Property 2016-2017 | Atty.

Gravador
PROPERTY FINALS TRANSCRIPT In Costabella Corporation case, the SC said that just a mere allegation in the complaint that you are
WILLING, ABLE, and READY TO PAY is already compliance with this requisite.
September 13, 2016 (FIRST HOUR)
3. Isolation was not due to acts of the proprietor of the dominant estate;
Specific Types of Easement
Dili nimo sala nga wa kay agianan. If naa unta kay agianan but imo gi fence kay landscape, imong sala.
I. Legal Easement/Compulsory Easement - regardless of whether the adjacent owners can agree You cannot claim a right of way.
or not, there is still an easement (pinugsanay, wa kay mahimo), i.e. right of way, aqueduct.
4. Right of way claimed is at the point least prejudicial to the servient estate; and insofar as
Types: consistent with this rule, where the distance from the dominant estate to a public highway
may be the shortest.
1. Easement relating to waters i.e, natural drainage, drainage of buildings
If mag agi2 ka sa imong FJ cruiser diha nya imong silingan tawon tagaan ka og increase sa imong right
i. Natural Drainage of way, mag tindog nalang matulog kay perteng gamaya sa iyang lote, thats already a violation of this
criterion.
Article 637. Lower estates are obliged to receive waters, which naturally and without the
intervention of man descend from the higher estates (wala kayo niya gi expound) Ideally, it should be the shortest distance because the assumption is that it is least prejudicial.
However, it doesnt follow in all cases. If the shortest distance would require the destruction of the
ii. Drainage of buildings (owner of buildings obliged to construct roof so that rain water shall house, compared to the long distance nga saging ray putlon, katong long distance ang pilion kay
fall on his own land) LEAST PREJUDICE CRITERION man mu prevail over SHORT DISTANCE.
iii. Easement on riparian banks for navigation, floatage, etc.
iv. Easement of a dam Quimen vs CA: When the two circumstances (meaning, the shortest and least prejudicial) do not
v. Esement for drawing water or for watering animals concur, the way where damage will be least shall be used even if not the shortest way.
vi. Easement of aqueduct (a person who may use water upon his estate shall have right to
make it flow through intervening estates) As much as possible, walay gub.on nga kahoy, walay gub.on nga structure. Bahala nag magliko2, basta
walay gub.on.
Easement of aqueduct the right to make water flow through or under intervening or lower
estates. Mintanilla vs Abangan (??): If in the establishment of the right of way, the house will be destroyed, the
least prejudice criterion will be applied.
vii. Easement for construction of stop lock or sluice gate
Note: If any of the requisites is not present, then YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO AN EASEMENT OF
2. Easement of right of way RIGHT OF WAY. In other words, if the case you are handling is compulsory easement of right of way,
the allegations in your complaint should jive with the requisites.
If your right of way arises from an agreement, nya kada agi pabayron ka, that is VOLUNTARY
EASEMENT. Here, pinugsanay ni type of easement (COMPULSORY EASEMENT) Article 651. The width of the easement of right of way shall be that which is sufficient for the needs of
the dominant estate, and may accordingly be changed from time to time.
Requisites (memorize):
Except for animal path and animal trail, which shall not exceed 75 meters and 37.5 meters,
1. Dominant estate is surrounded by other immovables and has no adequate outlet to a public respectively, (as provided under Article 657), the normal right of way would be dependent on the
highway; needs of the dominant estate.

If you are not surrounded by other immovables or naa kay lain kaagian, no right of way. In Encarnacion case, the petitioner was into plant nursery business. Initially, pushcart ra ila gamit to
tow the plants to the national highway. But the business grew and so kailangan na siyag jeepney. So,
2. After payment of the proper indemnity; niingon cya sa iyang silingan mangayo siyag increase sa right of way but di man muhatag ang silingan.
Nag kasohay sila. SC allowed the increase because of Art. 651, that the width of the right of way shall
How do you comply with this na wa paman ka kahibalo pila ibayad? depend on the needs of the dominant estate, and may be adjusted from time to time. Here, walay
prejudice kay the owner of the dominant estate expressed nga iyang i.exchange iyang lot. SC described

