Suntay vs. Suntay
G.R. No. L-3807 and L-3088, July 31, 1954
In 1934, Jose B. Suntay, a Filipino citizen and a resident of the Philippines, died
in Amoy, China. He left real and personal properties in the Philippines and a house in
Amoy. During his lifetime, he married twice, the first wife was Manuela Cruz, with whom he had several children. The second marriage was with Maria Natividad Lim Brillian, with whom he had a son, petitioner Silvino Suntay.
Intestate proceedings were instituted by the heirs from the first marriage. While
the second wife, the surviving widow who remained in Amoy China, filed a petition for
the probate of the last will and testament of the deceased which was claimed to have
been executed and signed in the Philippines on November, 1929. The petition was
denied due to the loss of the will before the hearing thereof. After the pacific war,
Silvino, claimed to have found among the records of his father, a last will and testament
in Chinese characters executed and signed by the deceased on January, 1931 and
probated in the Amoy District Court. He filed a petition in the intestate proceedings for
the probate of the will executed in the Philippines on November 1929 or the will
executed in Amoy China on November, 1931.
ISSUE: Whether or not the will executed in Amoy, China can still be validly probated in the Philippines
The fact that the municipal district court of Amoy, China is a probate court must
be proved. The law of China on procedure in the probate or allowance of wills must also
be proved. The legal requirements for the execution of the will in China in 1931 should
also be established by competent evidence. There is no proof on these points.
Moreover, it appears that all the proceedings had in the municipal district court of
Amoy were for the purpose of taking the testimony of two attesting witnesses to the will
and that the order of the municipal district court of Amoy does not purport to probate the will.
The order of the municipal district court of Amoy, China does not purport to
probate or allow the will which was the subject of the proceedings. In view thereof, the
will and the alleged probate thereof cannot be said to have been done in accordance
with the accepted basic and fundamental concepts and principles followed in the
probate and allowance of wills. Consequently, the authenticated transcript of
proceedings held in the municipal district court of Amoy, China, cannot be deemed and
accepted as proceedings leading to the probate of allowance of a will and therefore, the
will referred to therein cannot be allowed, filed and recorded by a competent court of
this country.
