Mula, Iane Gem M.

Property
1JDCV211 Atty. Maria Lourdes P. Garcia

Hypothetical Cases:

1. A donated a parcel of land to B, an illegitimate daughter of his deceased wife

before their marriage. In the deed of donation, A expressly stipulated that B may
immediately take possession of the land and derive fruits therefrom with a further
condition not to sell or transfer the land for twenty years. After A’s death, B sold
the land to C. B died within the year after the sale. D, a sole heir of B realized
that the property had already been transferred in contravention of the conditions
of the will. D then filed an action for annulment of sale on the ground of the
violation of the conditions in the Deed. C filed a motion to dismiss on the ground
that D, being only an heir to B, does not have to the legal capacity to sue. Assume
you are the judge, how will you rule on the Motion to Dismiss?

Answer:

The motion to dismiss is tenable. C is correct on claiming that D, being only the
heir of B, doesn’t have the personality to question the violation of the restriction
because D is not the heir of the donor himself. As pronounced by the Court in the
case of SPOUSES ALBERTO GARRIDO AND COLOMA DAGURO vs.
THE COURT OF APPEALS, SPOUSES RUFINO AND CONRADA
SUPLEMENTO, when the donee fails to comply with any of the conditions
imposed by the donor, it is the donor who has the right to impugn the validity of
the transaction affecting the donated property, conformably with Art. 764 of the
Civil Code, which provides that the right to revoke may be transmitted to the heirs
of the donor and may be exercised against the heirs of the donee, and the action
prescribes four years after the violation of the condition.

2. Mr. X donated a parcel of land to Miss Y. The deed of donation is entitled

“Donation Inter Vivos”, notarized and Ms. Y accepted the donation in the same
instrument. The deed likewise states that Ms. Y can immediately take possession
and enjoy the fruits fully. However, Ms. Y cannot dispose of it especially while
Mr. X is alive, as the deed provides for a condition that only he (Mr. X) can
dispose of the property in his lifetime. Also, it further states that Ms. Y can only
register the donation after Mr. X’s death. Subsequently, Mr. X died and his
widow, filed an action to annul the donation contending that the donation is a
mortis causa and not intervivos. Assume, you are the judge, how will you decide.

Answer:

I will decide in favor of Miss Y. The intention of Mr. X in donating the property
was clearly stated in the deed of donation which was a donation Inter Vivos. It is
also clearly stated in Art. 729 of the Civil Code that: When the donor intends that
the donation shall take effect during the lifetime of the donor, though the property
Mula, Iane Gem M. Property
1JDCV211 Atty. Maria Lourdes P. Garcia

shall not be delivered till after the donor’s death, this shall be a donation inter
vivos. The fruits of the property from the time of the acceptance of the donation,
shall pertain to the donee, unless the donor provides otherwise. Here, Miss Y was
even able to immediately take full possession and enjoy the fruits of such
property.
Therefore, Miss Y has validly acquired the property and shall now be able to
register the same, under her name since Mr. X’s death.

3. Ms. D. executed a Deed of Donation to the unborn child of Mrs. P. in the amount
of P 1 million. Unfortunately, the child after birth survived for less than 24 hours.
Mrs. P. now wants to claim as heir to her unborn child. Ms. D. now contends that
the deed of donation did not become effective. Decide.

Answer:

Ms. D’s contention is incorrect. Art. 41 of the Civil Code provides the conditions
to determine when the child is considered conceived and states that: for civil
purposes, the foetus is considered born if it is alive at the time it is completely
delivered from the mother’s womb. However, if the foetus had an intra-uterine life
of less than seven months, it is not deemed born if it dies within twenty-four hours
after its complete delivery from the maternal womb.
Therefore, the child was already deemed born even if it only survived for less
than 24 hours and the donation was deemed effective.

