Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 51 views

    Case Digest-Aznar vs. Garcia

    Uploaded by

    Julie Mae Lagare
    This case involved determining the succession rights of the heirs of Edward E. Christensen, an American who died in the Philippines. Under Philippine law, the national law of the deceased governs succession, but California law stated that personal property is governed by the law of the domicile. The Supreme Court determined that since Christensen's domicile was the Philippines, Philippine law should apply in determining the rights of his acknowledged natural daughter, Maria Helen Christensen Garcia, overturning the lower court's ruling. The case was returned to the lower court with instructions to partition the estate according to Philippine succession law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case Digest-Aznar vs. Garcia

    Uploaded by

    Julie Mae Lagare
    51 views2 pages
    This case involved determining the succession rights of the heirs of Edward E. Christensen, an American who died in the Philippines. Under Philippine law, the national law of the deceased governs succession, but California law stated that personal property is governed by the law of the domicile. The Supreme Court determined that since Christensen's domicile was the Philippines, Philippine law should apply in determining the rights of his acknowledged natural daughter, Maria Helen Christensen Garcia, overturning the lower court's ruling. The case was returned to the lower court with instructions to partition the estate according to Philippine succession law.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved determining the succession rights of the heirs of Edward E. Christensen, an American who died in the Philippines. Under Philippine law, the national law of the deceased governs succession, but California law stated that personal property is governed by the law of the domicile. The Supreme Court determined that since Christensen's domicile was the Philippines, Philippine law should apply in determining the rights of his acknowledged natural daughter, Maria Helen Christensen Garcia, overturning the lower court's ruling. The case was returned to the lower court with instructions to partition the estate according to Philippine succession law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    51 views2 pages

    Case Digest-Aznar vs. Garcia

    Uploaded by

    Julie Mae Lagare
    This case involved determining the succession rights of the heirs of Edward E. Christensen, an American who died in the Philippines. Under Philippine law, the national law of the deceased governs succession, but California law stated that personal property is governed by the law of the domicile. The Supreme Court determined that since Christensen's domicile was the Philippines, Philippine law should apply in determining the rights of his acknowledged natural daughter, Maria Helen Christensen Garcia, overturning the lower court's ruling. The case was returned to the lower court with instructions to partition the estate according to Philippine succession law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    JULIE MAE M. LAGARE SECTION: 1.

    5A
    SUBJECT TITLE: PERSONS & FAMILY RELATIONS
    FACULTY: JUDGE RONALD S. TOLENTINO

    CASE DIGEST

    Aznar vs. Garcia


    G.R. No. L-16749
    January 31, 1963

    Facts:
    Edward E. Christensen was born in New York but he migrated to California where he
    resided for 9 years. In 1913, he came to the Philippines where he became a domiciliary until the
    time of his death. He executed a will in the Philippines in which he instituted an acknowledged
    natural daughter, Maria Lucy Christensen as his only heir. However, he bequeathed Php 3,600.00
    to Maria Helen Christensen and the remainder of his estate to his daughter, Maria Lucy
    Christensen Daney. The laws of California allow the testator to dispose of his estate in any
    manner he pleases. However, California law also provides that the personal property of a person
    is governed by the laws of his domicile. The counsel of the acknowledged natural daughter,
    Maria Helen Christensen Garcia claims that pursuant to Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Civil
    Code, California law should be applied wherein it was stated that the matter be referred back to
    the law of the domicile. On the other hand, the counsel of Maria Lucy Christensen contends that
    the national law of the deceased must apply. The illegitimate children cannot be entitled to
    anything under the California Law.

    Issue:
    Whether or not the national law of the deceased should be applied in determining the
    successional rights of his heirs.

    Held:
    The Supreme Court granted more successional rights to Maria Helen Christensen Garcia.
    The decision of the CFI Davao was reversed and the case was returned to the lower court with
    instructions that the partition should be anchored to the Philippine law on succession.
    The law that governs the validity of his testamentary dispositions is defined in Article 16
    of the Civil Code of the Philippines which states that real property as well as personal property is
    subject to the law of the country where it is situated. However, intestate and testamentary
    successions, both with respect to the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights
    and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of
    the person whose succession is under consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property
    and regardless of the country where said property may be found.

    The application of the said article in the case at bar requires the determination of the
    meaning of the term “national law” therein and the determination of the law in California
    governing the disposition of personal property.

    The decision of CFI Davao, sustains the contention of the executor-appellee that under
    the California Probate Code, a testator may dispose of his property by will in the form and
    manner he desires. However, the respondent invokes the provisions of Article 946 of the Civil
    Code of California, which states that personal property is governed by the laws of the domicile
    of its owner.

    It is argued on executor’s behalf that as the deceased Christensen was a citizen of the
    State of California, the internal law should govern the determination of the validity of the
    testamentary provisions of Christensen’s will. Appellant, on the other hand, insists that Article
    946 should be applicable, and in accordance with the doctrine of the renvoi, the Philippine Court
    will take cognizance of the issue and apply the law of the Philippines.

    The court of the domicile cannot refer the case back to California because such action
    would leave the issue incapable of determination since the case will then be like a football,
    tossed back and forth between the two states.

    Thus, the Court finds that as the domicile of the deceased Edward, a citizen of California,
    is the Philippines, the validity of the provisions of his will depriving his acknowledged natural
    child, the appellant Maria Helen Christensen Garcia should be governed by the Philippine Law,
    the domicile, pursuant to Art. 946 of the Civil Code of California, not by the internal law of
    California.

    You might also like