G.R. No. 84240 March 25, 1992
OLIVIA S. PASCUAL and HERMES S. PASCUAL, petitioners, vs.ESPERANZA C. PASCUAL-BAUTISTA, MANUEL C.
PASCUAL, JOSE C. PASCUAL, SUSANA C. PASCUAL-BAUTISTA, ERLINDA C. PASCUAL,
WENCESLAO C. PASCUAL, JR., INTESTATE ESTATE OF ELEUTERIO T. PASCUAL, AVELINO
PASCUAL, ISOCELES PASCUAL, LEIDA PASCUAL-MARTINES, VIRGINIA PASCUAL-NER, NONA
PASCUAL-FERNANDO, OCTAVIO PASCUAL, GERANAIA PASCUAL-DUBERT, and THE HONORABLE
PRESIDING JUDGE MANUEL S. PADOLINA of Br. 162, RTC, Pasig, Metro Manila, respondents.
Facts:
·
Petitioners Olivia and Hermes are
the acknowledged natural children of
the late Eligio Pascual, the latter being the full blood brother of the decedent Don Andres Pascual (Rollo,
petition, p. 17).
·
Don Andres Pascual died intestate
on October 12, 1973 without any issue, legitimate, acknowledged natural,
adopted or spurious children.
·
On October 16, 1985, all the heirs
entered into a COMPROMISE AGREEMENT, over the vehement objections of the herein
petitioners Olivia S. Pascual and Hermes S. Pascual.
·
Petitioners contend that the term
"illegitimate" children as provided in Article 992 must be
strictly construed to refer only to spurious children.
·
Issue: WON NCC 992 can be interpreted to exclude recognized
natural children from the inheritance of the deceased. NO.
Ratio:
·
Article 992 of the civil Code,
provides:
An illegitimate child has no
right to inherit ab intestato from the legitimate children and relatives
of his father or mother; nor shall such children or relatives inherit in
the same manner from the illegitimate child.
·
In Diaz v. IAC:
Article 992 of the Civil Code provides a barrier or iron curtain in that it prohibits absolutely a
succession ab intestato between the illegitimate child and the
legitimate children and relatives of the father or mother of said legitimate
child. They may have a natural tie of blood, but this is not recognized by law
for the purposes of Article 992. Between
the legitimate family and illegitimate family there is presumed to be an
intervening antagonism and incompatibility. #peaches The illegitimate child is
disgracefully looked down upon by the legitimate family; the family is in turn
hated by the illegitimate child; the latter considers the privileged condition
of the former, and the resources of which it is thereby deprived; the former,
in turn, sees in the illegitimate child nothing but the product of sin,
palpable evidence of a blemish broken in life; the law does no more than
recognize this truth, by avoiding further grounds of resentment.
X x x
Article 902, 989, and 990 clearly speaks of successional rights of
illegitimate children, which rights are transmitted to their descendants upon
their death. The descendants (of these illegitimate children) who may inherit
by virtue of the right of representation may be legitimate or illegitimate. In
whatever manner, one should not overlook the fact that the persons to be
represented are themselves illegitimate. The three named provisions are
very clear on this matter. The right
of representation is not available to illegitimate descendants of legitimate
children in the inheritance of a legitimate grandparent. It may be
argued, as done by petitioners, that the illegitimate descendant of a
legitimate child is entitled to represent by virtue of the provisions of
Article 982, which provides that "the grandchildren and other descendants
shall inherit by right of representation." Such a conclusion is erroneous.
It would allow intestate succession by
an illegitimate child to the legitimate parent of his father or mother, a
situation which would set at naught the provisions of Article 992. Article 982
is inapplicable to the instant case because Article 992 prohibits absolutely a
succession ab intestato between the illegitimate child and the
legitimate children and relatives of the father or mother. Article 982 is the
general rule and Article 992 the exception. #peaches
The rules laid down in Article 982 that "grandchildren and
other descendants shall inherit by right of representation" and in Article
902 that the rights of illegitimate children . . . are transmitted upon their
death to their descendants, whether legitimate or illegitimate are subject to the limitation
prescribed by Article 992 to the end that an illegitimate child has no right to
inherit ab intestato from the legitimate children and relatives of his
father or mother.
·
Eligio Pascual is a legitimate
child but petitioners are his illegitimate children. Petitioners cannot
represent their father Eligio Pascual in the succession of the latter to the
intestate estate of the decedent Andres Pascual, full blood brother of their
father.
·
Verily, the interpretation of the
law desired by the petitioner may be more humane but it is also an elementary
rule in statutory construction that when the words and phrases of the statute
are clear and unequivocal, their meaning must be determined from the language
employed and the statute must be taken to mean exactly what is says.
·
Clearly the term
"illegitimate" refers to both natural and spurious.
·
Finally under Article 176 of the
Family Code, all illegitimate children are generally placed
under one category, which undoubtedly settles the issue as to whether or
not acknowledged natural children should be treated differently, in the
negative.
·
#DURALEXSEDLEX
·
Petition dismissed for lack of
merit.
