Short answer. The share goes to the other relatives in the same degree. Under Article 968 of the Civil Code, when one of several relatives of the same degree is unwilling or incapacitated to succeed, that person's portion accrues to the others in the same degree — unless the right of representation applies.
What the law says
If there are several relatives of the same degree, and one or some of them are unwilling or incapacitated to succeed, his portion shall accrue to the others of the same degree, save the right of representation when it should take place.
Civil Code, Article 968 — Repudiation by One of Several Relatives. Read the full provision →
The accrual rule among co-heirs of equal degree
In intestate succession, relatives of the same degree of kinship to the deceased inherit equally. Article 968 addresses what happens when one of those equally-placed relatives drops out — because they are disqualified, incapacitated, or have repudiated the inheritance. Their portion does not pass down to their own descendants by default, and it does not pass up to more remote relatives. Instead, it accrues to the remaining relatives at the same degree. The surviving co-heirs of equal standing absorb the vacant share among themselves.
Unwilling or incapacitated: two separate triggers
Article 968 covers two distinct situations. An heir who is unwilling to succeed is one who has validly renounced or repudiated the inheritance — a deliberate choice not to accept. An heir who is incapacitated to succeed is one disqualified by law, such as a person convicted of a crime against the decedent or someone otherwise barred from inheriting. The legal consequence is the same in both cases: the portion falls to the other relatives at the same degree.
The exception: when representation steps in instead
Article 968 includes a critical carve-out: the accrual among same-degree relatives happens only when the right of representation does not apply. Representation allows the descendants of a deceased, incapacitated, or disinherited heir to step into that heir's shoes and take what their predecessor would have received. When representation is available — primarily in the descending direct line and among nephews and nieces inheriting alongside their uncles and aunts — the vacant share does not accrue to the other co-heirs at the same degree. Instead, it passes down to the representatives of the person who could not inherit.
Why the distinction matters
The practical difference between accrual and representation can significantly change who ends up with the missing heir's share. If you and two siblings are inheriting equally and one sibling renounces, accrual means you and the remaining sibling split the renouncing sibling's share between yourselves. But if the renouncing sibling has children and representation applies, those children take the parent's share instead — none of it flows to you. Understanding which mechanism governs the particular succession at hand requires knowing both the degree of relationship and whether the absent heir has living descendants eligible to represent them.
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.
- Heirs of Serapio Mabborang; Lauriano Mabborang, et al. vs. Hermogenes Mabborang and Benjamin Mabborang, G.R. No. 182805, April 22, 2015 — read the decision on LawPhil →