Arturo’s nonmarital child, she cannot represent him in Miguel’s estate under Article 992 of the Civil Code, and that she was not entitled to the PHP 64,000 monthly allowance granted by the RTC. Meanwhile, Abdulah, another son of Miguel, in another case, claimed that since Angela failed to prove her filiation, she could not inherit from Miguel ab instestato. The Court of Appeals in that case ruled that Angela cannot establish open and continuous possession of her status as Arturo’s child, under Article 172 (3) of the Fmaily Code, thus the relatives’ over acts cannot translate to legal recognition of her status as Arturo’s child. It also said that even if filiation could be proved, Angel could not inherit ab intestato from Miguel because Article 992 provides that nonmarital children cannot inherit from their parents’ marital relatives. Whether Amadea Angela K. Aquino (the alleged nonmarital child of Arturo C. Aquino, who was a marital child of Miguel T. Aquino) can inherit from her grandfather's estate.
RULING
Yes. We adopt a construction of Article 992 that makes children, regardless of the circumstances of their births, qualified to inherit from their direct ascendants-such as their grandparent-by their right of representation. Both marital and nonmarital children, whether born from a marital or nonmarital child, are blood relatives of their parents and other ascendants. Nonmarital children are removed from their parents and ascendants in the same degree as marital children. Nonmarital children of marital children are also removed from their parents and ascendants in the same degree as nonmarital children of nonmarital children. Accordingly, when a nonmarital child seeks to represent their deceased parent to succeed in their grandparent’s estate, Article 982 of the Civil Code shall apply. This ruling will only apply when the nonmarital child has a right of representation to their parent’s share in her grandparent’s legitime.
Here however, the application of Article 982 here does not automatically give Angela the right to inherit from Miguel’s estate. Angela must still prove her filiation. Documents may need to be presented and authenticated; witnesses’ testimonies received and examined; and DNA testing ordered and conducted, to determine the truth or falsity of the allegations raised by the parties before this Court. This Court finds it prudent to remand these cases to their court of origin for reception of evidence, in conformity with the legal principles articulated here.
