MICIANO vs. BRIMO | G.R. No. L-22595 | November 1, 1927

MICIANO vs. BRIMO
G.R. No. L-22595, November 1, 1927 
Facts

Joseph G. Brimo, a citizen of Turkey, died and left a partition of the estate. Juan Miciano, the judicial administrator of the estate left filed a scheme of partition. However, Andre Brimo, one of the brothers of the deceased, opposed it. Brimo‘s opposition is based on the fact that the partition in question puts into effect the provisions of Joseph Brimo‘s will which are not in accordance with the laws of his Turkish nationality, for which reason they are void as being in violation of Article 10 of the Civil Code. 
Issue

Whether or not the national law of the testator is the one to govern his testamentary disposition. 

Ruling

Joseph Brimo, a Turkish citizen, though he declared in his will that Philippine laws must govern the disposition of his estate; however, it must not prejudice the heir or legatee of the testator. Therefore, the testator‘s national law must govern in accordance with Article 10 of the Civil Code.Though the last part of the second clause of the will expressly said that ―it be made and disposed of in accordance with the laws in force in the Philippine Island‖, this condition, described as impossible conditions, shall be considered as not imposed and shall not prejudice the heir or legatee in any manner whatsoever, even should the testator otherwise provide.  Impossible conditions are further defined as those contrary to law or good morals.  Thus, national law of the testator shall govern in his testamentary dispositions. 
The court approved the scheme of partition submitted by the judicial administrator, in such manner as to include Andre Brimo, as one of the legatees. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

URSUA vs. COURT OF APPEALS | G.R. No. 112170 | April 10, 1996

URSUA vs. COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No. 112170, April 10, 1996  Facts Petitioner Cesario Ursua was convicted for violation of Sec. 1 of CA No. 142, as amended by RA 6085 otherwise known as ―An Act to Regulate the Use of Aliases‖ by the RTC of Davao City which was affirmed by the CA. Allegedly petitioner when asked by his counsel to take his letter of request to the Office of the Ombudsman because his law firm‘s messenger Oscar Perez had personal matters to attend to, instead of writing his name wrote the name ―Oscar Perez‖ when he was requested to sign. However, Loida Kahulugan who gave him the copy of complaint was able to know through Josefa Amparo that petitioner is not Oscar Perez. Loida reported the matter to the Deputy Ombudsman who recommended that petitioner be accordingly charged. Petitioner comes for review of his conviction to the SC as he reasserts his innocence.  Issue Whether or not petitioner Cesario Ursua should be acquitted on the ground that he was char
Read more

MICHAEL C. GUY vs. COURT OF APPEALS | G.R. No. 163707 | September 15, 2006

MICHAEL C. GUY vs. COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No. 163707, September 15, 2006    Facts On October 29, 1992, Sima Wei died in Makati City leaving an estate valued 10 million more or less. His known heirs are his spouse Shirley Guy with their children five children. On June 13, 1997, private respondents Karen Oanes Wei and Kamille Oanes Wei represented by their mother Remedios filed a petition for letters of administration before the Regional Trial Court alleging that they are duly acknowledged illegitimate children of Sima Wei. However, petitioner and co-heirs alleged that private respondent‘s claim had been paid, waived, abandoned, or otherwise extinguished by Remedios‘ June 7, 1993 Release and Waiver of Claim stating that in exchange for the financial and educational support received from petitioner, Remedios and her minor children discharge the estate of Sima Wei and any and all liabilities.   The petition was denied in the lower court and the motion for reconsidered dismissed in the Court
Read more