Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2


PROVINCE OF TARLAC- Donation with a Condition

A condition which cannot be complied with except after giving effect to the donation is
not a condition precedent.

In 1910, Concepcion Cirer and James Hill donated parcels of land to the municipality of
Tarlac on the condition that it be used absolutely and exclusively for the erection of a
central school and public parks, the work to commence within six months. The president
of the municipality of Tarlac accepted and registered the donation.

In 1921, Cirer and Hill sold the same property to George L. Parks.

Later on the, the municipality of Tarlac transferred their rights in the property to the
Province of Tarlac.
Parks filed a complaint seeking the annulment of the donation and asking that he be
declared the absolute owner of the property. Parks allege that the conditions of the
donation were not complied with.

Whether or not the donation was coupled with a condition precedent? W/N the action to
revoke has prescribed?

No. The condition to erect a school within six months is not a condition precedent. The
characteristic of a condition precedent is that the acquisiito of the right is not effected
while said condition is mot complied with or is not deemed complied with. Meanwhile
nothing is acquired and there is only an expectancy of a right. Consequently, when a
condition is imposed, the compliance of which cannot be effected except when the right
is deemed acquired, such condition cannot be a condition precedent. In the present
case the condition that a public school be erected and a public park be made of the
donated land could not be complied with except after giving effect to the donation.

The action to revoke the donation has prescribed. The prescriptive periods are: 5 years
for the revocation by the subsequent birth of children, 1 year if by reason of ingratitude.
If no special period is prescribed, 10 years, for an onerous donation following the law of
contracts and general rules on prescriptions. The donation was made in 1910, the
cause of action accrued in 1911, while the action to revoke was filed 1924, twenty three
years later.