View full case

FELIX AZUELA v. CA

FACTS:

The decedent, Eugenia E. Igsolo, executed a notarial will naming Felix Azuela as the sole heir and Vart Prague as the executor. The will was witnessed by three individuals who signed the left-hand margin of both pages but not the attestation clause. Upon filing a petition for probate, Geralda Aida Castillo opposed, claiming the will was a forgery and the decedent had 12 legitimate heirs. The RTC denied the probate petition due to several deficiencies. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, prompting the petitioner to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The case involves the probate of the last will and testament of Eugenia Igsolo. The petitioner filed a petition for probate, claiming he was the sole heir, while the oppositor argued that the will was not executed and attested to correctly. The RTC admitted the will to probate, considering the testimonies of the witnesses and a tendency to liberalize the interpretation of formal requirements. The Court of Appeals reversed this decision, declaring the will void due to the attestation clause's failure to state the number of pages used. The petitioner then appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the requirement to state the number of pages in the attestation clause is not mandatory but subject to substantial compliance.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the failure of the attestation clause to state the number of pages used in the will renders the will invalid.

  2. Whether the Supreme Court decisions in Singson v. Florentino and Taboada v. Hon. Rosal, which allowed probate to wills with attestation clauses that did not state the number of pages, are applicable to the present case.

  3. Whether the failure of the attestation clause to state the number of pages on which the will was written is fatal to its validity.

  4. Whether the failure of the attestation clause to be signed by the instrumental witnesses is fatal to its validity.

  5. Whether the attestation clause had been duly signed by the instrumental witnesses.

  6. Whether there was a valid acknowledgment of the will before a notary public.

  7. Whether the will in question was properly acknowledged by the testator and instrumental witnesses.

  8. Whether the failure to sign each page of the will on the left margin, except the last page, and to number the pages correlatively in letters is fatal to the probate of the will.

RULING:

  1. Yes, the failure of the attestation clause to state the number of pages used in the will renders the will invalid.

  2. No, the Supreme Court decisions in Singson v. Florentino and Taboada v. Hon. Rosal are not applicable to the present case.

  3. The failure of the attestation clause to state the number of pages on which the will was written is a fatal flaw. The purpose of this requirement is to safeguard against interpolation or omission of pages and to prevent any increase or decrease in the pages of the will. Without an averment on the number of pages, the attestation clause cannot guarantee compliance. Substantial compliance with this requirement is possible if the will states elsewhere the number of pages it consists of, but in this case, there is no statement in the attestation clause or anywhere in the will as to the number of pages. Therefore, there is no substantial compliance.

  4. The failure of the attestation clause to be signed by the instrumental witnesses is also a fatal flaw. The attestation clause serves as the textual guarantee of compliance and must strictly adhere to the formalities required. The absence of the witnesses' signatures on the attestation clause goes against the purpose of requiring the witnesses to attest and subscribe to the will.

  5. The attestation clause had not been duly signed by the instrumental witnesses, rendering the will fatally defective.

  6. There was no valid acknowledgment of the will before a notary public.

  7. The will in question was not properly acknowledged by the testator and instrumental witnesses. Although the notary public affixed a jurat to the will, the express requirement of Article 806 is that the will be "acknowledged" and not merely subscribed and sworn to. The will lacks textual proof, under oath, that the decedent and the witnesses executed or signed the will as their own free act or deed. An acknowledgment is an important legal safeguard against spurious wills or those made without the free consent of the testator. Therefore, the will is invalid.

  8. The failure to sign each page of the will on the left margin, except the last page, and to number the pages correlatively in letters are not decisive factors in the probate denial. These omissions may not be sufficient to deny probate to a will on their own. However, they indicate a general lack of due regard for the requirements under Article 805. While these omissions are not decisive in this case, they contribute to the probate denial.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The requirement that the attestation clause state the number of pages of the will is mandatory as an effective safeguard against tampering or interpolation of the will. It must be considered material. (In re Will of Andrada)

  • In the absence of bad faith, forgery, fraud, undue and improper pressure, defects and imperfections in the form of attestation or in the language used therein shall not render the will invalid if it is proved that the will was executed and attested in substantial compliance with all the requirements of the law. (Article 809 of the Civil Code)

  • An unsigned attestation clause cannot be considered as an act of the witnesses, since the omission of their signatures at the bottom thereof negatives their participation.

  • The signatures on the left-hand corner of every page signify that the witnesses are aware that the page they are signing forms part of the will, while the signatures to the attestation clause establish that the witnesses are referring to the statements contained in the attestation clause itself. An unsigned attestation clause results in an unattested will.

  • The attestation clause contains the utterances reduced into writing of the testamentary witnesses themselves, and it is the witnesses, not the testator, who are required to state certain elemental facts in the will. The only proof in the will that the witnesses have stated these facts would be their signatures on the attestation clause.

  • The requirement under Article 806 that "every will must be acknowledged before a notary public by the testator and the witnesses" is separate and distinct from the requirements under Article 805. The non-observance of Article 806 is equally critical and should be treated as of equivalent import.

  • An acknowledgment is the act of one who has executed a deed in going before a competent officer or court and declaring it to be his act or deed. It involves the signor actually declaring to the notary that the document has attested to the notary that it is his own free act and deed.

  • A notarial will that is not acknowledged before a notary public by the testator and the witnesses is fatally defective, even if it is subscribed and sworn to before a notary public. (Article 806)

  • An acknowledgment in a will coerces the testator and the instrumental witnesses to declare under oath that they executed and subscribed to the will as their own free act or deed. It provides a safeguard against spurious wills and ensures the testator's free consent. (Article 806)

  • Failure to sign each page of the will on the left margin, except the last page, and to number the pages correlatively in letters may not be decisive in denying probate to a will, but they indicate a lack of due regard for the requirements under Article 805. (Article 805)