FELIX AZUELA, PETITIONER, VS. COURT OF APPEALS, GERALDA AIDA CASTILLO SUBSTITUTED BY ERNESTO G. CASTILLO, RESPONDENTS.

Azuela versus Court of Appeals

The Case

This is a petition for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals in a probate proceeding. Felix Azuela sought to admit to probate the notarial will of Eugenia Igsolo, who died in December 1982 at the age of 80. The will was notarized in June 1981. Geralda Aida Castillo, later substituted by Ernesto Castillo, opposed the petition, claiming the will was a forgery and that it was not executed in accordance with law. The case matters because the Supreme Court uses it to restate the mandatory formal requirements for the execution of notarial wills under Articles 805 and 806 of the Civil Code, and to clarify the limits of the substantial compliance rule under Article 809.

Procedural History

Felix Azuela filed a petition for probate with the Regional Trial Court of Manila. After trial, the Regional Trial Court admitted the will to probate in an Order dated 10 August 1992. The trial court relied on the testimony of the three subscribing witnesses and invoked what it called the modern tendency toward liberalizing the interpretation of the formal requirements of a will. It held that the attestation clause and acknowledgment substantially complied with the law, that the signing by the witnesses on the left margin substantially satisfied the purpose of attestation, and that the defects were not serious enough to invalidate the will.

Ernesto Castillo, who had substituted his deceased mother-in-law Geralda Castillo, appealed to the Court of Appeals. In a Decision dated 17 August 1995, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and ordered the dismissal of the petition for probate. The Court of Appeals held that the attestation clause failed to state the number of pages used in the will, rendering the will void and undeserving of probate. Felix Azuela then filed the present petition with the Supreme Court.

Facts

Eugenia Igsolo died on 16 December 1982 at the age of 80. She was the widow of Bonifacio Igsolo, who died in 1965, and the mother of a legitimate child, Asuncion Igsolo, who predeceased her by three months. The decedent was survived by her grandchildren, who were then residing abroad. Felix Azuela, the petitioner, is the son of the cousin of the decedent.

On 10 April 1984, Felix Azuela filed a petition for probate of a notarial will notarized on 10 June 1981. The will consisted of two pages and was written in Pilipino. The three named witnesses to the will affixed their signatures on the left-hand margin of both pages, but not at the bottom of the attestation clause. The attestation clause contained a blank space for the number of pages, but the blank was never filled in. The will did not contain an acknowledgment, only a jurat.

Geralda Aida Castillo opposed the petition, representing herself as the attorney-in-fact of the 12 legitimate heirs of the decedent. She claimed the will was a forgery and that its true purpose was to serve as a defense in several court cases she had filed against the petitioner, particularly for forcible entry and usurpation of real property. She also argued that the will was not executed and attested to in accordance with law, pointing out that the decedent's signature did not appear on the second page and that the will was not properly acknowledged.

Issues

• Whether or not the failure of the attestation clause to state the number of pages of the will is a fatal defect that bars probate.
• Whether or not the attestation clause must be signed by the instrumental witnesses at the bottom thereof.
• Whether or not a will that contains a mere jurat instead of an acknowledgment before a notary public is fatally defective.
• Whether or not the substantial compliance rule under Article 809 of the Civil Code may cure the defects in the will.

Applicable Provisions

Article 805 of the Civil Code provides:

Every will, other than a holographic will, must be subscribed at the end thereof by the testator himself or by the testator's name written by some other person in his presence, and by his express direction, and attested and subscribed by three or more credible witnesses in the presence of the testator and of one another. The testator or the person requested by him to write his name and the instrumental witnesses of the will, shall also sign, as aforesaid, each and every page thereof, except the last, on the left margin, and all the pages shall be numbered correlatively in letters placed on the upper part of each page. The attestation shall state the number of pages used upon which the will is written, and the fact that the testator signed the will and every page thereof, or caused some other person to write his name, under his express direction, in the presence of the instrumental witnesses, and that the latter witnessed and signed the will and all the pages thereof in the presence of the testator and of one another. If the attestation clause is in a language not known to the witnesses, it shall be interpreted to them.

This provision enumerates the formal requirements for the execution of a notarial will, including the requirement that the attestation clause state the number of pages upon which the will is written.

