Short answer. No — they take their late parent's one share between them. Article 981 has surviving children inherit in their own right and the descendants of a child who died inherit by right of representation, so the grandchildren step into their father's place rather than each counting as a child of the deceased.
What the law says
Should children of the deceased and descendants of other children who are dead, survive, the former shall inherit in their own right, and the latter by right of representation.
Civil Code, Article 981 — Children and Grandchildren Together. Read the full provision →
Two ways of inheriting in one sentence
Article 981 handles the mixed case directly. Should children of the deceased and descendants of other children who are dead, survive, the former shall inherit in their own right, and the latter by right of representation. Two different mechanisms operate side by side in the same estate. The surviving children take as children, counted by head. The grandchildren do not join that count; they are admitted only because their own parent would have been there, and they take what he would have taken. The estate is therefore divided at the level of the deceased's children, whether those children are alive to receive it or not.
The arithmetic this produces
Take a father with three children, one of whom died before him leaving two children of her own. The estate is divided into three, because he had three children. The two surviving children take a third each. The remaining third goes to the two grandchildren, who divide it between them, so each receives a sixth. Add a third grandchild in that branch and the sixths become ninths — while the uncles' thirds do not move at all. The size of the branch changes what each person in it receives; it never changes what the branch as a whole is entitled to.
Unequal per head, and correctly so
The result offends a lot of families, because a grandchild ends up with visibly less than an uncle who is a generation older and often better provided for already. It is not an oversight. Representation exists so that the death of a child does not disinherit that child's line, and so that the surviving children are not enlarged by the accident of their sibling dying first. Read the other way, if the grandchildren each counted as a child, a branch with five children would take five times what a branch with one took, which would make the shares turn on family size rather than on relationship.
Dates and documents decide this
Everything here rests on one fact: that the child died before the parent whose estate is being settled. So the two death certificates are the first documents to obtain, and their dates should be compared rather than assumed. Then establish the grandchildren's filiation to the deceased child through the civil registry. Note also that representation and repudiation are different things — a child who survived the parent but gives up his share afterwards is not in the same position as one who predeceased, and the difference changes who receives what. Get the sequence of events right before dividing anything.
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.
- The Roman Catholic Bishop of Tuguegarao vs. Florentina Prudencio, et al, G.R. No. 187942, September 7, 2016 — read the decision on LawPhil →