Appeal from an order of the Hon. Jose P. Veluz, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Misamis Oriental dismissing plaintiffs' complaint dated July 17, 1950 for the recovery of three parcels of land in the City of Cagayan de Oro.

There is no question that said lands belonged to Eugeniano  Saarenas who  died intestate in 1937, leaving no  ascendants  nor  descendants; that as his surviving nephews (by a sister) defendant Proceso Yanez  (and his sisters) took possession of said  lots; and that plaintiffs  are  illegitimate (adulterous)  children of Eugeniano,  born between 1910  and 1927.

Plaintiffs' action is founded on arts. 287 and 988 of the New  Civil Code, giving illegitimate children the right to succeed, where decedent leaves no ascendants nor descendants.

Defendant Yañez  (and  his sisters)  claim the right to inherit under the Civil Code articles 946, 947, and 948 the law in force at the time of Eugeniano's  death.

Applying the Civil Code, the trial judge absolved the defendant.  He refused to  apply the  New Civil Code- that grants for the first time successional rights to illegitimate. children, in accordance with this Court's decision in Uson vs.  Del  Rosario,   (92 Phil., 530)   promulgated January 29, 1953, the pertinent portions of which  are;

"But defendants contend that, while it is true that the minor defendants 'are illegitimate children of the late Faustino Nebrada and under the old Civil Code are not entitled to" any. success rights, however, under the new Civil Code ,which  became in force in June 1950, they are  given  the status and, rights which the law accords to the latter (Article 2264 and Article 278, new Civil  Code), and because these successional rights  were declared  for the first time in the new code,  they shall be given retroactive  effect even though the event which gave rise to them may have occurred  under the prior legislation (Art.  2253, new Civil Code). 

"There is  no merit in this  claim. Article 2253 * * *  provides that if  a right should.be declared for the first time in his Code, it shall be effective  at once, even though the  act or event which gives rise thereto may  have been done or-may  have  occurred under the. prior legislation,  provided said new  right does not prejudice  or impair any vested or acquired right, of the  same  origin. As  already stated in the early part of  this decision, the right of ownership of Maria Uson over  the lands in question became  vested in 1945 upon the death of her late husband and this is so because of the imperative provision of the law which commands that the rights to succession  are transmitted from the moment of death (Article 657, old Civil Code).   The new  right recognized by the  new Civil Code in favor of the illegitimate children of the deceased cannot, therefore, be asserted to the  impairment  of the vested  right  of Maria Uson over  the lands in dispute."

It is clear that His Honor read the law correctly. " Appellants contend,  however, that for  defendant to  acquire a vested right  to, Eugeniano's property, he must first commence proceedings to settle Eugeniano's estate which  he had not done.  There is no merit to the contention.  This Court has  repeatedly held  that the  right of  heirs to  the property of  the deceased is vested  from the moment of death.^[1]  Of  course the  formal declaration  or recognition or enforcement of  such right needs judicial  confirmation in proper proceedings.  But we have often enforced or protected such rights from  encroachments made or attempted before the judicial declaration.^[2]  Which can only  mean that the heir  acquired hereditary rights even before judicial declaration in testate or intestate proceedings.

However, a more conclusive consideration barring plaintiffs'  demand is to  be found in Article 2263 of the New Civil Code which read:

"ART. 2263. Eights to the inheritance of a person who died, with or without a will, before the effectivity of this Code, shall be governed by the Civil Code of 1889, by other previous laws, and by the Rules of Court.   The inheritance  of those  who, with or without a will, die after the beginning of  the effectivity  of this  Code,  shall  be adjudicated and  distributed  in accordance with this new body  of laws and by the Rules of Court; but the testamentary provisions shall be carried out insofar as  they may be permitted by this Code. Therefore, legitimes, betterments, legacies and bequests shall be respected; however, their amount shall he reduced  if  in  no  other manner can every compulsory heir be given his full share according to this Code."

According to  the  above  italicized portion  the rights of the herein litigants to the property of Eugeniano must be determined  in accordance with the Civil  Code, because he died in 1937, i. e, before the enactment of the New Civil Code in 1949.

The  appealed  order  is   therefore  affirmed with  cost

against appellants.

Parás, C. J., Padilla, Reyes, A., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J. B. L., and Endencia, JJ., concur.

---

^[1] Art. 657 Civil Code, Mijares vs. Neri, 3 Phil. 195; Velasco vs. Vizmanos, 45 Phil., 675; Ilustre vs. Frondosa, 17 Phil., 321; Bondad vs. Bondad, 34 Phil., 232; Inocencio vs. Gatpandan, 14 Phil., 491; Fule vs. Fule, 46 Phil., 317.

^[2] See Coronel vs. Ona, 33 Phil., 456; Nable Jose vs. Nable Jose, 41 Phil., 713; Velasco vs. Vizmanos, supra.