FORTUNATA SOLIS VS.

MAXIMA BARROSO, ET AL
NATURE: Appeal on the Judgement
FACTS: 1. Juan Lambino & Maria Barroso had 3 children- Alejo, Eugenia and
Marciana Lambino.
2. On June 2, 1919, spouses made a donation propter nuptias to Alejo &
Fortunata Solis of land with the condition that in case one dies, of the land will be
reverted to the donors, and will be retained by the surviving spouse.
3. On June 8, 1919, Alejo and Fortunata got married and immediately got the land
donated to them.
4. On August 3, 1919- Alejo died. His father, Juan also died in the same year. Then,
Maxima recovered the donated land.
5. Fortunata filed an action demanding execution of proper deed transferring ,
proceed with partition of donated property and fruits.
6. RTC- granted Fortunata based on Art 1279 of the Civil Code (Art 1279 provides
that should law require execution to make obligation of a contract effective, parties
may compel each other to comply from the moment consent has been given)
ISSUE: WON donation propter nuptias is valid
HELD: NO. Judgement reversed. Defendants absolved from complaint.
RATIO: Donation propter nuptias according to Article 1328 of the Civil Code is to
be governed by Art 618-656 of the same code. Art 633 suggests that to make valid
a donation of real property, it must be made in a public instrument. Except for
onerous/ remunatory donations, as long as they dont exceed the value of charged
imposed (Art 622) and those which take effect upon donors death (Art 620).
Donation propter nuptias made by the spouses is NOT valid because it was NOT
made in a public instrument. Therefore, it did not create rights.
Art1 1279 cannot be be used because such refers to contracts, those for donation
is governed by Art 618-656. Moreover, such presupposes the existence of a valid
contract, when in fact, a contract of donation propter nuptiasmay only be valid in
form when it is notarized.