Article 806 of the Civil Code provides:

Every will must be acknowledged before a notary public by the testator and the witnesses. The notary public shall not be required to retain a copy of the will, or file another with the office of the Clerk of Court.

This provision requires that the testator and the witnesses acknowledge the will before a notary public, a safeguard distinct from a mere jurat.

Article 809 of the Civil Code provides:

In the absence of bad faith, forgery, or fraud, or undue and improper pressure and influence, 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 in fact executed and attested in substantial compliance with all the requirements of article 805.

This provision embodies the substantial compliance rule, which the petitioner invoked to argue that the defects in the will should not invalidate it.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the failure of the attestation clause to state the number of pages on which the will is written is a fatal defect. The purpose of the requirement is to safeguard against possible interpolation or omission of one or some of the pages and to prevent any increase or decrease in the pages. The failure to state the number of pages equates with the absence of an averment on the part of the instrumental witnesses as to how many pages consisted the will. Following Caneda versus Court of Appeals, there is substantial compliance with this requirement if the will states elsewhere in it how many pages it is comprised of, as was the situation in Singson versus Florentino and Taboada versus Rosal. However, in this case, there was no statement in the attestation clause or anywhere in the will itself as to the number of pages which comprise the will. Thus, there could have been no substantial compliance with the requirements under Article 805.

On the second issue, the Court held that a will whose attestation clause is not signed by the instrumental witnesses is fatally defective. The three named witnesses affixed their signatures only on the left-hand margin of both pages of the will, but not at the bottom of the attestation clause.

On the third issue, the Court held that a will which does not contain an acknowledgment, but a mere jurat, is fatally defective. Article 806 requires that the will be acknowledged before a notary public by the testator and the witnesses. The will in this case contained only a jurat, not an acknowledgment.

On the fourth issue, the Court held that Article 809 should not deviate from the need to comply with the formal requirements as enumerated under Article 805. The Court quoted with approval the cautionary note of Justice J.B.L. Reyes:

The rule must be limited to disregarding those defects that can be supplied by an examination of the will itself: whether all the pages are consecutively numbered; whether the signatures appear in each and every page; whether the subscribing witnesses are three or the will was notarized. All these are facts that the will itself can reveal, and defects or even omissions concerning them in the attestation clause can be safely disregarded. But the total number of pages, and whether all persons required to sign did so in the presence of each other must substantially appear in the attestation clause, being the only check against perjury in the probate proceedings.

The Court also quoted the ruling in Caneda:

It may thus be stated that the rule, as it now stands, is that omission which can be supplied by an examination of the will itself, without the need of resorting to extrinsic evidence, will not be fatal and, correspondingly, would not obstruct the allowance to probate of the will being assailed. However, those omissions which cannot be supplied except by evidence aliunde would result in the invalidation of the attestation clause and ultimately, of the will itself.

The Court concluded that any one of the three defects is sufficient to deny probate, and a notarial will with all three defects is just aching for judicial rejection.

Doctrine

A will whose attestation clause does not contain the number of pages on which the will is written is fatally defective. A will whose attestation clause is not signed by the instrumental witnesses is fatally defective. A will which does not contain an acknowledgment, but a mere jurat, is fatally defective. Any one of these defects is sufficient to deny probate. The substantial compliance rule under Article 809 of the Civil Code is limited to disregarding those defects that can be supplied by an examination of the will itself, such as whether all the pages are consecutively numbered, whether the signatures appear in each and every page, and whether the subscribing witnesses are three or the will was notarized. The total number of pages, and whether all persons required to sign did so in the presence of each other, must substantially appear in the attestation clause, being the only check against perjury in the probate proceedings. Compliance with the formal requirements of Article 805 affords the public a high degree of comfort that the testator himself or herself had decided to convey property post mortem in the manner established in the will.

Disposition

The petition was denied. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the petition for probate, and the will of Eugenia Igsolo was denied probate.

Remember This

The single line worth memorizing is that a notarial will with a defective attestation clause, unsigned by the instrumental witnesses, or lacking a proper acknowledgment before a notary public, is fatally defective and cannot be admitted to probate. Examiners like to use this case to test the limits of the substantial compliance rule under Article 809, particularly the rule that defects which cannot be supplied by an examination of the will itself are fatal.