Doctrine of Dependent Relative Revocation | Revocation of Wills and Testamentary Dispositions | Testamentary Succession | Different Kinds of Succession | WILLS AND SUCCESSION

Doctrine of Dependent Relative Revocation (DRR) in Testamentary Succession

The Doctrine of Dependent Relative Revocation (DRR) is a principle in testamentary succession that applies when a testator revokes a will or a testamentary disposition under the mistaken belief that another disposition or set of circumstances will take effect. If the revocation is premised on such a mistaken belief, and the new disposition or set of circumstances fails, the revocation is considered invalid, and the original will or testamentary disposition is revived.

Key Elements of DRR

1. Revocation by Mistake or Misapprehension:

   • The doctrine operates where the testator revokes a will or part thereof under the mistaken belief that:
     • A new testamentary disposition is valid and effective, or
     • Certain conditions or circumstances will come into existence.
   • If the assumption underlying the revocation is false, the revocation is rendered dependent and ineffective.

2. Intention of the Testator:

   • The DRR seeks to uphold the true intent of the testator.
   • If it is evident that the testator would not have revoked the earlier will or disposition had they known the new disposition or assumption would fail, DRR applies.

3. Revival of the Original Will or Testamentary Disposition:

   • The original will or part thereof remains operative as if the revocation had not occurred.
   • Courts often invoke this doctrine to prevent intestacy or unintended consequences contrary to the testator's wishes.

Legal Basis in the Philippines

While the Philippine Civil Code does not explicitly codify the DRR, its application is consistent with principles of justice, equity, and the intention to give effect to the true will of the testator. Articles 783 to 837 of the Civil Code, governing wills and succession, form the general legal framework within which the doctrine operates.

Relevant Provisions:

• Article 830: Revocation of wills is permitted by subsequent wills or acts indicating the intent to revoke. This provision allows for situations where revocation might be reconsidered under DRR.
• Article 837: Courts are required to ascertain the true intention of the testator, which forms the foundation for applying DRR.

Modes of Revocation and Application of DRR

The doctrine can apply to different methods of revocation:

1. Revocation by a Subsequent Will or Testamentary Disposition:

   • Example: A testator executes a new will and expressly revokes a prior one. If the new will is later found invalid (e.g., due to failure to meet formal requirements), DRR can revive the earlier will if it is clear that the testator would not have revoked it otherwise.

2. Revocation by Physical Act:

   • Example: A testator destroys a will intending to replace it with a new one, but the new one is never properly executed. The revocation by destruction may be ineffective under DRR.

3. Revocation Under Conditional or Mistaken Assumptions:

   • Example: A testator revokes a will believing they are dying soon but later recovers. DRR can restore the will if the revocation was contingent on a false assumption.

Philippine Jurisprudence on DRR

While limited, Philippine jurisprudence has recognized and applied the DRR in cases where the testator's intent would otherwise be defeated.

• Heirs of Velasquez v. Velasquez (G.R. No. 123456) (hypothetical example for illustrative purposes):
  • Facts: A testator revoked a prior will intending to execute a new one but died before completing the new will. The court reinstated the prior will under DRR, emphasizing that the revocation was dependent on the mistaken assumption that a valid new will would replace it.

Practical Applications

1. Avoiding Intestacy:

   • DRR is often applied to prevent intestacy, which occurs if the revocation of a valid will leads to the absence of any operative testamentary disposition.

2. Interpreting Conditional Revocations:

   • Courts interpret ambiguous revocations conditionally to determine whether the testator’s intent aligns with DRR principles.

3. Evidentiary Considerations:

   • The proponent of DRR must provide evidence of the testator’s intent and the mistake or misapprehension leading to the revocation.

Limitations of DRR

1. Clear Intent to Revoke:

   • If the testator’s intent to revoke the prior will is unconditional, DRR cannot apply.

2. Absence of Mistake:

   • DRR does not apply if the revocation is based on accurate assumptions or valid conditions.

3. Failure to Execute a New Will:

   • DRR cannot operate if there is no evidence that the testator intended a new testamentary disposition.

Conclusion

The Doctrine of Dependent Relative Revocation is a nuanced principle that safeguards the testator’s intent and prevents unintended consequences, such as intestacy or misallocation of estates. Its application requires careful scrutiny of the facts, evidence, and surrounding circumstances. Courts in the Philippines, guided by principles of equity and justice, uphold DRR to honor the true wishes of the testator.