MARGIE SANTOS MITRA, PETITIONER, VS. PERPETUA L. SABLAN-­GUEVARRA, REMEGIO L. SABLAN, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

Mitra versus Sablan-Guevarra

The Case

This is a petition for review on certiorari brought by Margie Santos Mitra against Perpetua L. Sablan-Guevarra, Remegio L. Sablan, and their co-respondents, arising from the probate of the notarial will of the late Remedios Legaspi y Reyes. The petitioner, who claims to be the de facto adopted daughter of the testator, sought to have the will admitted to probate; the respondents, who claim to be the legal heirs, opposed it on the ground that the will did not comply with the formalities required by law. The case matters because it is the Supreme Court's clearest modern restatement of the substantial compliance rule for notarial wills, and because it settles two recurring questions in succession law: whether the instrumental witnesses must sign the last page of the will, and whether the number of pages must appear specifically in the attestation clause.

Procedural History

On June 26, 2006, the petitioner filed a petition for the probate of the notarial will before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 128 of Caloocan City, with a prayer for the issuance of letters testamentary. The respondents opposed the petition.

On February 23, 2009, the Regional Trial Court rendered judgment admitting the will to probate. It held that the last page of the will was a mere continuation of the Acknowledgment, which the testator and the witnesses were not required to sign, and that the number of pages, having been stated in the Acknowledgment, sufficed. It also found no evidence of undue influence.

The respondents appealed to the Court of Appeals. On May 22, 2013, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court. It insisted on strict compliance with the requirement that the number of pages be stated in the attestation clause, and it found a further fatal defect: the photocopy of the will submitted on appeal did not show the signatures of the instrumental witnesses on every page.

The respondents filed a motion for reconsideration one day late, and the Court of Appeals denied it in a Resolution dated August 15, 2014. The petitioner then came to the Supreme Court by petition for review on certiorari. The Supreme Court relaxed the procedural rules, given the substantive merit of the case and the conflicting rulings below, and proceeded to decide the merits.

Facts

Remedios Legaspi y Reyes, single, died on December 22, 2004 in Caloocan City. She left a notarial will dated September 27, 2004, instituting Margie Santos Mitra, Orlando Castro, Perpetua Sablan Guevarra, and Remigio Legaspi Sablan as her heirs, legatees, and devisees. She named Mary Ann Castro as executor. Her estate consisted of real and personal properties with an approximate total value of One Million Thirty-Two Thousand Two Hundred Thirty-Seven Pesos.

On June 26, 2006, Margie Santos Mitra filed a petition for probate. Perpetua L. Sablan-Guevarra and Remegio L. Sablan, claiming to be the legal heirs, opposed the petition. They alleged that the will was not executed in accordance with the required formalities; that the last page, containing the Acknowledgment, was not signed by the testator and the instrumental witnesses; that the attestation clause failed to state the number of pages; and that the will was executed under undue and improper pressure.

The trial court admitted the will to probate, but the Court of Appeals reversed. On appeal, it appeared that the photocopy of the will submitted to the Court of Appeals did not show the witnesses' marginal signatures, which the petitioner attributed to the manner of photocopying. The respondents did not deny that the original copy of the will bore the signatures of the instrumental witnesses on every page except the last.

Issues

• Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in finding that the instrumental witnesses failed to sign each and every page of the will on the left margin, except the last, as required under Article 805 of the Civil Code.
• Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the failure to state the number of pages comprising the will in the attestation clause renders the will defective.

Applicable Provisions

Article 805 of the Civil Code provides:

Article 805. 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 is the formal law governing notarial wills, and it supplies both requirements at issue: the marginal signatures on every page except the last, and the statement of the number of pages in the attestation.

Article 809 of the Civil Code provides:

Article 809. 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 is the substantial compliance rule, and it is the provision that saves the will in this case.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the Court of Appeals erred. It is uncontested and readily gleaned that the instrumental witnesses signed each and every page of the will except the last. The confusion arose from the photocopy submitted on appeal, in which the marginal signatures were not reproduced. The requirement of Article 805 that the testator and the instrumental witnesses sign each and every page on the left margin, except the last, was therefore complied with.

The Court also rejected the respondents' insistence that the testator and the witnesses should have signed the last page. When Article 805 requires the testator to subscribe at the end of the will, it refers to the logical end thereof, which is where the last testamentary disposition ends. The last page of this will contained no testamentary disposition; it was a mere continuation of the Acknowledgment.

On the second issue, the Court likewise held that the Court of Appeals erred. The attestation clause did fail to state the number of pages. But this omission was supplied in the Acknowledgment, which stated that the will is composed of four pages, the Acknowledgment included. The Court quoted the Acknowledgment in part:

Ang HULING HABILlNG ito ay binubuo ng apat (4) na dahon, kasama ang dahong kinaroroonan ng Pagpapatunay at Pagpapatotoong ito.

The Court explained that what is imperative for the allowance of a will despite omissions is that the omissions be supplied by an examination of the will itself, without resorting to extrinsic evidence. Omissions that cannot be supplied except by evidence aliunde would invalidate the attestation clause and ultimately the will itself. Here, the omission was supplied by the Acknowledgment without extrinsic evidence, exactly as in Taboada versus Rosal. The Court noted that the older cases requiring strict compliance, Uy Coque versus Naves Sioca and In re: Will of Andrada, were decided before the Civil Code took effect on August 30, 1950, and that Singson versus Florentino adopted the more liberal approach to prevent a testator's will from being defeated by purely technical considerations.

Doctrine

First, under Article 805 of the Civil Code, the testator and the instrumental witnesses must sign each and every page of the will on the left margin, except the last. The last page need not be signed because the subscription at the end refers to the logical end of the will, which is where the last testamentary disposition ends; a final page containing only the Acknowledgment is not a page that must be signed.

Second, the attestation clause must state the number of pages upon which the will is written. But under Article 809, in the absence of bad faith, forgery, fraud, or undue and improper pressure and influence, a defect or imperfection in the form of the attestation or in the language used does not invalidate the will if the will was in fact executed and attested in substantial compliance with Article 805. The number of pages may be stated elsewhere in the will, such as in the Acknowledgment, provided the omission is supplied by an examination of the will itself and not by extrinsic evidence.

Third, procedural rules may be relaxed to prevent a grave injustice, especially where the lower courts have rendered conflicting rulings and the substantive merit of the case warrants review.

Disposition

The petition was granted. The Court of Appeals decision and resolution were reversed and set aside, the Regional Trial Court decision admitting the will to probate was reinstated and affirmed, and the case was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

Remember This

Memorize this line: the number of pages need not appear in the attestation clause so long as it appears elsewhere in the will itself, such as the Acknowledgment, and the omission can be supplied without extrinsic evidence. Examiners use this case to test the substantial compliance rule under Article 809 and the rule that the last page of a notarial will, when it contains only the Acknowledgment, need not be signed by the testator and the instrumental witnesses.