
REYES V. MOSQUEDA- Donation Inter Vivos
Category: Property, Ownership and Its Modifications
REYES V. MOSQUEDA- Donation Inter Vivos
The nature of the disposition made is the determinative factor which makes the donation ― inter vivos or ― mortis causa and not the title given to a deed of donation.
FACTS:
Dr. Emilio Pascual died intestate and was survived by his sister Ursula Pascual and the children of his late sisters, herein petitioners Ruperto Reyes et. al. The heirs of Dr. Pascual filed Special Proceedings No. 73-30-M in the CFI for the administration of Pascual’s estate. Ursula then filed a motion to exclude some properties included alleging that these were donated to her in a donation mortis causa in 1966. This was granted by the CFI without prejudice to its final determination in a separate action. An appeal was made to the SC. The SC then issued a TRO enjoining the CFI from enforcing the order.
Among the properties donated to Ursula is lot 24 which was also donated in 1969 in a deed of donation inter vivos in favor of Ofelia Parungao who was then a minor at the time of the donation. When she reached the age of majority, she had the donation registered but found out that the certificate of title was missing so she filed a petition for reconstitution of title which was granted and she registered the donation and was issued a new TCT in her name.
Ursula then sold the lot in favor of the Reyes. Benjamin Reyes filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of Ofelia’s TCT which prompted Ofelia to file a petition for recovery of possession against Benjamin Reyes. The CFI issued a joint decision for the 2 cases ruling that Ofelia’s TCT was null and void. The IAC affirmed thus an appeal to the SC.
ISSUES:
(1) Whether or not the probate has jurisdiction to exclude properties donated to Ursula
(2) Whether or not the donation executed in favor of Ursula was a donation inter vivos
RULING:
(1) YES
It was stressed in the order of the probate court that it was without prejudice to the final determination in a separate action. It is well-settled that although a probate court cannot adjudicate or determine title to properties, it can determine whether or not the properties should be included in the inventory to be administered. Such determination is not conclusive and is subject to the final decision in a separate action.
(2) YES
Although the donation was entitled ―donations mortis causa it has been held that dispositions in a deed of donation do not depend on the title or term used in the deed of donation. It is the body of the document which should be considered in ascertaining the intention of the donor.
For a donation to be a donation mortis causa, the following characteristics should be present:
1. It conveys no title before the death of the transferor or the transferor retains ownership over the property
2. Before his death, the transfer should be revocable by the transferor at will
3. The transfer is void should the transferor survive the transferee
The following are not present in the case. The transfer of ownership was immediate and independent of the death of the donor. The provision stating that the donor has reserved sufficient properties for himself to maintain him for life confirms the intention of the donor to give naked ownership immediately after execution of the deed of donation.
Related Philippine Law Resources:
Newer Philippine Law Resources:
Additional Law Reading:
REYES V. MOSQUEDA- Donation Inter Vivos
Category: Property, Ownership and Its Modifications
REYES V. MOSQUEDA- Donation Inter Vivos
The nature of the disposition made is the determinative factor which makes the donation ― inter vivos or ― mortis causa and not the title given to a deed of donation.
FACTS:
Dr. Emilio Pascual died intestate and was survived by his sister Ursula Pascual and the children of his late sisters, herein petitioners Ruperto Reyes et. al. The heirs of Dr. Pascual filed Special Proceedings No. 73-30-M in the CFI for the administration of Pascual’s estate. Ursula then filed a motion to exclude some properties included alleging that these were donated to her in a donation mortis causa in 1966. This was granted by the CFI without prejudice to its final determination in a separate action. An appeal was made to the SC. The SC then issued a TRO enjoining the CFI from enforcing the order.
Among the properties donated to Ursula is lot 24 which was also donated in 1969 in a deed of donation inter vivos in favor of Ofelia Parungao who was then a minor at the time of the donation. When she reached the age of majority, she had the donation registered but found out that the certificate of title was missing so she filed a petition for reconstitution of title which was granted and she registered the donation and was issued a new TCT in her name.
Ursula then sold the lot in favor of the Reyes. Benjamin Reyes filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of Ofelia’s TCT which prompted Ofelia to file a petition for recovery of possession against Benjamin Reyes. The CFI issued a joint decision for the 2 cases ruling that Ofelia’s TCT was null and void. The IAC affirmed thus an appeal to the SC.
