DONATION

Article 728, 729, 748 and 749

Elvira Arangote vs. Spouses Martin and Lourdes Maglunob and Romeo Salido;

FACTS:

Elvira Arangote acquired the subject parcel of land from Esperanza Maglunob, who is
grand aunt of respondents Martin Maglunob and Romeo Salido. In June 1986, Esperenza executed
an affidavit in which she renounced her rights, share and participation in the land in favor of Elvira
and her husband. It appears that the lot was not exclusive property of Esperanza but also of the
other heirs of Martin I whom she r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e p a r t i t i o n a g r e e m e n t . E l v i r a
a n d h e r husband, Ray constructed a house on the land in 1989 and in 1993, OCT was issued
in her name by the DAR. However, respondents with the help of hired persons entered the
property and built a wall behind and in front of Elviras house. Elvira and Ray sued
respondents for quieting of title and declaration of ownership. Respondents averred
that they were co-owners of the land with Esperanza who allegedly inherited the land
from Martin 1 together with Tomas and Inocencia (Martin 2s and Romeos predecessor in
interest). They argued that Esperanza could not have validly waived her rights in favor of Elvira
and Ray. M C T C r u l e d f o r E l v i r a . R T C r e v e r s e d M C T C a n d d e c l a r e d respondents
lawful owners of the land together with the other heirs of Martin I. Elvira went to the CA but the
CA affirmed the RTC decision. Before SC, Elvira argued that both RTC and CA erred in declaring
the affidavit of Esperanza void because it is a valid and bindi ng proof of transfer of
ownership of the subject property as it was coupled with actual delivery.

ISSUE: Whether or not the donation to Elvira and her husband is valid.

HELD: Supreme Court affirmed the decision of CA. SC ruled that the affidavit
executed by Esperanza wherein she r e n o u n c e d , r e l i n q u i s h e d a n d w a i v e d a l l h e r
r i g h t s , s h a r e , i n t e r e s t a n d participation in the subject property in favor of Elvira
and Ray is in fact a donation. Thus, it should have complied with the requirements of Article
749 of the Civil Code.

A simple donation of real property to be valid:

1) Must be made in a public instrument;
2) It must be accepted, which must be in the same deed of donation or in a separate public
instrument;
3) If the acceptance is made in a separate instrument, the donor must be notified in authentic form
and the same must be noted in both instruments.

The affidavit executed by Esperanza relinquishing her rights, share and participation over the
property in favor of Elvira suffered from legal infirmities. In Sumipat vs. Banga, the
Court ruled that title to immovable does not pass from the donor to the done by virtue of a Deed
of Donation until and unless it has been accepted in a public instrument and the donor duly
notified thereof. In this case, the acceptance of the donation was not made by Elvira
either in the same affidavit or in a separate public instrument. Neither was there notice of
acceptance given to the donor, therefore the donation is void