ANTONIO RIERA V. VICENTE PALMAROLI

G.R. No. 14851, September 13, 1919

ANTONIA RIERA Y BOTELLAS VS. VICENTE PALMAROLI, CONSUL GENERAL FOR SPAIN, ET AL.

FACTS: Juan Pons y Coll, decedent, is a Spanish subject resident in the Philippine Islands. The petitioner is the widow of the deceased and was at the time of her husband's death residing in the Balearic Islands. The respondent Vicente Palmaroli, Consul General for Spain in the Philippine Islands, produced a document purporting to be the will of the deceased, and asked that it be admitted to probate. Publication was accordingly made, and an order was entered admitting the will to probate. Owing to the great distance between her residence and the city of Manila and to the lack of adequate means of communication between the two places, the petitioner received no information of the probate proceedings. The petitioner, upon knowing of the result of the probate, moved that the order of probate be set aside in order to allow the petitioner to enter opposition. This application was denied on the ground that more than six months had elapsed since the date of the order of probate and prior to the filing of the motion.

ISSUE: Whether the order of probate can still be set aside under the circumstances.

RULING: NO. As a result of this decision it cannot be denied that, without any fault on the part of the petitioner or her attorneys, she has been deprived not only of the opportunity of opposing the will and appealing from the order of probate but also of the opportunity of applying to the Court of First Instance for relief. The action of the court in admitting a will to probate has all the effect of a judgment; and as such is entitled to full faith and credit in other courts. As has been repeatedly stated in the decisions of this court, the probate of a will, while conclusive as to its due execution, in no wise involves the intrinsic validity of its provisions. If, therefore, upon the distribution of the estate of Juan Pons y Coll, it should appear that any provision of his will is contrary to the law applicable to his case, the will must necessarily yield upon that point and the disposition made by law must prevail. The petitioner is therefore free to appear in the Court of First Instance at the proper juncture and discuss the question of the validity of such provisions of the will as affect her interests adversely; and so far as we can see, on the facts before us, this is her only recourse.


Comments