G.R. No. 25966, November 1, 1926
In the matter of the estate of Tomas Rodriguez, deceased. MANUEL TORRES, special administrator, and LUZ LOPEZ DE BUENO, heir, appellees, vs. MARGARITA LOPEZ, opponent-appellant.

FACTS

Tomas Rodriguez executed a will on January 3, 1924, instituting his cousin Vicente F. Lopez and Vicente’s daughter, Luz Lopez de Bueno, as his “only and universal heirs” to all his property without specifying their individual shares. At the time the will was made, Tomas Rodriguez was under guardianship, and Vicente F. Lopez was his guardian. Vicente F. Lopez died on January 7, 1924, without having presented his final accounts as guardian. The testator, Tomas Rodriguez, died on February 25, 1924. The will was subsequently admitted to probate. Margarita Lopez, another cousin and the nearest intestate heir of Tomas Rodriguez, claimed one-half of the estate by intestate succession, arguing that the legacy to Vicente F. Lopez was void under Article 753 of the Civil Code (which invalidates testamentary provisions in favor of a guardian before the guardian’s final accounts are approved). Luz Lopez de Bueno claimed the entire estate by right of accretion.

ISSUE

Does the right of accretion under Article 982 of the Civil Code apply, thereby entitling Luz Lopez de Bueno to the entire estate, or does the disqualification of Vicente F. Lopez result in a partial intestacy under Article 912, entitling Margarita Lopez to one-half of the estate as the nearest intestate heir?

RULING

The right of accretion applies. Luz Lopez de Bueno is entitled to the entire estate.

The Supreme Court held that the provisions of Article 982 on accretion are more specific and control over the general provisions on intestate succession in Article 912. Article 982 provides that accretion takes place when two or more persons are called to the same inheritance without a special designation of shares and one of them predeceases the testator, renounces the inheritance, or is disqualified to receive it. Both conditions are present in this case: Vicente F. Lopez and Luz Lopez de Bueno were instituted as universal heirs without a division of shares, and Vicente F. Lopez predeceased the testator and was disqualified from receiving the legacy due to the guardian-ward relationship (under Article 753).

The Court rejected the argument that Article 912(4), which provides for intestate succession when an instituted heir is disqualified to succeed (“incapaz de suceder”), should prevail. It harmonized the Code’s provisions by ruling that the more specific article on accretion (982) limits the general article on intestacy (912). This interpretation is supported by Article 912(3), which explicitly subordinates intestacy to the right of accretion, and by Article 986, which indicates intestacy occurs only when accretion is impossible. The Court also noted a legal presumption against partial intestacy where a will exists.

Furthermore, the Court found the distinction between “incapacity to succeed” (incapaz de suceder) under Article 912 and “incapacity to receive” (incapaz de recibirla) under Article 982 to be overly refined and not controlling. The disqualification of Vicente F. Lopez was an “accidental incapacity to receive the legacy” arising from the guardian-ward relationship, which squarely falls under the condition for accretion in Article 982. Therefore, Luz Lopez de Bueno, as the surviving co-heir, acquired by accretion the share intended for her disqualified and predeceased father.