1) What an Extra-Judicial Settlement Is (and When It’s Allowed)

An extra-judicial settlement (EJS) is a non-court method of settling and dividing a deceased person’s estate among heirs. It is commonly used to transfer inherited property—especially land, condominiums, and titled assets—without filing a judicial settlement case.

In Philippine law and practice, the EJS is generally recognized when these baseline conditions are met:

The decedent left no will (intestate succession applies), or the will is not being implemented through probate for the particular settlement being done.
There are no outstanding enforceable debts of the estate (or creditors are otherwise properly protected/paid/secured).
All heirs are identified and participate (or are properly represented).
The settlement is documented in the form required by law for extrajudicial settlement and for the type of property involved.

The governing framework is primarily found in Rule 74 of the Rules of Court (settlement of estate without administration), together with relevant provisions of the Civil Code (succession, partition, obligations and contracts), and property registration practice affecting Register of Deeds (RD) transactions.

2) The Legal Form Requirement Under Rule 74: Public Instrument (or Affidavit)

Rule 74 allows settlement without court administration, but it requires the settlement to be executed in a specific form to be recognized as an extrajudicial settlement for purposes of dealing with property records:

If there is only one heir, the heir executes an Affidavit of Self-Adjudication.
If there are two or more heirs, they execute a Deed of Extra-Judicial Settlement (often with partition).

Crucially, Rule 74 contemplates execution in a public instrument (or, in practice, an affidavit format for self-adjudication). In the Philippine setting, a public instrument is commonly achieved through notarization, which converts the document into a public document.

Practical consequence: Even if heirs agree among themselves on paper, a non-notarized EJS typically fails as a Rule 74 “public instrument” for the purpose of registration, annotation, and transfer in official registries.

3) What Notarization Does in Philippine Law

A. Notarization is not just a “formality”

Notarization is a legal act that:

Converts a private document into a public document.
Makes it admissible in evidence without further proof of authenticity (generally), because it carries the presumption of regularity.
Is usually a hard requirement in practice for RD, banks, insurers, and government agencies processing transfers and releases.

B. Notarization is tied to public notice and reliability

The extrajudicial settlement process affects not only heirs but also creditors and third persons. Notarization is one of the mechanisms that supports the public nature of the transaction.

4) The Core Question: Is a Non-Notarized EJS Valid?

The best way to understand validity is to separate (a) validity among the heirs from (b) enforceability against third persons and registrability.

A. Validity as an agreement among heirs (inter se)

A non-notarized EJS can still function as a private agreement among heirs—essentially a written understanding on how they want to divide property—because:

Philippine contract law generally recognizes consensual agreements, and
Many formalities (like a public instrument) often affect enforceability/registrability rather than the existence of consent.

However, there are major limitations:

If the document involves transfer/partition of real property, a purely private writing is usually not acceptable to implement transfers in registries.
If signatures are disputed, the private document has less evidentiary weight and may require proof of due execution and authenticity.

Bottom line (inter se): It may be treated as a private partition agreement, but it is legally fragile and often practically useless for transferring title.

B. Validity as an “extrajudicial settlement” under Rule 74 (for public/official effects)

As an instrument meant to substitute for judicial settlement and to support title transfers, non-notarization is typically fatal because Rule 74 envisions a public instrument.

Bottom line (Rule 74 purpose): A non-notarized EJS is generally not effective as a Rule 74 extrajudicial settlement for registration and public reliance.

5) Registrability: Why the Register of Deeds Will Usually Reject It

For titled real property (land/condo), transfer and annotation require documents in registrable form. RD processes rely heavily on notarized instruments because:

RD transactions are public-facing and rely on the integrity of public documents.
The RD must be able to accept an instrument that is presumed authentic, properly executed, and compliant with form requirements.

A non-notarized EJS typically cannot serve as a basis to:

Cancel the decedent’s title and issue new titles in heirs’ names,
Annotate settlement/partition on the title,
Transfer tax declarations cleanly (LGUs vary, but commonly require notarized deeds too),
Secure downstream transactions (sale, mortgage, donation) because the chain of title becomes defective.

6) Publication Requirement: Another Practical Barrier

Rule 74 practice also involves publication of the settlement in a newspaper of general circulation (commonly once a week for three consecutive weeks), particularly where there are multiple heirs and real property is involved.

Even if heirs publish, agencies and registries commonly require that the underlying deed being published is a notarized public instrument. Publishing a non-notarized deed does not reliably cure the lack of public-instrument character.

7) Effect on Third Persons, Creditors, and Omitted Heirs

A. Two-year period and creditor protection

Rule 74 contains mechanisms intended to protect creditors and other persons with claims against the estate. In practice, titles transferred via EJS are often subject to:

A form of two-year vulnerability where persons with lawful claims may pursue remedies, and/or
The concept that EJS does not defeat rights of creditors or omitted heirs.