1

the act of the owner of the servient estate in refusing to accede to the increase as sheer
pigheadedness.
Article 652. Whenever a piece of land acquired by sale, exchange or partition, is surrounded by other
estates of the vendor, exchange, or co-owner, he shall be oblighed to grant a right of way without
indemnity.
For example, palit ka og yuta nga barato but ang seller is the owner of the surrounding lots. He is
obliged to give you a right of way, FREE OF CHARGE. Di cya kaingon nga tagaan kag right of way basta
i.adjust ang price. No. He is bound by law.
Note: Mere convenience to the dominant estate is not determinative for the grant of the compulsory
easement of right of way.
Ramos vs Gatchalian Realty, Inc: A subdivision resident wanted to agi sa road provided by the
neighboring subdivision kay paved man. Ang yuta sa iyang subdivision di man paved, bumpy man. SC
said this cannot be a case for compulsory easement kay dili man ang inconvenience nimo ang criterion
diri. For as long as maagian bahala inconvenient para nimo, that is still and adequate outlet. The fact
that the said lot is still undeveloped and causes inconvenience to the petitioner when he uses it to
reach the public highway does not bring him within the ambit of the legal requisite.
Costabella Corporation case: It was established during the trial that there was another outlet, although
inconvenient.
When we decide what is an adequate outlet, it must be something that is passable. In Costabella case,
SC lifted the observation by Manresa. An estate bordering a public road through an inaccessible slope
of precipice is isolated. For example, ikaw tag.iya kag balay, diha sa ilawm imong balay dapit sa
highway. Nya imong silingan nay agianan ana nga paved. Gusto ka muagi didto kay imong agianan
sloped man. Nya ingnon ka sa imong silingan ngano diri man jud ka muagi nga naa man kay agianan?
Nya unsaon mana nimo pag agi, mag kamang ka padung sa highway? DILI NA PWEDE. Thats still an
inadequate outlet.
Compensation requirement in compulsory easement of right of way dominant owner ka but it
doesnt mean that you will be using a part of the servient estate for free.
Article 649. xxx the indemnity shall consist of the value of the land occupied and the amount of the
damage caused to the servient estate
So mura rani siyay imong gipalit. So, would this not somehow go against the principle that in easement
there is no transfer of ownership? No. Because if di na necessary ang easement, the servient owner is
bound to return the money. Mura kag ning bond while the easement continues to exist. Nya kung di na
kailangan ang easement, iuli pud to niya imong gibayad.
Unsa may compensation while you were using it? Interest. So ang iuli ra kay minus the legal interest
(6%).
Aerial right of way when your land is traversed by transmission lines.
Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
SEPTEMBER 13 (SECOND HOUR)
Please refer to the Power Point slides of Atty. Gravador for the illustrations/examples
EASEMENT OF PARTY WALL
Another type of easement is what is known as easement of party wall. What is a party wall? Its just a
wall. The wall serves as the dividing line between two estates. Not all walls in the dividing line is a
party wall, especially a firewall just because it is in the middle of your estate and anothers estate. It is
not necessarily a party wall, especially when the same is located entirely on your property (In this
case it is just your wall because a party wall presupposes that there are two owners). Why is this an
easement? Is there an encumbrance here? There is an encumbrance because when one of the owners
will use it as a support for a beam in his house or when one of the owners will make an opening
(window) in that party wall.
The law provides for certain presumptions in the existence of a party wall. Every co-owner of a party
wall may use it in proportion to the right that he may have in the co-ownership (1/2). No co-owner
may, without the consent of the others, open to the party wall any window. However, if your co-
adjacent owner makes an opening on a party wall, the prescriptive period will immediately run right
at the time of the opening. So, if you are the affected party, dapat muobject ka by filing the case to
compel the closure of the party wall, otherwise (after 10 years) it may be said that the other owner
already acquired easement of light and view.
EASEMENT OF LIGHT AND VIEW
What is the essence of easement of light and view? It is the right to make an opening (The adjacent
owner cannot build structures that may block your light and view). The adjacent owner may still
construct pero dapat muset back sya. However, if you already have easement of light, it doesnt follow
that you already have easement of view. If you are the property owner, you can actually use your
property up to the boundary line, provided that you do not construct a window, terrace, and the like. If
you want a terrace, muatras kag 2 meters. But what if wa ka niatras? Di nlang gud ka paopenon bsag
gamay ra nga opening? There is a law that if the distances are not observed (if gigamit nimo imo
property up to the boundary), you are given the right to make an opening with a size of 30 square
centimeters .The only purpose for this rule is to admit light and only applicable if di ka mucomply sa 2
meters nga atras (Effect of non-observance: does not give rise to prescription). Thus, kung mucomply
ka to atras for 2 meters, you can build a full window, otherwise (if d ka mucomply) your adjacent
owner may compel you to close (by filing a mandatory injunction within the 10-year period) the
opening which is more than 30 square meters. This is a continuous and apparent easement.
IMPORTANT POINT (OPINION OF PARAS):
We have been talking about certain types of easement which may be acquired by prescription and I
said that only those that are continuous and apparent. But at the same time, we mentioned about
negative easement ad we even said that the reckoning point in computing the period of prescription is
from the time that the notarial prohibition has been served. Take note that kaning prohibition, this is
something nga which is not apparent. When you prohibit somebody that is not apparent dba? But why
is it nga pwde man ka makaacquire by prescription? According to Paras, a notarial prohibition makes
apparent what is really non-apparent.
NOTARIAL PROHIBITION
2

