Disinheritance: Meaning

So there are two conditions: a will, and a legal cause written in it. In Ching v. Rodriguez (2011), relatives asked a court to "disinherit" an heir, but no will or instrument disposing of the estate was ever mentioned. The Supreme Court applied Article 916 and the case failed.

The Code has three lists, one for each kind of compulsory heir:

• Children and descendants, legitimate or illegitimate: Article 919. The causes include being found guilty of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her spouse, descendants or ascendants; a groundless accusation of a crime punished by six years or more; refusal without justifiable cause to support the parent; maltreatment by word or deed; and leading a dishonorable or disgraceful life. See Article 919.
• Parents and ascendants: Article 920. The causes include abandoning their children, the loss of parental authority for causes in the Code, and refusal to support the children without justifiable cause.
• The spouse: Article 921. The causes include having given cause for legal separation and unjustifiable refusal to support the children or the other spouse.

A cause not on these lists cannot support a disinheritance.

So the heir keeps the legitime, and the rest of the will stands as far as it does not impair it. Under Article 917, the burden of proving the cause rests on the other heirs if the disinherited heir denies it.

Yes. Under Article 922, a later reconciliation between the offender and the offended person deprives the offended person of the right to disinherit and makes any disinheritance already made ineffectual.

Under Article 923, the children and descendants of a disinherited heir take his or her place and keep the rights of compulsory heirs to the legitime, but the disinherited parent does not get the usufruct or administration of that property.

In Seangio v. Reyes (2006), a father wrote and signed by hand a short document disinheriting his eldest son, stating that the son was "lapastangan" (disrespectful) and had used the father's name to borrow money. The Court said the incidents, taken as a whole, "can be considered a form of maltreatment" under Article 919, and that the document met the formalities of a holographic will. It ordered the trial court to hear the will's probate, noting: "Unless the will is probated, the disinheritance cannot be given effect."

Preterition is a silent omission of a compulsory heir in the direct line; disinheritance is an express act with a stated cause. In Nuguid v. Nuguid (1966), the Court explained that preterition annuls the institution of heirs entirely (unless there are devises or legacies), while an ineffective disinheritance annuls it only insofar as it prejudices the person disinherited.

Made-up illustration: Nena writes a will that says, "I disinherit my son Rico because he has not visited me in years." Not visiting is not one of the causes in Article 919, so the disinheritance is ineffective under Article 918: Rico keeps his legitime, and the rest of the will stands insofar as it does not impair it. If instead the will stated that Rico had refused, without justifiable cause, to support her, and Rico denied it, the other heirs would have to prove it. Whether a cause is proved is decided by the court. See Can parents disinherit a child?.

See also the comparison preterition vs disinheritance.