However, Art. 742 of the Civil Code expressly provides that: The donation of a
movable may be made orally or in writing.
An oral donation requires the simultaneous delivery of the thing or of the
document representing the right donated. If the value of the personal property
donated exceeds Five thousand pesos, the donation and the acceptance shall be
made in writing. Otherwise, the donation shall be void. It must be noted that both
the donation and acceptance must be made in writing. It was not stated in the facts
whether acceptance was written. If it wasn’t then, the donation is void.

4. Fraternity member, Mr. A. donated a parcel of land, to his fraternity “Tau Lambda
Wee” with the condition that the fraternity will construct a fraternity house therein
and name the same in his honor. The donation was notarized and the acceptance
was in the same instrument. The Deed of Donation was not registered with the
Registry of Deeds.
However, a purely commercial center was constructed therein. Disappointed, Mr.
A revoked the donation and demanded to surrender the premises immediately.
Under the circumstances, can Mr. A recover possession of the property?

Answer:
Mula, Iane Gem M. Property
1JDCV211 Atty. Maria Lourdes P. Garcia

Yes, Mr. A can recover the possession of his property as his only condition for
donating the property was not complied with. Article 764 of the Civil Code
provides that: The donation shall be revoked at the instance of the donor, when
the donee fails to comply with any of the conditions which the former imposed
upon the latter.
“In this case, the property donated shall be returned to the donor, the alienations
made by the donee and the mortgages imposed thereon by him being void, with
the limitations established, with regard to third persons, by the Mortgage Law and
the Land Registration Laws.
“This action shall prescribe after four years from the non-compliance with the
condition, may be transmitted to the heirs of the donor, and may be exercised
against the donee’s heirs.”

5. In 1950, Dr. Alba donated a parcel of land to Central University on condition that
the latter must establish a medical college on the land to be named after him. In
the year 2000, the heirs of Dr. Alba filed an action to annul the donation and for
the reconveyance of the property donated to them for the failure, after 50 years, of
the University to establish on the property a medical school named after their
father. The University opposed the action on the ground of prescription and also
because it had not used the property for some purpose other than that stated in the
donation. Should the opposition of the University to the action of Dr. Alba’s heirs
be sustained? Explain.

Answer:

No, the opposition of the University to the action of the donor’s heirs should not
be sustained. It was clearly stated that donation of the property with the condition
that a medical college shall be established on the land to be named after the donor
was an onerous donation. In the case of CPU vs. CA et.al, an onerous donation is
one executed for a valuable consideration which is considered the equivalent of
the donation itself, e.g., when a donation imposes a burden equivalent to the value
of the donation. A gift of land to the City of Manila requiring the latter to erect
schools, construct a children's playground and open streets on the land was
considered an onerous donation. Therefore, it is only just and equitable that the
subject property be re-conveyed to the heirs of the donor since the donees had
obviously failed to comply with their obligation for so many years.

6. In year 2010, Mr. S donated a parcel of land to Mr. P. who personally handed to
him the deed of donation in a document duly acknowledged before the notary
public. Mr. P. received it. A few days after, Mr. S. rode a plane on his way to
Hongkong. Unfortunately, the plane crashed and Mr. S. died. Upon learning of
Mr. S’s death, Mr. P. executed a deed acknowledging before the notary public that
Mula, Iane Gem M. Property
1JDCV211 Atty. Maria Lourdes P. Garcia

he accepts the donation to him by Mr. S. Has the donation become operative?
Explain your answer.

Answer:

No, the donation was invalid. According to Art. 746 of the Civil Code,
Acceptance must be made during the lifetime of the donor and of the donee.
Moreover, Art. 749 of the Civil Code specifically provides that: In order that the
donation of an immovable may be valid, it must be made in a public document,
specifying therein the property donated and the value of the charges which the
donee must satisfy. The acceptance may be made in the same deed of donation or
in a separate public document, but it shall not take effect unless it is done during
the lifetime of the donor… Therefore, since the donor died before the donee’s
acceptance, the deed acknowledging the latter’s acceptance did not validate the
donation.

