GR L 7188; (August, 1954) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-7188; August 9, 1954
In re: Will and Testament of the deceased REVEREND SANCHO ABADIA. SEVERINA A. VDA. DE ENRIQUEZ, ET AL., petitioners-appellees, vs. MIGUEL ABADIA, ET AL., oppositors-appellants.
FACTS
On September 6, 1923, Reverend Sancho Abadia executed a document purporting to be his Last Will and Testament (Exhibit “A”). He died on January 14, 1943. One of the legatees, Andres Enriquez, filed a petition for its probate in 1946. Oppositors, who were cousins and nephews who would inherit by intestate succession if there were no will, objected. During the hearing, the sole surviving attesting witness testified that the testator wrote the will in Spanish in his own handwriting, signed the left-hand margin of the front page of each of the three folios, numbered them, and signed at the end, all in the presence of three attesting witnesses who then signed the attestation clause. The oppositors presented no evidence. The trial court found Exhibit “A” to be a holographic will, written in the testator’s handwriting. It noted that holographic wills were not permitted by law at the time of execution (1923) or at the time of death (1943), but because the new Civil Code (which permits holographic wills) was in force at the time of the hearing, the court, aiming to carry out the testator’s intention, admitted the will to probate. The oppositors appealed.
ISSUE
Whether the validity of the will (Exhibit “A”) should be judged based on the law in force at the time of its execution or at the time of probate, specifically, whether the provisions of the new Civil Code allowing holographic wills can be applied retroactively to validate a will defectively executed under the old law.
RULING
The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s order and denied probate to Exhibit “A”. The validity of a will as to its form depends upon the observance of the law in force at the time it is made, not at the time of death or probate. At the time of execution in 1923 and at the time of death in 1943, holographic wills were not permitted, and the law required specific formalities (such as the testator and attesting witnesses signing on the left-hand margin of every page) which were not complied with in Exhibit “A”. Applying the new Civil Code retroactively to validate the defective will would divest the heirs of their vested rights in the estate by intestate succession, which accrued upon the testator’s death. The legislature cannot validate void wills. Therefore, Exhibit “A” is invalid and probate is denied.