SHIRLEY YAP, IN HER OWN BEHALF AND IN HER CAPACITY AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF MANING YAP, JAIME YAP, AND TALINA BIANONG VDA. DE YAP, PETITIONERS, VS. COURT OF APPEALS, N…

Yap versus Court of Appeals

The Case

This is Yap versus Court of Appeals, a petition to review a decision of the Court of Appeals in the settlement of the intestate estate of the late Maning Yap. Two families claim the estate: on one side, Talina Bianong, the first wife married under Muslim rites, together with her children Shirley Yap and Jaime Yap; on the other, Nancy Yap, the second wife married in a civil ceremony while the first marriage still subsisted, together with her four children. The case matters because it fixes the law that governs the inheritance of a person who died after the New Civil Code took effect, and it shows how a void second marriage affects the rights of the second wife and of her children.

Procedural History

Talina Bianong filed an intestate proceeding before the then Court of First Instance of Lanao del Sur, seeking letters of administration over the estate of Maning Yap. Nancy Yap and her minor children opposed, claiming that Nancy was the legitimate widow and her children the legitimate children. Talina was first appointed special administratrix, and later Shirley Yap was appointed regular administratrix. After creditors' claims were approved and paid, the trial court held a hearing to declare the heirs. It rendered judgment declaring Talina Bianong, Shirley Yap, and Jaime Yap as the legal heirs, awarding one third of the estate to each, and dismissing the opposition. Nancy Yap and her children appealed. The Court of Appeals reversed, set aside the trial court's decision, and ordered the entire estate divided into two equal parts, one half to Talina and her children and the other half to Nancy and her children, relying on the old Spanish law, the Leyes de Partidas. The petitioners then brought this petition to review the decision of the Court of Appeals before the Supreme Court.

Facts

During his lifetime, Maning Yap married twice. He first married Talina Bianong in 1939 at Malabang, Lanao del Sur, in accordance with Muslim rites and practices, both spouses professing the Islam religion. The couple lived in the house of Maning Yap's parents, and four children were born to them; two died in infancy during the Japanese occupation, while the two survivors are the petitioners Shirley Yap and Jaime Yap.

While the first marriage was still subsisting, Maning Yap married Nancy J. Yap on December 11, 1948, in a civil ceremony performed by a district judge. Nancy entered into the marriage in the belief that Maning Yap was not a married man. Four children were born to them: Maning Yap, Junior, Julia Yap, Jasmin Yap, and Samuel Yap. At the time of his death, Maning Yap therefore had two families living separately, about eighty kilometers apart.

On February 21, 1964, Maning Yap died in a plane crash in Piagapo, Lanao del Sur. The properties under administration were acquired by Talina Bianong and Maning Yap during their marriage, and no evidence showed they were not conjugal. There was no liquidation of the conjugal partnership during Maning Yap's lifetime.

Issues

• Whether or not the distribution of the estate of Maning Yap, who died in 1964, is governed by the New Civil Code rather than by the old Leyes de Partidas applied by the Court of Appeals.
• Whether or not the second marriage of Maning Yap to Nancy Yap is void, and whether Nancy Yap may inherit from him.
• Whether or not the children of Nancy Yap by Maning Yap are compulsory heirs of their father.
• Whether or not the estate must first be liquidated as a conjugal partnership of gains before it is distributed among the heirs.

Applicable Provisions

Article 2263 of the New Civil Code provides:

Rights to the inheritance of a person who died, with or without a will, before the effectivity of this Code, shall be governed by the Civil Code of 1889, by other previous laws, and by the Rules of Court. The inheritance of those who, with or without a will, die after the beginning of the effectivity of this Code, shall be adjudicated and distributed in accordance with this new body of laws and by the Rules of Court; but the testamentary provisions shall be carried out insofar as they may be permitted by this Code. Therefore, legitimes, betterments, legacies and bequests shall be respected; however, their amount shall be reduced if in no other manner can every compulsory heir be given his full share according to this Code.

This transitional provision fixes the governing law by the date of death, and Maning Yap died in 1964, after the New Civil Code took effect.