Whether or not a particular annotation is made, the policy point remains: extrajudicial settlement cannot be used to prejudice creditors and lawful claimants.

B. Omitted heirs

If an heir is omitted (e.g., unknown child, later-discovered spouse, etc.):

The settlement can be challenged.
Transfers made on the basis of a defective settlement can be attacked, with consequences that may include reconveyance, annulment of partition, or damages depending on circumstances.

A non-notarized EJS is even more vulnerable because it lacks the formal safeguards and public-document status.

8) Evidence and Court Use: Private vs Public Document

If a dispute arises (e.g., one heir denies signing), the evidentiary consequences are significant:

Notarized EJS (public document): Carries a presumption of due execution and authenticity; generally easier to enforce.
Non-notarized EJS (private document): Must typically be authenticated; may require witnesses or proof of signatures; easier to deny; more susceptible to forgery allegations.

In inheritance conflicts, authenticity disputes are common. Notarization materially strengthens enforceability.

9) Special Situations Where Notarization Issues Become More Serious

A. Heirs abroad / represented by SPA

If heirs sign through a Special Power of Attorney (SPA), registries usually require:

Properly notarized SPA, and if executed abroad, typically consularization/apostille and compliance with Philippine requirements.
The EJS itself to be notarized.

B. Minor heirs

If any heir is a minor, purely extrajudicial arrangements become risky. Minors require legal protection (guardian/authority), and many situations effectively push toward judicial oversight or at least stringent compliance and court authority depending on the transaction.

C. Real property partition with unequal shares / consideration

If the “partition” is actually a disguised sale (e.g., one heir “buys out” another), the transaction may be treated as a conveyance with its own tax and form implications. A non-notarized instrument becomes even harder to defend.

10) Taxes and Agency Processing: Non-Notarized EJS Is Commonly a Dealbreaker

To transfer inherited property, heirs typically must deal with:

Estate tax compliance and clearances (including the issuance of a certificate authorizing registration/transfer),
RD documentary requirements,
Local assessor’s requirements for tax declaration updates.

Across these processes, notarized deeds are the norm. A non-notarized EJS typically results in:

Inability to obtain necessary clearances based on that document,
Refusal by RD to proceed,
A stalled transfer—meaning the property remains in the decedent’s name, complicating later sale, mortgage, or succession events.

11) Can the Defect Be Cured?

A. Proper notarization after signing

If the heirs already signed but did not notarize, cure may be possible if all signatories can personally appear before a notary public and properly acknowledge the document (or re-execute it), consistent with notarization rules. Notaries generally require personal appearance and identification.

B. Re-execution / deed of confirmation

If the original cannot be notarized properly (e.g., signatories unavailable), common practical cures include:

Executing a new Deed of Extra-Judicial Settlement (and properly notarizing it),
Executing a Deed of Confirmation/Ratification that restates and confirms the settlement terms in notarized form (agency acceptance may vary; RD often prefers a clean primary deed).

C. Judicial settlement when extrajudicial settlement is not viable

If there are debts, disputes, missing heirs, incapacity issues, or refusal to cooperate, judicial settlement may be necessary.

12) Risks of Proceeding With a Non-Notarized EJS

Non-registrability → cannot transfer title; cannot cleanly transact.
Dispute vulnerability → easy for an heir to deny consent or signature.
Third-party risk → buyers, banks, and insurers will generally reject it.
Estate complications multiply over time → later deaths of heirs create “layered estates,” dramatically increasing cost and complexity.
Potential liability exposure if false statements are used elsewhere (e.g., claiming a document is notarized when it is not, or presenting it as a public instrument).

13) Practical Guide: What a Compliant EJS Typically Needs (Philippine Practice)

While exact requirements vary by registry and property type, a typical compliant package involves:

Notarized Deed of Extra-Judicial Settlement (or Affidavit of Self-Adjudication if sole heir),
Publication (proof of newspaper publication as required in practice),
Death certificate,
Proof of heirship (e.g., birth/marriage certificates; other civil registry documents),
Tax compliance documents (estate tax filings/clearances),
Title documents (TCT/CCT, tax declaration, etc.),
Valid IDs, SPAs (if applicable), and other supporting documents required by RD/LGU/BIR practice.

14) Conclusion: The Practical Legal Reality

In the Philippines, an extra-judicial settlement without notarization may exist as a private agreement among heirs, but it is generally not effective as a Rule 74 extrajudicial settlement for the purposes that matter most—public reliance, evidentiary strength, and registration/transfer of real property. For inherited titled property, notarization is typically the line between a document that is merely an internal family arrangement and one that can actually operate in the legal system to transfer ownership and withstand challenge.