The Yanson 4 will file an appeal to the Regional Trial Court of Bacolod City, Branch 45, ruling declaring the extrajudicial settlement (EJS) of the estate of Ricardo B. Yanson null and void, Celina Lopez Yanson said on Tuesday, Feb. 11.
The decision, penned by Judge Phoebe Gargantiel–Balbin, affirmed Olivia Yanson’s majority ownership and control over the Yanson Group of Bus Companies (YGBC).
The Court-declared the EJS, the document on which Mrs. Yanson’s four children — Ricky, Roy, Celina, and Emily Yanson — anchor their claims of majority ownership of YGBC, void.
Lopez, on Tuesday, Feb. 11, said she and her siblings did not defraud their mother. They were merely claiming what was granted to them as agreed on in their family constitution that should be honored, she said.
“I am standing on the legacy that my father wanted, that we all agreed to, “ she said.
“To say that we defrauded our mother is too much already, we did not defraud our mom. We were not raised by our parents , especially our dad, to tell lies,” she said.
“To say that we defrauded our mother is a complete lie,” Lopez said.
“When out father was still alive out family was united,” she said.
“We are filing an appeal because this already too much injustice to us, the Y4,” she said.
“We are appealing to our mother who is 91 to put a stop to all of this already. There is too much chaos in our family already…our lives have been destroyed,” Lopez said.
The Y4 are still the majority owners of their family firm, she said.
The court, in its seven page decision, held that the extra judicial settlement that Olivia Yanson was made to sign did not accurately reflect what she agreed to.
“Mrs. Yanson feels defrauded and prejudiced when she was asked to sign the EJS without informing her that she was deprived of her 50 percent share in the conjugal partnership of gains,” the court decision said.
“The Court agrees with plaintiff that the EJS, the Amended EJS and the Annexes fail to comply with the mandate of Rule 74 Section 1 of the Amended Rules of Court,” it said.
The Court finds the EJS and Amended EJS null and void, thus, the Court will not anymore rule on the prayer for injunction in the complaint of the plaintiff, it added.
“The Court finds that the plaintiff had proved her case with preponderance of evidence,” the decision also said.*