1) What an extra-judicial settlement is—and what it is not

An extra-judicial settlement (EJS) is a non-court mode of settling an estate when a person dies intestate (no will), and the heirs divide the estate among themselves by public instrument (usually a notarized deed). It is mainly governed by Rule 74 of the Rules of Court, alongside substantive rules on succession under the Civil Code (and related family-law rules on who qualifies as heirs).

An EJS is not supposed to be used when any of these exist:

There is a will (testate succession requires different procedures; probate is generally required).
There are debts/claims that require administration (Rule 74 allows EJS only when the estate has no debts, or debts have been fully paid; creditors have protections).
Not all heirs are included in the settlement (this is the core issue here).

2) Core legal requirements of a valid extra-judicial settlement

Under Rule 74 (and standard practice), these elements matter most:

A. Intestacy and heirship

The decedent died without a valid will.
The persons executing the deed are the true heirs (and should include all heirs).

B. No unpaid debts

The estate must have no outstanding obligations, or these must have been paid. (Creditors are protected by the Rule 74 publication/bond mechanism and by later actions.)

C. Public instrument

The settlement must be in a public instrument (a notarized deed).
If real property is involved, it is typically registered with the Registry of Deeds; titles may be transferred based on it.

D. Publication

The fact of the EJS must be published (commonly: once a week for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation). Publication is tied to protections for creditors and third parties, and is also a “red flag” area when it is skipped or faked.

E. Bond (in certain cases)

Rule 74 has a bond requirement conceptually tied to protecting creditors/claimants in some distributions; in practice, publication and later remedies are the usual battleground.

3) What it means when the EJS is filed “without all heirs”

When an EJS is executed by only some heirs and excludes others (whether deliberately or by mistake), the deed is typically not binding on the excluded heirs with respect to their hereditary rights.

Key practical consequences:

The participating heirs cannot, by themselves, validly “settle” the hereditary rights of heirs who were not parties to the deed.
Transfers of property (including titled land) based on that EJS become vulnerable to annulment/reconveyance/partition actions, depending on who currently holds the property and their good/bad faith.
If the EJS includes false statements (e.g., “we are the only heirs”), the signatories may face civil liability and potentially criminal exposure (details below).

4) Who counts as “all heirs” (common sources of exclusion)

Excluded-heir disputes often arise from incorrect assumptions about legal heirs. Examples:

Surviving spouse omitted (a very common error).
Children omitted (legitimate, illegitimate, adopted, legitimated).
Children by another relationship not acknowledged/known to the executing heirs.
Heirs by representation (e.g., a predeceased child’s children stepping into the parent’s share).
Parents as heirs when there are no descendants.
Collateral relatives (siblings, nephews/nieces) when there are no descendants, ascendants, or spouse (depending on the exact family situation).

Because succession shares depend on the family constellation, “all heirs” is not a casual concept—it is a legal conclusion based on the Civil Code’s order of intestate succession.

5) Immediate objectives of an excluded heir

An excluded heir usually needs to do three things quickly (even before filing a case):

Prevent further transfers (stop the property from being sold/encumbered).
Create a record of the dispute (to defeat “good faith” claims later).
Prepare proof of heirship and estate composition (documents and trace of titles).

Practical protective steps (commonly used tools):

Adverse Claim annotation (for registered land, when appropriate).
Notice of Lis Pendens (once a case affecting title/possession is filed).
Written demands to co-heirs/possessors and to the Registry of Deeds when warranted.
Obtain certified true copies of:
- The EJS deed, affidavits, attachments, publication proof.
- Titles (TCT/OCT) and encumbrances.
- Tax declarations, estate tax filings/eCAR (if any), transfer documents.

6) Civil remedies for excluded heirs (the main menu)

A. Action for partition (judicial partition)

If co-ownership exists (which is the default status of hereditary property before proper partition), an excluded heir can file an action for judicial partition to:

have the court determine who the heirs are,
determine each one’s shares, and
order actual division (or sale if indivisible), plus accounting.

Partition is often paired with:

Accounting of fruits/income (rent, produce) received by possessors,
Delivery of share, and
Damages if there was bad faith, fraud, or refusal.

B. Annulment / nullification of the EJS (or deed of partition)

If the deed states false facts or excludes mandatory parties, the excluded heir may sue to have it:

declared void or ineffective as to them, or
rescinded/annulled depending on the nature of defect.

Courts will look at:

whether consent was vitiated (fraud),
whether indispensable parties were excluded,
whether the deed misrepresented heirship.

C. Reconveyance of property / cancellation of title

If property was transferred (especially real property) based on the defective EJS, an excluded heir may seek:

reconveyance (return of property to the estate/co-ownership), and/or
cancellation of titles issued under the flawed chain.

This typically depends on who currently holds the property:

Still in the hands of participating heirs / transferees in bad faith: reconveyance/cancellation is stronger.
Transferred to an innocent purchaser for value (IPV) in good faith: Torrens principles may protect the purchaser; the excluded heir may be pushed toward damages against the fraudulent sellers, though outcomes can be fact-intensive (e.g., whether the buyer truly had no notice; whether the title had red flags/annotations; whether possession facts defeat good faith).

D. Action to quiet title / remove cloud

When the EJS and subsequent transfer documents create a “cloud” on the excluded heir’s rights, an action to quiet title can be an appropriate vehicle, often alongside reconveyance/partition.

E. Rescission / reformation (case-specific)

If the EJS was not outright fraudulent but was drafted incorrectly (e.g., wrong shares, mistaken descriptions), a remedy may focus on:

reformation of instrument (to reflect true intent), or
rescission if legally proper.

In excluded-heir situations, however, the conflict is usually more fundamental: lack of participation/consent by an indispensable heir.

