The Deed of Extra-Judicial Settlement of Estate (EJS) is one of the most commonly executed notarial instruments in the Philippines. It is intended to be a quick, inexpensive, and private mode of distributing the estate of a decedent who died intestate and whose estate has no outstanding debts. However, when the document lacks the signatures of some or all compulsory heirs, or when required supporting documents are missing, serious questions arise as to its validity, enforceability, and registrability. This article exhaustively discusses the legal effects of such defects under current Philippine law and jurisprudence as of December 2025.

Legal Basis and Essential Requisites of a Valid Extra-Judicial Settlement

The governing law is Section 1, Rule 74 of the Rules of Court, as supplemented by Articles 777, 1058–1081 of the Civil Code, Revenue Regulations No. 2-2003 (now Revenue Regulations No. 13-2018 as amended), and BIR Memorandum Circulars on estate tax amnesty (most recently R.A. No. 11956 and its IRR under RMC 78-2024, still in effect until 2025).

For an EJS to be valid, the following must concur:

The decedent died intestate.
There are no unpaid debts (or all known debts have been paid/settled).
All heirs are of legal age or, if minors/legally incapacitated, are properly represented by judicial guardians or legal representatives with Special Power of Attorney.
The partition is embodied in a public instrument (notarized deed).
The fact of extrajudicial settlement is published once a week for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation.
A bond equivalent to the value of personal property is filed with the Register of Deeds (if personalty is involved).
Estate tax is paid and a Certificate Authorizing Registration (CAR) or eCAR is issued by the BIR.
The deed, together with all required supporting documents, is registered with the Register of Deeds (for titled land) or Assessor’s Office (for untitled land).

Effect of Absence of Signatures of Some or All Heirs

1. Lack of Signature of Even One Compulsory Heir Renders the EJS Void Ab Initio

Supreme Court jurisprudence is unanimous and consistent: an extra-judicial settlement executed without the participation and signature of all compulsory heirs is null and void.

Key rulings:

Reyes v. Enriquez (G.R. No. 162956, April 10, 2008) – “The extrajudicial settlement of the estate is valid only as among the heirs who participated therein. It cannot prejudice the heirs who did not participate.”
Heirs of Gabatan v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 150206, March 13, 2009) – Explicitly declared the EJS void for lack of signature of one sister.
Heirs of Teofilo Gabatan v. CA (supra) and subsequent cases such as Pedrosa v. CA (G.R. No. 118680, March 5, 2001), Portugal v. Portugal-Beltran (G.R. No. 155555, August 16, 2005), and Del Rosario v. Conanan (G.R. No. 169822, July 21, 2008) all reiterate the same doctrine.
Cua v. Vargas (G.R. No. 156536, October 31, 2006) – Even if the non-signatory heir later acquiesces or receives benefits, the document remains void; acquiescence does not cure the defect of lack of consent of all heirs at the time of execution.
Sevilla v. De Los Angeles (G.R. No. 212799, August 9, 2022, Ponente: J. Leonen) – Reaffirmed that “an extrajudicial settlement executed without all the heirs is not binding upon the heirs who were excluded.”

Conclusion from jurisprudence: The EJS is void, not merely voidable. It produces no legal effect whatsoever with respect to the share of the non-signatory heir. The property remains in co-ownership pro-indiviso, and any transfer of title based on the defective EJS is null and void.

2. Partial Participation Creates Only a Limited Binding Effect Among Signatories

Under the doctrine in Reyes v. Enriquez and qualified in later cases (e.g., Heirs of Sandejas v. Lina, G.R. No. 141634, February 5, 2001), the EJS is valid and binding only among the signatories with respect to their proportionate shares, but it cannot adjudicate or dispose of the share pertaining to the non-signatory heir.

In practice, however, Registers of Deeds almost uniformly refuse registration of such defective deeds, and courts consistently annul titles issued on the basis thereof.

3. Signature of a Minor or Incapacitated Heir Without Proper Representation

If a minor signs through a parent who has no judicial authority or SPA, the entire document is void (Sps. Benatiro v. Heirs of Cuyos, G.R. No. 161220, July 30, 2008).