Section 29 of Act Number 3613, the Marriage Law in force when the two marriages were celebrated, provides:

Illegal Marriages. Any marriage subsequently contracted by any person during the lifetime of the first spouse of such person with any person other than such first spouse shall be illegal and void from its performance, unless: (a) The first marriage was annulled or dissolved; (b) The first spouse had been absent for seven consecutive years at the time of the second marriage without the spouse present having news of the absentee being alive, or the absentee being generally considered as dead and believed to be so by the spouse present at the time of contracting such subsequent marriage, the marriage so contracted being valid in either case until declared null and void by a competent court.

Neither exception applies, so the second marriage is void from its performance.

Article 142 of the New Civil Code provides:

By means of the conjugal partnership of gains the husband and wife place in a common fund the fruits of their separate property and the income from their work or industry, and divide equally, upon the dissolution of the marriage or of the partnership, the net gains or benefits obtained indiscriminately by either spouse during the marriage.

This characterizes the properties acquired during the first marriage as conjugal.

Article 185 of the New Civil Code provides:

The net remainder of the conjugal partnership of gains shall be divided equally between the husband and the wife or their respective heirs, unless a different basis of division was agreed upon in the marriage settlements.

This requires the net remainder to be split equally between Maning Yap and Talina Bianong before the estate is distributed.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court ruled that the New Civil Code governs. The Court agreed with the petitioners that Maning Yap died in 1964, when the New Civil Code had already superseded the old Spanish Civil Code, and that under Article 2263 the estate must be adjudicated and distributed in accordance with the new body of laws. The decisive fact giving origin to the right of the heirs is the death of the decedent, and no heir has any vested right until that moment. The Leyes de Partidas applied by the Court of Appeals therefore had no application.

On the second issue, the Court ruled that the first marriage was valid and the second marriage void. The second marriage was contracted while the first was subsisting, and neither exception in Section 29 of the Marriage Law applied. Nancy Yap, the second wife, cannot inherit from Maning Yap because their marriage was void from the beginning. Talina Bianong, the first wife, never lost her status as heir and is entitled to share in the estate.

On the third issue, the Court ruled that the children of Nancy Yap by Maning Yap have the status of natural children by legal fiction and are compulsory heirs of their father. Although the second marriage is void, the children are not penalized for the fault of their parents.

On the fourth issue, the Court ruled that the properties acquired during the first marriage are conjugal, there being no evidence to the contrary, and that since there was no liquidation during Maning Yap's lifetime, liquidation must be carried out in the intestate proceedings. The net remainder, after the approved creditors' claims are paid, is divided equally between Maning Yap and Talina Bianong. The one half corresponding to Maning Yap comprises his intestate estate, distributed as follows: to the legitimate children Shirley Yap and Jaime Yap, one half of the net estate, divided equally between them; to the legitimate widow Talina Bianong, one fourth of the net estate, taken from the free portion or disposable half; and to the natural children by legal fiction, Maning Yap, Junior, Julia Yap, Jasmin Yap, and Samuel Yap, the remaining one fourth, shared equally among them.

Doctrine

First, the governing law of succession is determined by the date of death of the decedent. Under Article 2263, the inheritance of one who died after the effectivity of the New Civil Code is adjudicated and distributed in accordance with the New Civil Code, and the old Spanish law, including the Leyes de Partidas, does not apply.

Second, a marriage contracted during the lifetime of the first spouse is illegal and void from its performance under Section 29 of the Marriage Law, absent the two exceptions of annulment or dissolution of the first marriage, or absence of the first spouse for seven consecutive years. The second wife in such a void marriage cannot inherit from the deceased husband.

Third, the children of the void second marriage are natural children by legal fiction and are compulsory heirs of their father, and the first wife retains her status as heir of her husband.

Fourth, properties acquired during the marriage are presumed conjugal under Article 142, and upon dissolution the net remainder is divided equally between the spouses under Article 185. The surviving spouse's one half is her share in the conjugal partnership, while the deceased spouse's one half is the estate distributed among the heirs.

Disposition

The petition was granted, the decision of the Court of Appeals was reversed and set aside, and the estate was ordered distributed with one half to Talina Bianong as her share in the conjugal partnership and the other half to the heirs of Maning Yap as stated above.

Remember This

The single line worth memorizing is that the law of succession is fixed by the date of death, so one who dies after the New Civil Code took effect is governed by the New Civil Code, not by the old Leyes de Partidas. Examiners like to use this case on the conflict of laws in succession, on the void second marriage and the rights of the second wife and her children, and on the liquidation of the conjugal partnership before distribution of the estate.