Republic of the Philippines

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES “N
Quezon City, Metro Manila > RECEIVED Z
1 28.
EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

First Regular Session

HOUSE BILL NO. 347

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE XAVIER JESUS D. ROMUALDO

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Article 891 of the Civil Code provides for what is known as the reserva troncal. The reserva
troncal is a “special rule designed primarily to assure the return of a reservable property to the
third degree relatives belonging to the line from which the property originally came, and avoid
its being dissipated into and by the relatives of the inheriting ascendant.” It is meant to avoid the
danger that property existing for many years in a family’s patrimony might pass gratuitously to
outsiders through the accident of marriage and untimely death.”

The reserva troncal operates where (1) a person, called the prepositus, acquires property from a
legitimate ascendant or sibling, called the origin, by gratuitous title, that is by succession or
donation; (2) the prepositus dies without legitimate descendants; (3) the property is inherited by
another legitimate ascendant of the prepositus, called the reservista, by operation of law, that is
by compulsory or intestate succession; and (4) there are legitimate relatives of the prepositus
within the third degree belonging to the line from which the property came. These relatives,
called the reservatarios, are for whom the property is reserved. Upon the death of the reservista,
the property passes to the reservatario’s.

The reserva troncal was a feature of the Spanish Civil Code of 1889, together with the reserva
viudal and the reversion legal. The Code Commission that drafted the present Civil Code
regarded these rules as unjust and inequitable not only because these were remnants of feudalism
but also because they seemed to penalize legitimate family relations. Hence, in order to prevent a
decedent's estate from being entailed, to eliminate the uncertainty in ownership caused by a
reservation, and to discourage the confinement of property within a certain family for
generations, which seemingly leads to economic oligarchy and is incompatible with the
socialization of ownership, the Code Commission sought to remove these rules from our law.
However, Congress retained the reserva troncal when it enacted the Civil Code.

The drafters of the Civil Code sought to eliminate a provision of law it deemed already
outmoded and archaic almost 70 years ago. According to the commentator Castan, “(t]he
institution of the reservas is hardly consistent with the principles of strict law, let alone with the
spirit of modem law. The reservas are based on a spirit of distrust and suspicion from which
modern law is veering away, aware that the regime of reservas is unjust in principle and sterile in
practice.”

" Mendoza v. Delos Santos, G.R. No. 176422, Mar. 20, 2013,

2 Gonzaleszv. Court of Fist Instance of Manila, G.R. No. 1-34395, May 19, 1981(..el peligro de que bienes poseidos secularmente por una
{familia pasen bruscamente a titulo gratuito a manos extras por el azar de los enlaces y muertes prematuras...)

Ma.


It is submitted that there is no value or good to be gained in keeping the reserva troncal in our
law. It is extremely obsolete and very out of place in today’s world. It penalizes marriage and
legitimate family relations. It is a hindrance to the development and transferability of property. It
unduly complicates our already complex law on succession. Finally, it is impractical, quite
difficult to grasp, and is a source of unnecessary litigation. Elaborate rules, intricate distinctions,
and differing interpretations by commentators mark the reserva troncal. Indeed, according to
Manresa, “[uJnderstanding this article is no easy matter; it would not be farfetched to say that it
has engendered doubts and questions, many of them difficult to resolve.” It is time for Congress
to finally heed the Code Commission and remove the reserva troncal from the law.

This is a refiled bill from last Congress and I earnestly request for the support of the Members of,

Congress for the prompt and timely passage of this measure.
ie Ae

XAVIER JESUS D. ROMUALDO


 etmen’

Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila
EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

HOUSE BILL No,__347

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE XAVIER JESUS D. ROMUALDO

AN ACT
REPEALING ARTICLE 891 OR THE RESERVA TRONCAL OF REPUBLIC ACT NO.
386, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE CIVIL CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled:

SECTION 1. Article 891 of Republic Act No. 386, otherwise known as the Civil Code of

the Philippines, is hereby repealed.

SEC. 2. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in the Official

Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation

Approved,