ISSUES:
(1) Whether or not the probate has jurisdiction to exclude properties donated to Ursula
(2) Whether or not the donation executed in favor of Ursula was a donation inter vivos
RULING:
(1) YES
It was stressed in the order of the probate court that it was without prejudice to the final determination in a separate action. It is well-settled that although a probate court cannot adjudicate or determine title to properties, it can determine whether or not the properties should be included in the inventory to be administered. Such determination is not conclusive and is subject to the final decision in a separate action.
(2) YES
Although the donation was entitled ―donations mortis causa it has been held that dispositions in a deed of donation do not depend on the title or term used in the deed of donation. It is the body of the document which should be considered in ascertaining the intention of the donor.
For a donation to be a donation mortis causa, the following characteristics should be present:
1. It conveys no title before the death of the transferor or the transferor retains ownership over the property
2. Before his death, the transfer should be revocable by the transferor at will
3. The transfer is void should the transferor survive the transferee
The following are not present in the case. The transfer of ownership was immediate and independent of the death of the donor. The provision stating that the donor has reserved sufficient properties for himself to maintain him for life confirms the intention of the donor to give naked ownership immediately after execution of the deed of donation.
Related Philippine Law Resources:
Newer Philippine Law Resources:
Additional Law Reading:
BATASnatin The Firm
Latest @ Forums
-
-
- Shema Corporation legal ba?
- In General Discussion
- 6 days, 5 hours ago
-
-
-
- foreclosed property, i need guides please help me
- In I Need A Lawyer!
- 2 weeks, 3 days ago
-
-
-
- i cant access even the demo
- In Law MCQuizzer
- 2 weeks, 3 days ago
-
Popular
- 1
- 2
- 3
SUGGESTED ANSWERS …
ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW ARRANGED BY TOPIC (1990 – 2006) Edited and Arranged by:Silliman University College of Law Batch 2005Updated by:DondeeD’ BAR-Retake 2007 From the ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS by the UP LAW COMPLEX & PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF LAW SCHO...
Read moreOral Defamation l S…
Kinds and Definition of Slander or Oral Defamation Definition: Speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to prejudice another in his reputation, office, trade, business or means of livelihood Two kinds of oral or verbal defamation: (1) Grave Slander (2) Simple Slander A. Factor...
Read moreArticle I – THE NAT…
Article I – THE NATIONAL TERRITORYThe national territory of the Philippines comprises:1) the Philippine archipelago;2) all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdictionPHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO – that body of water studded with islands which is delineated in the Treaty of...
Read moreRandom
- 1
- 2
- 3
CHATTEL MORTGAGE
CHATTEL MORTGAGE(ARTICLES 2140-2141, CHATTEL MORTGAGE LAW)Art. 2140. By a chattel mortgage, personal property is recorded in the Chattel Mortgage Register as a security for the performance of an obligation. If the movable, instead of being r...
Read moreThe Powers of the O…
The Powers of the OmbudsmanThe Office of the Ombudsman is endowed with a wide latitude of investigating power, virtually free from legislative, executive and judicial intrusion. (Perez v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 141445, May 27, 2004, 426 SC...
Read moreA Guaranty May Be C…
Conventional Guaranty, Legal Guaranty or Judicial Guaranty, Gratuitous Guaranty, or Guaranty by Onerous TitleArt. 2051. A guaranty may be conventional, legal or judicial, gratuitous, or by onerous title. It may also be constituted, not only in favo...
Read moreFeatured
- 1
- 2
- 3
Right to Strike
SSSEA v. CA – right to strike – At present, in the absence of any legislation in government employees the right to strike, recognizing their right to do so, or regulating the exercise of such right, they are prohibited form striking by express prohi...
Read morePeople vs. Tolentin…
G.R. No. 176385, February 26, 2008 FACTS: On 13 February 1998, three separate informations of Murder and two counts of Frustrated Murder were filed before the RTC against appellants, together with accused Jimmy Trinidad and Arnel Trinidad. The murd...
Read morePerfection Of A Con…
In Oesmer, Jr., et al. v. Paraiso Dev. Corp., G.R. No. 157493, February 5, 2007, a contract to sell was entered into by the owners of a real property. They affixed their signatures but contested its validity later contending that their co-owner had n...
Read more

