RULE 74 Summary Settlement of Estate Flashcards
Judicial administration is mandatory
False. When a person dies without leaving pending obligations to be paid, his heirs, whether of age or not, are not bound to submit the property to a judicial administration, which is always
long and costly, or to apply for the appointment of an administrator
by the Court. In such case the judicial administration and the appointment of an administrator are superfluous and unnecessary proceedings
ToF. Oral partition is null and void.
False. Partition although oral, is valid and binding. There is no law that requires partition among heirs to be in writing to be valid , when there are no creditors or the rights of creditors are not affected.
Can a party to an extra-judicial settlement still
assail its validity?
NO.
An heir or interested person who was able to
participate either in the extrajudicial or summary
settlement of estate of the decedent has a period of two (2) years after the settlement and distribution to assail its validity. The prescriptive period stated under Section 4 applies only to persons who participated, took part in, or had notice of the settlement of the estate provided under Rule 74 (Pedrosa vs. CA, 353 SCRA 620).
Is rule 4 of Section 74 Applicable To Those Who
Had No Knowledge of Settlement?
Under Section 4, Rule 74 is only applicable to persons who have participated or taken part or had notice of extra-judicial
partition. There is nothing in Section 4, Rule 74 which
clearly shows a statute of limitation and a bar
against third person.
It is not a bar of action against third person.
What is the prescriptive period to annul settlement?
The doctrine in Gerona v. De Guzman was cited in Balbin v. Medalla, where it was held that an action for reconveyance of real
property on the ground of fraud must be filed within four (4) years from the discovery of the fraud. Such discovery is deemed to have taken place from the issuance of the certificates of title.
An action for reconveyance based on an implied or constructive trust must perforce prescribe in ten years and not otherwise
What is the remedy of an heir who is deprived of one’s share in the estate because he did not participate, take part, or had no notice of the settlement of estate?
An heir may file an action for re-conveyance within ten (10) years, which is based on an implied trust (Teves vs. CA, October 13, 1999). This implied or constructive trust is an
obligation created by law, which an interested person may enforce within 10 year prescriptive period. This prescriptive period shall commence upon the issuance of a new title over the property (Marquez vs. CA, 300 SCRA 653) or from actual notice in case of unregistered deed (Neri vs. Heirs of Uy, October 10, 2012).
How is an agreement in an action for partition effected?
There must be an action for partition filed by any or all of the heirs. In the said action, the parties entered into a compromise agreement to have the estate of the deceased settlement. This compromise agreement will have to be approved by the Court where the action for partition is pending.
Suppose an extra-judicial settlement of estate
was executed by the three (3) children of the
deceased. The heirs complied with all the
requisites of the Rules. Within two (2) years
from the settlement and distribution of estate,
a person claiming to be an heir surfaced. Can this person still claim from the estate of the deceased?
YES.
If it shall appear at any time within two (2) years after the settlement and distribution of an estate in accordance with the provisions of either of the first two sections of this rule, that an heir or other person has been unduly deprived of his lawful participation in the estate, such heir or such other
person may compel the settlement of the estate in the courts in the manner hereinafter provided for the purpose of satisfying such lawful participation.….. (Section 4, Rule 74)
In what instance may the period for prescription of actions for annulment of settlement of estate not apply? (exception)
There is one instance when prescription cannot be invoked in an action for reconveyance. That is, when the plaintiff is in possession of the land to be reconveyed. In those cases, the Court permitted the filing of an action for reconveyance despite the lapse often years and
declared that said action, when based on fraud, is imprescriptible as long as the land has not passed to an innocent purchaser for value.
The common factual backdrop in those cases was that the registered
owners were never in possession of the disputed property. Instead, it was the legal owners of the land who had always been in possession of the same. Thus, the Court allowed the action for reconveyance to
prosper despite the lapse of ten years from the issuance of title to
the land. The exception was based on the theory that registration proceedings could not be used as a shield for fraud enriching a person at the expense of the other.
What is the period for claim of minor or incapacitated person?
Section 5. Period for claim of minor or incapacitated person. — If on the date of the expiration of the period of two (2) years prescribed in the preceding section the person authorized to file a claim is a minor or mentally incapacitated, or is in prison or outside the Philippines, he may present his claim within one (1) year after such disability is removed.
