Bellis vs. Bellis G.R. No. L-23678 (Case Digest/brief)

Procedural Facts:
Case filed in Court of First instance of Manila, which overruled Petitioner's opposition approving the executor's final account, report and administration and project of partition. Relying upon Art. 16 of the Civil Code, it applied the national law of the decedent, which in this case is Texas law, which did not provide for legitimes.

Substantive Facts: Amos G. Bellis, a resident of San Antonio, Texas, U.S. A died testate. His will was admitted to probate in the Court of First Instance of Manila. He left the bulk of his testate to his legitimate children resulting in the impairment of the legitime of his other heirs (illegitimate children).
Issue: Which law shall apply in executing the deceased’s will ---Texas law or Philippine law?

Held:
The parties admit that the decedent, Amos G. Bellis, was a citizen of the State of Texas, U.S.A., and that under the laws of Texas, there are no forced heirs or legitimes. Accordingly, since the intrinsic validity of the provision of the will and the amount of successional rights are to be determined under Texas law, the Philippine law on legitimes cannot be applied to the testacy of Amos G. Bellis.
Reasoning:
Article 16, par. 2, and Art. 1039 of the Civil Code, render applicable the national law of the decedent, in intestate or testamentary successions, with regard to four items: (a) the order of succession; (b) the amount of successional rights; (e) the intrinsic validity of the provisions of the will; and (d) the capacity to succeed.
Intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration, whatever may he the nature of the property and regardless of the country wherein said property may be found.


To see the original copy of this case, follow this link.