Taboada vs. Rosal

A notarial will is valid despite the attesting witnesses signing on the left margin instead of at the end, and despite the attestation clause omitting the number of pages, provided the purpose of the law (identification and prevention of fraud) is substantially complied with and the defect can be supplied by examining the will itself.

Probate proceedings for the last will of Dorotea Perez. The will was written in Cebuano-Visayan and consisted of two pages, but the placement of signatures and the contents of the attestation clause deviated from the strict literal requirements of the Civil Code, prompting the trial court to deny probate.

• Original Filing: Court of First Instance (CFI) of Southern Leyte, Branch III, Special Proceedings No. R-1713
• Lower Court Decision: CFI (Judge Pamatian) denied probate for want of formality in execution; ordered petitioner to submit names of intestate heirs.
• Appeal: Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration and an ex parte manifestation, but Judge Pamatian transferred before resolving them. New presiding Judge Rosal denied the motion for reconsideration and the motion for appointment of special administrator due to petitioner's failure to submit the intestate heirs' names.
• SC Action: Petitioner filed a Petition for Review directly to the SC.

• The Will's Execution: Dorotea Perez executed a 2-page notarial will in the Cebuano-Visayan dialect.
• Signature Placement:
  • Page 1 (contains all testamentary dispositions): Signed at the bottom by the testatrix alone; signed on the left margin by the three instrumental witnesses.
  • Page 2 (contains attestation clause and acknowledgment): Signed at the end of the attestation clause by the three attesting witnesses; signed on the left margin by the testatrix.
  • Attestation Clause Defect: The attestation clause failed to state the number of pages used in writing the will. However, the acknowledgment on the second page explicitly stated, "This Last Will and Testament consists of two pages including this page," and the second page was marked "Pagina dos."
  • Probate Proceedings: Petitioner filed for probate. No opposition was filed after publication. Subscribing witness Vicente Timkang testified to the will's genuineness and due execution.
  • Lower Court Denial: Judge Pamatian denied probate solely because the witnesses signed on the left margin rather than at the end of the will. He explicitly noted that were it not for this defect, he would have found the testimony sufficient to establish validity. No question of fraud or substitution was raised.

• Article 805 of the Civil Code does not require the signatures of the subscribing witnesses to be specifically located at the end of the will after the testatrix's signature as an absolute necessity for extrinsic validity.
• Placing heavy import on the physical location of signatures is absurd as long as the location is consistent with good faith and the honest frailties of human nature.

• Article 805 requires both the testatrix and all three subscribing witnesses to sign at the end of the will in the presence of each other.
• Attesting witnesses attest not merely to the will itself but also to the signature of the testator; thus, signing on the left margin of the page containing the end of the will is insufficient compliance.

• Procedural Issues: N/A
• Substantive Issues:
  • Whether Article 805 of the Civil Code requires the testatrix and all three instrumental and attesting witnesses to sign at the end of the will for the validity of a formal notarial will.
  • Whether the omission of the number of pages in the attestation clause invalidates the will.

• Procedural: N/A
• Substantive:
  • No, Article 805 does not strictly require witnesses to sign at the end of the will. The SC differentiated between attestation (witnessing the execution to note statutory requirements are met) and subscription (signing for identification). The witnesses' signatures on the left margin of the page containing the testamentary dispositions fully satisfied the purpose of identification. Unsubstantial departures from statutory forms should be ignored, especially where the will's authenticity is unassailed and the law's purpose is served.
  • No, the omission is not fatal. While stating the number of pages in the attestation clause is mandatory to prevent interpolation or omission, the deficiency can be supplied not by evidence aliunde, but by examining the will itself. Here, the acknowledgment explicitly stated the will consisted of two pages, and the pages were properly numbered and signed. Strict interpretation should not penalize the testatrix for the inadvertence of others when the purpose of guaranteeing the will's identity is attained.

• Liberal Construction of Wills — The law on wills is liberally construed to give the testator more freedom in expressing last wishes, with sufficient safeguards against fraud. Unsubstantial departures from statutory forms are ignored if the will's authenticity is not assailed.
• Purpose of Attestation and Subscription — Attestation consists in witnessing the testator's execution to see that statutory requirements are met and the signature exists as a fact. Subscription is the signing of the witnesses' names upon the same paper for the purpose of identifying it as the will executed by the testator.
• Defects in the Attestation Clause — The requirement that the attestation clause state the number of pages is mandatory as a safeguard against interpolation. However, if the deficiency can be supplied by a consideration or examination of the will itself (e.g., the acknowledgment or body of the will states the page count), the will is not invalidated.

• Article 805, Civil Code — Governs the formalities of a notarial will (subscription at the end by testator, attested by 3 witnesses, signing on left margin, numbering of pages, contents of attestation clause). Applied: The SC held that "subscribed at the end" applies strictly to the testator, while witnesses' subscription on the left margin suffices for identification. The missing page count in the attestation clause was excused because the acknowledgment supplied the deficiency.