G.R. No. 17430; May 31, 1922
In the matter of the estate of Geronima Uy Coque, deceased. ANDREA UY COQUE, ET AL., petitioners-appellees, vs. JUAN NAVAS L. SIOCA, special administrator of the estate of Geronima Uy Coque, deceased, opponent-appellant.

FACTS

This is an appeal from an order of the Court of First Instance of Samar admitting a will to probate. The opponent-appellant attacked the validity of the will on two grounds: (1) the testatrix was mentally incapacitated at the time of its execution, and (2) the will was not executed in the form prescribed by Section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended by Act No. 2645. The transcript of testimony regarding the testatrix’s sanity was not included in the record on appeal, leaving only the formal defects for the Supreme Court’s consideration. The will’s attestation clause, in translation, stated: “We, the undersigned witnesses of this will, state that it has been shown to us by the testatrix as her last will and testament. And as she cannot sign her name, she asked that Mr. Filomeno Piczon sign her name in the presence of each of us, and each of us, the witnesses, also signed in the presence of the testatrix.” This clause failed to state (a) the number of pages contained in the will, and (b) that the witnesses signed in the presence of each other. These facts also did not appear elsewhere in the will.

ISSUE

Whether the omission in the attestation clause of the statement of the number of pages of the will and the fact that the witnesses signed in the presence of each other, as required by Section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended, renders the will null and void.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the order admitting the will to probate. Statutes prescribing the formalities for the execution of wills are strictly construed. The amendments introduced by Act No. 2645 to Section 618 were deliberate and must be given effect. The requirement that the attestation clause state the number of sheets or pages serves to prevent fraud by making it difficult to remove or alter pages without detection. The requirement that the attestation clause itself state that the witnesses signed in the presence of the testator and of each other, and that this fact can no longer be proven by evidence aliunde (outside the will), ensures more reliable evidence of due execution. Since the attestation clause in question lacked these two mandatory statements, the will was not executed in accordance with the law and is therefore null and void. The Court could not review the issue of the testatrix’s mental capacity due to the absence of the testimony transcript.