In the Matter of the Trusteeship of Minors Benigno, Angela and Antonio

all surnamed Perez v Antonio Perez, Judicial Guardian of Angela and

Antonio Perez (Makalintal, 1966)
FACTS (short case)

March 24, 1950 Antonio Araneta was appointed trustee pursuant to the will of the
late Angela Perez. He qualified on May 5 when he took his oath of office. The
beneficiaries of the trust are Bengno, Angela and Antonio Perez. The last 2 are
represented by appellant Antonio Perez, their father and judicial guardian.

April 30, 1955 Araneta executed a deed of donation in favor of the City of Manila
covering a lot pertaining to the trusteeship, with an area of 853.1sqm. The lower court
approved it but such was opposed by Antonio, the father. The lot was being used as a
street and had been so used even before Angela acquired it. The street leads to other
lots pertaining to the trusteeship with an area of 8176.7 sqm. It is through the street
that the tenants occupying those other lots pass in going to and from their respective
homes. Araneta had been paying P 100/ year.

CFI of Rizal Ordered approval of the deed of donation - Found that the lots would
be converted into a residential subdivision and a plan for such was prepared.

CA certified to SC because it involves a purely legal question

ISSUES

WON the deed of donation was valid YES

P: The donation was invalid because under Art 736 of the NCC guardians
and trustees cannot donate the properties entrusted to them.

R: (see CFI ruling) The lot donated by Araneta to the City of Manila appears on the
plan to be included among the areas covered by the street lay-outs are required by
law. The donation would save the trusteeship the amount of the realty tax and relieve
it from the duty of maintaining the lot in usable condition as a street. The donation
was beneficial to the trusteeship.

C: Said provision is a new and only took effect on August 30, 1950, taking into
account Articles 2253 and 2255, which provide against such retroactive operation on
acts or events that took place under former laws. There was nothing in the old Civil
Code which prohibits a trustee from donating properties under trusteeship, and
considering that the powers given to Araneta as trustee are of a plenary character,
subject only to the limitation that they should be permissible under the law. [The will
was in Spanish but the underlined portion was provided in the will under number 4]

Furthermore, the NCC the prohibition mentioned in Art 736 is for the protection of the
trust beneficiaries and evidently contemplates gifts of pure beneficence. When the
donation is clearly in the beneficiaries interest, to say it cannot be done would be
contrary to the spirit and intention of the law.

ORDER AFFIRMED