De la Cerna vs. Rebaca-Potot

A final probate decree is conclusive and binding even if it erroneously admitted a void joint will to probate, but this conclusiveness is limited to the deceased testator's share; the surviving testator's share must be adjudicated de novo upon their death because a joint will is considered a separate will and is void under the Civil Code.

Spouses executed a joint will in 1939 bequeathing conjugal properties to a niece. Upon the husband's death, the will was probated. Upon the wife's death years later, a separate probate was dismissed. The husband's intestate heirs then sought partition, challenging the validity of the joint will.

• Original Filing: Special Proceedings No. 499, CFI Cebu (probate of Bernabe's will, 1939); Special Proceedings No. 1016-R, CFI Cebu (probate of Gervasia's will, 1952); Civil Case No. R-3819, CFI Cebu (action for partition)
• Lower Court Decision: CFI Cebu (Civil Case) declared the joint will null and void for violating the prohibition on joint wills.
• Appeal: CA (C.A.-G.R. No. 23763-R) reversed the CFI, holding the 1939 probate decree was conclusive.
• SC Action: Appeal by certiorari by the heirs intestate of Bernabe de la Cerna from the CA decision.

• The Joint Will: On May 9, 1939, spouses Bernabe de la Serna and Gervasia Rebaca executed a joint last will and testament. They willed two conjugal parcels of land to their niece Manuela Rebaca, with the condition that while each testator is yet living, he or she will continue to enjoy the fruits of the lands.
• First Probate: Bernabe died on August 30, 1939. Gervasia and Manuela filed for probate. On October 31, 1939, the CFI Cebu (Sp. Proc. 499) admitted the will to probate and decreed summary distribution to Manuela upon posting a P500 bond.
• Second Probate Attempt: Gervasia died on October 14, 1952. A petition to probate the same will for her estate was filed (Sp. Proc. 1016-R). The CFI dismissed it on March 30, 1954, due to the petitioner's failure to appear at the hearing.
• Action for Partition: Heirs intestate of Bernabe filed an action for partition. The CFI declared the joint will null and void for violating the prohibition on joint wills. The CA reversed, relying on the conclusiveness of the 1939 probate decree and the common usage of joint wills.

• The joint will is void under Art. 669 of the Civil Code of 1889 and Art. 818 of the Civil Code of the Philippines.
• A void will cannot be validated by a probate decree.

• The 1939 probate decree is final and conclusive on the due execution of the testament.
• Joint wills are sanctioned by long usage and should be given effect when admitted to probate by a court of competent jurisdiction, citing Macrohon vs. Saavedra.

• Procedural Issues: Whether the 1939 final probate decree is conclusive despite erroneously admitting a void joint will to probate.
• Substantive Issues: Whether a joint will is valid under the Civil Code; whether the 1939 probate decree covers the surviving spouse's share.

• Procedural: The SC held that the 1939 probate decree is conclusive as to Bernabe's estate. An error of law committed by the probate court does not affect its jurisdiction or the conclusive effect of its final decision. Final probate judgments are binding upon the whole world, and public policy demands that judgments become final at some definite date fixed by law.
• Substantive: The SC held that joint wills are prohibited and void under the Civil Code; common usage cannot validate them because laws are repealed only by subsequent laws. The 1939 probate decree only affected Bernabe's share. Gervasia's share must be adjudicated de novo upon her death because a joint will is considered a separate will for each testator, and her estate was not in issue in 1939. Her undivided interest passes to her heirs intestate.

• Conclusiveness of Probate Decrees — A final judgment on the probate of a will is binding upon the whole world. Errors of law committed by the probate court should be corrected by appeal and do not affect the conclusive effect of the final decision. Applied to hold that the 1939 probate decree conclusively validated the will as to Bernabe's estate despite the joint will being void.
• Separability of Joint Wills — A joint will is considered a separate will of each testator. Probate of one testator's portion does not validate the surviving testator's portion. Applied to rule that Gervasia's share must be adjudicated de novo upon her death because her estate was not in issue during the 1939 probate.

• Art. 669, Civil Code of 1889 — Prohibits the making of a will jointly by two or more persons. Applied to show the joint will was void from the start under the old law.
• Art. 818, Civil Code of the Philippines — Prohibits joint wills. Applied to affirm the continuing prohibition under the new law.
• Art. 5, Civil Code of 1889 & Art. 7, Civil Code of the Philippines — Laws are repealed only by subsequent laws; usage cannot prevail against their observance. Applied to reject the argument that common usage validates joint wills.