4. Forged Signature or Signature Obtained Through Fraud

The entire deed is void. The defrauded heir may file an action for annulment and damages, and the notary public may be administratively and criminally liable (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Revised Notarial Law).

Effect of Missing or Incomplete Supporting Documents

Even if all heirs sign, the EJS is ineffective for purposes of title transfer if required annexes are missing.

Documents Required for BIR Clearance (eCAR/CAR)

Under R.A. 10963 (TRAIN Law), R.A. 11534 (CREATE MORE), and the Estate Tax Amnesty (R.A. 11956 extended to June 14, 2025, now further extended by legislation in 2025):

Certified true copy of Death Certificate
TIN of decedent and all heirs
Proof of relationship (birth/marriage certificates)
Affidavit of Self-Adjudication or Deed of EJS
Special Power of Attorney if executed abroad or by representative
Proof of payment of estate tax (or acceptance of Estate Tax Amnesty return)
For real properties: Certified true copies of TCT/OCT, Tax Declaration, Real Property Tax Clearance
For shares of stock: Stock certificates, Secretary’s Certificate, etc.

If any of these are missing, the BIR will not issue the eCAR. Without the eCAR, the Register of Deeds will not allow transfer or annotation of the EJS.

Documents Required by the Register of Deeds (LRA Circulars and P.D. 1529)

Original + duplicate original of the notarized EJS
Owner’s duplicate TCT/OCT
CAR/eCAR from BIR
Real Property Tax Clearance from the Treasurer’s Office
Proof of publication (Affidavit of Publication + newspaper clippings)
Payment of transfer tax (Provincial/City Treasurer)
Payment of registration fees and DST
Bond (if personal property is involved)

Missing any of these renders the EJS unregistrable. The RD will return the document with a notation of denial.

Practical Consequences of a Defective EJS

Titles issued on the basis of a void EJS are null and void and may be cancelled in a direct action for reconveyance or cancellation of title (Heirs of Gabatan, supra; Sevilla v. De Los Angeles, supra).
Prescription does not run against the non-signatory heir; the action to annul is imprescriptible when the document is void ab initio (Cua v. Vargas, supra).
Buyers in good faith who purchase from heirs under a void EJS acquire no valid title; the true owners can recover the property even from innocent purchasers for value (Heirs of Trinidad de Leon Vda. de Roxas v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 138660, February 5, 2004, reiterated in subsequent cases).
Banks that accept a defective EJS as collateral do so at their peril; the mortgage is invalid as to the share of the excluded heir.

Remedies Available to the Aggrieved or Excluded Heir

Action for Annulment of the EJS and Cancellation of Titles (imprescriptible if document is void).
Action for Partition (Rule 69, Rules of Court).
Action for Reconveyance.
Criminal actions for falsification, perjury, or estafa through falsification if signatures were forged.
Administrative complaint against the notary public (may lead to revocation of notarial commission).

Best Practices to Avoid Invalidity

Ensure 100% participation and signature of all compulsory heirs (legitimate, illegitimate acknowledged, adopted, surviving spouse).
Conduct a thorough heirship conference and document it.
Secure all supporting documents before execution.
Publish immediately after notarization.
Pay estate tax or avail of amnesty while still available.

Conclusion

An Extra-Judicial Settlement of Estate that lacks the signature of even one compulsory heir is null and void ab initio. It produces no legal effect, cannot serve as basis for transfer of title, and exposes signatories and notaries to serious civil, criminal, and administrative liability. Similarly, an EJS with complete signatures but missing required annexes is valid between the parties but completely ineffective for registration and transfer purposes until all documentary requirements are complied with.

In Philippine law, there is no such thing as a “substantially compliant” extra-judicial settlement when it comes to the participation of all heirs. The requirement is absolute. Practitioners and heirs who attempt shortcuts invariably find themselves in prolonged, expensive, and often losing litigation decades later. The safest and, in the long run, cheapest course is full compliance from the very beginning.