The Supreme Court has reinterpreted Article 992 of the Civil Code, concerning inheritance rights, to allow children to inherit from their grandparents regardless of their parents’ marital status. This decision reverses the long-held “Iron Curtain Rule,” which prevented illegitimate children from inheriting from their legitimate relatives. The Court clarified that all children, whether born inside or outside of marriage, can inherit from their direct ascendants by the right of representation. This aims to ensure that all children are treated equitably and consistently with modern family law and constitutional guarantees of equal protection.
Breaking Down the Iron Curtain: Can Non-Marital Grandchildren Inherit?
The case arose from a dispute over the estate of Miguel Aquino. Amadea Angela K. Aquino claimed to be the granddaughter of Miguel through her father, Arturo, who had predeceased Miguel. However, Rodolfo and Abulah Aquino, Miguel’s legitimate sons, contested Amadea’s claim, arguing that she was an illegitimate child and therefore barred from inheriting under Article 992 of the Civil Code. Article 992, often referred to as the “Iron Curtain Rule,” traditionally prohibited intestate succession between legitimate relatives and illegitimate relatives, based on the presumption of animosity between the two families.
The Supreme Court examined whether the existing interpretation of Article 992 was in conflict with the Constitution and modern social norms. The Court noted that laws on succession aim to approximate familial love, typically flowing downwards (to descendants), upwards (to ascendants), and sideways (to siblings). The legal concept recognizes society’s shift towards granting equal rights and protection to all children, regardless of their parents’ marital status. Thus, the issue involved examining succession law in light of children’s rights.
Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, writing for the Court, analyzed that statutory prohibition against reciprocal intestate succession between nonmarital children and the marital children and relatives of their parents is rooted in Article 943 of the Spanish Civil Code, a law introduced in the Philippines in 1889. Thus, with developments in children’s rights, the said law now goes under scrutiny for its consistency with the Constitution. Further, it carves out an exception to the general rule that persons, by operation of law, inherit intestate from their blood relatives up to a certain degree, specifically those based on their birth status.
The court acknowledged arguments claiming the provision perpetuates prejudice against nonmarital children for a matter they had no control over — when and if their parents chose to marry. The State, through this specific legislation, denies and makes a distinction by not allowing illegitimate issue of legitimate children inherit. The High Court found this unacceptable.
After hearing the views of court-appointed amici curiae, The Supreme Court moved to reinterpret Article 992 to allow an illegitimate child to represent their deceased parent to succeed in their grandparent’s estate. Now Article 982 of the Civil Code shall apply where such grandchild has a right of representation to their parent’s share in their grandparent’s legitime. The State’s obligation is also in accord to a provision where, in every situation and aspect of a minor’s life, it is the State’s responsibility to preserve what is beneficial to the child.
Following such restatement, the court directed the lower courts to proceed with its resolution of the issue of Amadea’s filiation. Because Amadea’s filiation was highly disputed, a full trial, and subsequent application of legal principles as herein laid down was deemed proper.
| What was the key issue in this case? | Whether an illegitimate grandchild can inherit from their legitimate grandparent via the right of representation. |
| What is Article 992 of the Civil Code? | It is also known as the “Iron Curtain Rule”, and traditionally prevented illegitimate children from inheriting from the legitimate relatives of their parents, and vice versa. |
| What was the Court’s ruling? | The Supreme Court reinterpreted Article 992 to allow children to inherit from their grandparents regardless of whether their parents were married. |
| What is the right of representation? | It’s a legal principle that allows grandchildren to inherit in place of a deceased parent who would have been an heir to their grandparent’s estate. |
| Was the decision unanimous? | No, there were concurring and dissenting opinions among the justices, reflecting varied perspectives on the matter. |
| What evidence is needed to prove filiation? | The court may now order and consider DNA test results as an aid in making factual and legal judgments in the present case, as well as the circumstances that may show love and support towards a would-be heir. |
| Does this decision erase all distinctions between legitimate and illegitimate children? | No, there remain differences; it now only concerns those that may arise relative to succession, based on current jurisprudence. |
| What specific aspect did this decision clarify regarding inheritance? | The ruling clarified the term “relatives” should be used without any sweeping qualification on legitimacy in matters concerning the transfer of property or any assets to family members. |
This case marks a pivotal shift in Philippine inheritance law, potentially affecting numerous families. By reinterpreting Article 992, the Supreme Court has brought the law closer to contemporary values and international standards of children’s rights. While the impact of this decision remains to be seen in future cases, its immediate effect is to eliminate the legal barrier preventing nonmarital grandchildren to inherit from their ascendants.
For inquiries regarding the application of this ruling to specific circumstances, please contact ASG Law through contact or via email at frontdesk@asglawpartners.com.
Disclaimer: This analysis is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal guidance tailored to your situation, please consult with a qualified attorney.
Source: AMADEA ANGELA K. AQUINO VS. RODOLFO C. AQUINO AND ABBULAH C. AQUINO, [G.R. Nos. 208912 & 209018], December 07, 2021