F. Damages and restitution

Excluded heirs often claim:

actual damages (losses, expenses),
moral/exemplary damages (when fraud/bad faith is proven),
attorney’s fees (in proper cases),
restitution of fruits/income received by bad-faith possessors.

A common claim is for accounting of fruits (e.g., rents collected) from the time of possession in bad faith.

7) Provisional/ancillary remedies to stop dissipation

A. Annotation tools (registered land)

Adverse claim (when available and factually proper).
Lis pendens once litigation is filed involving title/possession. These are crucial to defeat later “good faith purchaser” arguments by putting the world on notice.

B. Injunction / TRO (court order)

If there is an imminent sale, construction, or encumbrance, an excluded heir may seek a temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or preliminary injunction to preserve the status quo.

C. Receivership (rare but possible)

If property is income-producing and being mismanaged, a receiver may be sought in appropriate cases.

8) Rule 74’s “two-year” concept—and what it really means for excluded heirs

Rule 74 is often misunderstood as a strict “two-year deadline.” In practice, the two-year period is commonly associated with protections for:

creditors, and
persons with claims against the estate who were not part of the settlement.

For excluded heirs, the situation is more nuanced:

Being a true heir is a substantive right; an heir generally cannot be deprived of inheritance by the unilateral deed of others.
However, prescription and laches can still matter, especially once property has changed hands, titles have been issued, and third-party rights intervene.
The applicable prescriptive period depends on the exact cause of action (partition, reconveyance based on implied trust, annulment, damages, etc.) and the facts showing when the cause of action accrued.

Because of this, the “two years” should be treated as not a universal cut-off for excluded heirs, but it can still be relevant to certain claims and defenses in a particular case.

9) Criminal angles (when exclusion involves falsity or fraud)

Not every exclusion is criminal. But criminal liability becomes a real issue when the EJS contains false statements or is used to defraud the excluded heir or third parties.

Common exposures (depending on facts and evidence):

Falsification (e.g., untruthful statements in a public document; forged signatures; fake heirs).
Perjury (false statements under oath in affidavits).
Estafa / fraud-related offenses (when deceit causes damage, such as selling property by pretending to be sole heirs).

Criminal cases do not automatically restore property; they are often pursued alongside (or after) civil actions, and standards of proof differ.

10) Administrative / registration / tax consequences

Excluded-heir disputes frequently involve:

Registry of Deeds transactions (titles transferred based on EJS).
Estate tax compliance and transfer documentation.

Notes that often matter in litigation:

Whether the EJS was registered properly.
Whether publication was genuine and provable.
Whether estate tax documents were obtained using misrepresentations.
Whether subsequent deeds (sale, donation) were executed quickly after EJS—often used as evidence of intent to defeat rights.

Even when taxes were paid and titles transferred, tax compliance does not cure lack of heir participation or fraud; it mainly shows the paper trail and may affect equities/damages.

11) Typical fact patterns and the “best-fit” remedy

Scenario 1: Property still in the names/possession of participating heirs Most direct path:

Judicial partition + nullification of EJS as to excluded heir + accounting/damages.

Scenario 2: Property already transferred to a buyer Key questions:

Did the buyer buy in good faith?
Were there annotations (adverse claim/lis pendens) or other red flags?
Was the buyer aware of the family dispute/possession facts?

Possible outcomes:

Reconveyance/cancellation if transferee is in bad faith or not protected.
Damages against the fraudulent heirs if the transferee is protected as an innocent purchaser.

Scenario 3: Excluded heir is denied recognition as an heir Often requires:

Court determination of status/heirship (e.g., filiation proof), then partition/reconveyance.

12) Evidence checklist for excluded heirs

To build an heir-exclusion case, evidence usually focuses on:

Heirship and relationship

PSA civil registry records (birth/marriage/death), recognition/adoption papers, proof of filiation where applicable.

Estate composition

Titles (OCT/TCT), tax declarations, bank/asset records if available, contracts, inventories.

The challenged acts

The EJS deed and attachments, publication affidavits/newspaper issues, RD registration documents, subsequent deeds of sale/donation, notarization details.

Bad faith indicators

“We are the only heirs” language despite known spouse/children.
Sudden transfers after death.
Concealment of death or concealment of heirs.
Forged signatures or suspicious notarization.

Possession/income

Proof of rentals collected, occupancy, improvements, or dispossession.

13) Defenses commonly raised by the participating heirs—and how they play out

Expect defenses like:

“You are not an heir” (factual/legal heirship dispute).
“You slept on your rights” (laches/prescription; highly fact-dependent).
“The title is already in a third party’s name” (Torrens/IPV defense).
“The estate had no property left / waiver” (alleged waiver/renunciation must meet legal requirements; waivers in succession have formalities and timing implications).
“You were already paid” (requires proof; may convert remedy into accounting/damages issues).

14) Practical legal framing (how cases are commonly pleaded)

Excluded-heir litigation often bundles causes of action, such as:

Declaration of heirship + Partition + Accounting + Damages and/or
Nullification of EJS + Reconveyance/Cancellation of title + Injunction + Damages with lis pendens annotation as soon as the case is filed.

The exact structure depends on whether the estate property is still co-owned, already titled to others, or already sold to third parties.

15) Key takeaways

An extra-judicial settlement requires all heirs; excluding an heir makes the settlement vulnerable and typically ineffective against that heir’s hereditary rights.
The primary civil tools are partition, nullification/annulment, and reconveyance/cancellation, often supported by injunction and title annotations to prevent further transfers.
When fraud is involved (false “sole heirs” claims, forged signatures), civil remedies can be paired with criminal complaints.
Time limits are not one-size-fits-all: Rule 74’s two-year concept is often misapplied; actual outcomes depend on the specific cause of action, transfers to third parties, and factual indicators of notice/good faith.