GR 189984; (November, 2012) (Digest)
G.R. No. 189984; November 12, 2012
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR THE PROBATE OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF ENRIQUE S. LOPEZ RICHARD B. LOPEZ, Petitioner, vs. DIANA JEANNE LOPEZ, MARYBETH DE LEON and VICTORIA L. TUAZON, Respondents.
FACTS
Enrique S. Lopez died on June 21, 1999. His son, petitioner Richard B. Lopez, filed a petition for the probate of Enrique’s Last Will and Testament dated August 10, 1996, wherein Richard was named executor. Respondents Marybeth de Leon and Victoria L. Tuazon, also children of Enrique, opposed the petition, alleging improper execution and undue influence. During trial, Richard presented the attesting witnesses and the notary public, who testified to the due execution of the will, including that the testator and witnesses signed in each other’s presence. Photographs of the signing were also presented.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) disallowed the probate, finding that the attestation clause failed to state the number of pages of the will as required by Article 805 of the Civil Code. The RTC noted that while the acknowledgment stated the will consisted of seven pages including the acknowledgment page, the actual document had eight pages including that page. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s decision, also noting that Richard used the wrong mode of appeal (ordinary appeal instead of a record on appeal) for a special proceeding.
ISSUE
Whether the Last Will and Testament of Enrique S. Lopez should be allowed probate despite the omission in its attestation clause of the number of pages of the will.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and upheld the disallowance of the will. The Court emphasized that the formalities prescribed for the execution of wills are mandatory. Article 805 requires the attestation clause to state the number of pages used. While Article 809 allows substantial compliance to cure defects in form, this applies only when the defect can be supplied by an examination of the will itself without needing extrinsic evidence (evidence aliunde).
Here, the attestation clause completely omitted the number of pages. The discrepancy between the seven pages mentioned in the acknowledgment and the actual eight-page document could not be resolved by merely looking at the will; it required external evidence to explain. Citing Caneda v. CA and Azuela v. CA, the Court ruled that the total number of pages must substantially appear in the attestation clause itself, as this serves as a vital safeguard against perjury in probate proceedings. The total omission was fatal, not a mere defect curable by substantial compliance. The Court also affirmed that the CA correctly found the mode of appeal erroneous, as appeals in special proceedings require a record on appeal under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court.