Short answer. Under Article 1100, you have four years from the time the partition was made. The period runs from the date of partition itself, not from when you discovered the disparity. Missing this window bars the rescission claim, so acting promptly once you realize the prejudice is essential.
What the law says
The action for rescission on account of lesion shall prescribe after four years from the time the partition was made.
Civil Code, Article 1100 — Four Years to Sue for Lesion. Read the full provision →
What lesion means in partition
Lesion in the context of estate partition means that one heir received significantly less than the value they were entitled to — that the partition was so unequal that it inflicted real financial harm. Philippine law recognizes that partitions among heirs, often done under emotional and family pressure, can produce outcomes that depart sharply from what each heir's legal share should have been. The Civil Code allows the aggrieved heir to seek rescission and a corrected distribution, but only within a strict time window.
The four-year clock and when it starts
Article 1100 is unambiguous: the period is four years from the time the partition was made. This means the clock starts when the partition agreement was executed or when the court decree of partition was issued, not when the heir first became aware of the disparity. If the partition was done informally among heirs without a written document, determining the exact start date may itself become a question of fact. In practice, the signed extrajudicial settlement or the court judgment is the clearest reference point.
Rescission returns the parties to a fair distribution
A successful rescission for lesion does not simply void the partition outright. The goal is to correct the inequity so that each heir receives what they were lawfully entitled to. Courts may order a revaluation of the assets and a redistribution of shares. If the prejudiced heir's share was worth substantially less than the co-heirs received, rescission restores the proper proportion. The heir who benefited from the lopsided partition must account for the excess, which may involve returning property or compensating the difference in value.
When rescission will not succeed
Not every unequal partition gives rise to a lesion claim. The Civil Code allows heirs to agree on an unequal distribution if they do so freely and with full knowledge — a testamentary partition by the decedent, for example, may be lopsided by design. Additionally, if the heir who received less already sold or transferred that share to a third party, rescission becomes more complicated. A lawyer can assess whether the disparity in your case crosses the threshold the Civil Code requires and whether the four-year period is still open.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Maria Elena Rodriguez Pedrosa vs. The Hon. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 118680, March 5, 2001 — read the decision on LawPhil →