acap v ca 251 scra 30

waiver and quitclaim of hereditary rights. not sale, donation, or any other contract.

de luna v abrigo 181 scra 150 balikan mo to sa rabuya

4 kinds of donation. select which rules.

simple - no strings attached; donations

remunatory first kind - reward past services, services were non-demandable debts; donations

effects: formalities under donation have to be observed. Impossible/illegal conditions deemed not
imposed (stipulation not to sell forever not deemed imposed, will NOT be modified to read as only for 20
years)

remunatory second kind (conditional/modal) - for future services, conditions, less than value of donation;
contracts as to onerous part, donations as to rest (try to conform to donations, else majority will be void)

onerous - for future services, conditions, equal or more than value of donation; contracts

effects: formalities under donation need not be observed. Impossible/illegal conditions are void, but since
intent is followed, may allow modification to save from being completely void (like stipulation not to sell
forever, will be valid only for 20 years)

if effective during lifetime of donor, it is inter vivos.

When did ownership/title pass? During lifetime means inter vivos. Even if conditions should happen upon
or after donor’s death.

Delivery (unless personal property) is not essential to transfer ownership/title UNLIKE IN SALES.

Acceptance known to donor is what perfects and transfers ownership in donation. Must be done within
lifetime of both.

Donation may be valid and inter vivos even if delivery is to take place upon or after death.

Conversely, delivery ahead of passing ownership (which would be upon death) is still mortis causa

Marks of donation mortis causa:

 1. NAKED OWNERSHIP remains in donor
2. Donation may be revoked, potestative upon donor (ad mutuum)
a. If donee may sell for WHATEVER reason, mortis causa (basically means revocable ad
mutuum)
b. If donee may sell/mortgage IF she needs to, inter vivos (no longer completely potestative,
donor imposed restrictions upon himself)
3. Donation void if donee dies ahead
4. Ownership/title shall pass upon or after death—unless
a. donor warranted; warranting donee’s ownership is recognition that ownership actually
passed
b. donor said it was irrevocable
c. donor reserved usufruct rights; jus possessiones, jus fruendi, or both (why reserve
usufruct if you aren’t passing naked ownership yet?)
5. Can’t sell property until donor dies—unless
a. This was the only restriction, and the donation is otherwise inter vivos in character
(partakes of an impossible/illegal condition and deemed not imposed)
b. the condition is really only the donor’s consent be obtained
c. donor said it was irrevocable
d. donor reserved usufruct rights
6. Transfers only administration

In case of doubt, inter vivos to avoid uncertainty of ownership. However, still consider totality of
circumstances:

In David v Sison and Gestopa v CA, both donations contained stipulations that: a) donor reserves jus
fruendi until death; b) can’t sell property without consent until death. David was mortis cause, Gestopa
was inter vivos. Differences in Gestopa:

1. Granting clause (out of love and effection)

2. Acceptance clause (not required for mortis causa)
3. Executed 3 mortis causa donations before present (meaning they knew difference)
4. Stated that they reserved properties so donation won’t be inofficious
Liguez v CA GR L-11240

illegal motive may form part of cause

739 - do you have to be in pari delicto so aggrieved party may recover donation?

pershing tan queto v ca 148 scra 54

rules on donation re married couples

pajarillo v iac 176 scra 340

acceptance for donated real property may be made on another instrument. must be notarized, given a copy
to donor, and noted on both instruments. notation requisite is only to apprise parties, not a strict
requirement.

cruz v ca 140 scra 245 L-58671

760 rules: a) may revoke only insofar as legitime will be impaired; b) no impairment = no revocation; c)
donor has burden of proof

roman catholic archibishop of manila v ca 198 scra 300

prescription periods of revocation under donation does not apply when there is automatic rescission
clause.

cannot stipulate that donee cannot sell for 100 years. undue restriction on ownership rights, contrary to
public policy. applied 494 and 870 by analogy. cannot restrict partition/alienation beyond 20 years.

illegal/impossible conditions deemed not imposed. sabi ng court the whole provision is void pero tingin
ko dapat void lang as to excess. parties intended a restriction after all.

727 applies even in case of 494.

eduarte v ca 253 scra 391

765 not to be strictly interpreted. anything offensive to donor.

void donation may also be root of valid title. IPFV rules apply.

quilala v alcantara 371 scra 311

may separate page of acknowledgment. immaterial. page 1 contains both grant and acceptance in public
document form.

hemedes v ca 316 scra 347

1544 applies even in donations. first to register = better right

siguan v lim 318 scra 725

donations are rescissible. just comply with the requisites of accion pauliana

noceda v ca 313 scra 504

partition, donation, then repartition. donation subsisted. revocation due to ingratitude prescription runs
from time act was known and action was possible to institute

heirs of cesario velasquez v ca 325 scra 552

gonzales vca 358 scra 598

donation of real property must be registered to bind 3rd persons. di na register, so nasakop ng agrarian
reform.

imperial v ca 316 scra 393

pag di minor yung adopted, di yung 4 years mag apply.

What, then, is the prescriptive period for an action for reduction of an inofficious donation? The Civil
Code specifies the following instances of reduction or revocation of donations: (1) four years, in cases of
subsequent birth, appearance, recognition or adoption of a child; 16 (2) four years, for non-compliance
with conditions of the donation; 17 and (3) at any time during the lifetime of the donor and his relatives
entitled to support, for failure of the donor to reserve property for his or their support. 18 Interestingly,
donations as in the instant case, 19 the reduction of which hinges upon the allegation of impairment of
legitime, are not controlled by a particular prescriptive period, for which reason we must resort to the
ordinary rules of prescription.

Under Article 1144 of the Civil Code, actions upon an obligation created by law must be brought within
ten years from the time the right of action accrues. Thus, the ten-year prescriptive period applies to the
obligation to reduce inofficious donations, required under Article 771 of the Civil Code, to the extent that
they impair the legitime of compulsory heirs.

From when shall the ten-year period be reckoned? The case of Mateo vs. Lagua, 29 SCRA 864, which
involved the reduction for inofficiousness of a donation propter nuptias, recognized that the cause of
action to enforce a legitime accrues upon the death of the donor-decedent. Clearly so, since it is only then
that the net estate may be ascertained and on which basis, the legitimes may be determined.

republic v silim? 356 scra 1 !!!!!!!

compare below to paras.

A pure or simple donation is one where the underlying cause is plain gratuity. 8 This is donation in its
truest form. On the other hand, a remuneratory or compensatory donation is one made for the purpose of
rewarding the donee for past services, which services do not amount to a demandable debt. 9 A
conditional or modal donation is one where the donation is made in consideration of future services or
where the donor imposes certain conditions, limitations or charges upon the donee, the value of which is
inferior than that of the donation given. 10 Finally, an onerous donation is that which imposes upon the
donee a reciprocal obligation or, to be more precise, this is the kind of donation made for a valuable
consideration, the cost of which is equal to or more than the thing donated.
separate acceptance not noted on deed of donation. ok nga lang daw per earlier case.

pinaraanan yung "exclusively" for school purposes.

gestopa v ca 342 scra 105

donation with conditions of: a) donor usufruct; b) cannot sell during lifetime of donor without consent

granting clause of "love and affection for donee" is mark of donation intervivos.

acceptance clause is mark of intervivos.

consent was necessary only to protect usufructuary rights

this would have been different if hindi lang consent yung required. mortis causa yun kunsakali.

Sumigsat v banga 155810 aug 13 2004

no acceptance = void donation. this will not prescribe.