7. The Deed of Donation executed by Andy in favor of his son, Bert reads as
follows:
“ For and in consideration of my love to you, I hereby freely and
voluntarily and irrevocably donate to you, my son, my condominium unit
located at Unit 507 Mezza Residences Aurora Bldvd., Quezon City and
covered by Condominium Certificate of Title No. 12345. This donation
shall take effect upon my death. In the meantime, the unit shall remain in
my possession during my lifetime and that you, my son, cannot alienate,
encumber, sell or dispose of the unit while I am still alive”. The deed also
contains Bert’s acceptance and his agreement on the prohibition of sale
while his father is still alive. Is the Donation inter-vivos or mortis cause?
Discuss in not more than 5 sentences.

Answer:

The donation is inter vivos. It was expressly provided that such donation was
irrevocable although there are provisions in the deed which state that the same
will only take effect upon the death of the donor and that there is prohibition to
alienate, encumber, dispose, or sell the same. In the case of Bonsato v. Court of
Appeals, the Court said that the express irrevocability of the donation is a quality
absolutely incompatible with the idea of conveyances mortis causa where
revocability is of the essence of the act.
Mula, Iane Gem M. Property
1JDCV211 Atty. Maria Lourdes P. Garcia

8. The Deed of Donation of a rice land was executed by Xander in favor of Yassi
who signed his acceptance in the same deed in the presence of each other.
However, before the deed can be notarized, the donor died. Is the donation valid
or void? Why?

Answer:

The donation is void because it did not comply with the formalities of donation as
regards immovable properties. Although the Deed of Donation already contained
both their donation and acceptance, the deed, being unnotarized is not a public
document, but merely a private document. Art. 749 of the Civil Code specifically
provides that: In order that the donation of an immovable may be valid, it must be
made in a public document, specifying therein the property donated and the value
of the charges which the donee must satisfy…

9. Arnold gave Maria a brand new car when they were still sweethearts. The deed of
donation was specified in the Deed of Purchase on installment for 2 years clearly
specifying that Arnold purchased the car as a gift for his undying love for Maria.
The only evidence of the donation was the short note tied to a red ribbon when the
car was delivered to Maria. Maria then took possession of the car. Unfortunately,
after two years and the car was fully paid, they separated and he married Angel.
In the meantime Maria continued to use the car for 2 more years when
coincidentally Arnold died. At this time Angel discovered the existence of the car.
Angel then went to Maria demanding the return of the car because according to
her there was not valid deed of donation. Maria declined. What arguments, if
any, can you advise Maria so that she may no longer be compelled to return the
car?

Answer:

I will advise Maria that since it was a donation of a movable, she is no longer
compelled to return the car subject to the provisions of Art. 748 of the Civil Code.
It specifically provides that: The donation of a movable may be made orally or in
writing.
An oral donation requires the simultaneous delivery of the thing or of the
document representing the right donated. If the value of the personal property
donated exceeds Five thousand pesos, the donation and the acceptance shall be
made in writing. Otherwise, the donation shall be void.
Even if the note was only written to a ribbon, it still conformed with the
requirement of the law which was still made in “writing”.

10. Upon learning that best friend was finally pregnant after many years of trying,
Agnes donated to Sally’s unborn child the amount of 1million pesos. The
Mula, Iane Gem M. Property
1JDCV211 Atty. Maria Lourdes P. Garcia

donation was accepted by Sally. Unfortunately the baby died after a few hours
from birth as the baby was infected by Zika virus. After a few months, Sally
demanded from Agnes the 1 million pesos, she being an heir to her baby. Agnes
refused to give Sally the P1 million. Assume you are the lawyer of Agnes, what
or how will you advise your client?

Answer:

I will advise my client that Sally’s claim as heir to her baby is tenable if the
donation and the acceptance were made in writing, given the fact that the amount
exceeded P5,000.00, otherwise, it is void. Art. 742 of the Civil Code expressly
provides that: The donation of a movable may be made orally or in writing.
An oral donation requires the simultaneous delivery of the thing or of the
document representing the right donated. If the value of the personal property
donated exceeds Five thousand pesos, the donation and the acceptance shall be
made in writing. Otherwise, the donation shall be void.