What is meant by notarial prohibition? Its not just a simple letter. It must be duly notarized (Dpat
naay intervention of the notary public). Otherwise, if it is not notarized, the 10-year prescriptive
period will not start to run. What should be the essence or the content of the notarial prohibition?
Even a one paragraph statement stating that You are prohibited from constructing a building this size
bla bla bla will do.
September 19, 2016
1. Easement of View
As a property owner you can build up to the boundary line but if you choose to build up to
the boundary line you must not make any opening. That is a restriction on your right of ownership.
The law prohibits you from making an opening when you build up to the boundary line. If you want to
make regular windows on your property you must observe the setback rule which is 2 meters from
the boundary line.
The 2-meter requirement for windows also applies to terrace with railings. You must
observe the two meter set back rule. You cannot argue that it is not a window. You dont have to
observe the setback rule if it is a terrace without railing. Why? What is prohibited is the right to
have direct view.
Even if the opening is illegal meaning it did not observe the rule. By the way the remedy is
to file a case of mandatory injunction to close the illegal opening. The law further says that if you for
example that made the opening, even if the opening has been there for several years you cannot claim
prescription because of non-observance of setback rule.
From the perspective of the adjacent owner, the right to demand to close the opening will
prescribe. That is an obligation imposed by law. If you are the one asking for it to be enforced, you
must enforce within 10 years. However, it doesnt mean that the one who made that illegal opening
has acquired easement. You still have remedy but it is not to demand closure but it is to build a higher
structure to block the opening. (Atty. Showed several pictures of violation of the 2-meter setback
rule.)
TAKE NOTE: The right to demand closure may prescribe but it does not mean the violator has
acquired easement of view.
Exception: Limited opening may be made but the purpose is to admit light not viewing.
2. Easement of Drainage
a. When you construct a roof make sure the rainwater falls in your land;
b. The water collected will not cause damage to adjacent land; and
c. Surrounded by other houses and no possibility of outlet, establishment of
drainage may be demanded.
3. Easement of intermediate distances
Distances observed, if you plant big trees for example you need to observe proper distance;
If you have a mangrove plantation for example, it would serve you well if you check with your
municipality if you have an ordinance since they might order to cut down the mangroves if you do not
observe the ordinance.
Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
Branches extending over your property demand first before cutting. There is a possibility of
theft or malicious mischief.
In my case I saw the cut branches were gathered in his land so I photographed it and I formulated
theory that he was guilty of theft and he was convicted he was guilty of 5,000. We had a hearing in
Catmon.
TAKE NOTE: Do not cut without demand but if roots protrude in your property then you may
cut if off
4. Easement against Nuisance (to be discussed later)
There are some civil law commentators who do not agree that this shall be included under
easement
This is negative easement. It could not be said that you are doing something that can be lawfully
done. I remember when I was still a law student I passed by a dried pineapple factory. Every 9pm
they discharge their waste. Perting bahoa. Pero ang finished product perting lamia pud. Murag piggery
ba. Suwayi class. Daut jud nang ilung nimu.
5. Easement against Lateral and Adjacent Support
Prohibition on excavation upon a persons land. As to deprive any adjacent land or building of
sufficient lateral or adjacent support. If there is excavation, there is a danger that your property may
cave in so you may ask it to be stopped based on this article of the civil code.
CASE: Margarita Castro vs Monsod
Whether or not this type of easement needs to be annotated in the title.
ISSUE: If it is not annotated in the title, is it not enforceable?
RULING: It is not necessary because this is a right given to the owner and an obligation imposed
upon another owner by law. Hence, this does not have to be annotated to be enforceable.
Take note of this case as well as your land titles on annotation of adverse claim.
6. Voluntary easement
These are easements which arise from contract. When you say voluntary easement as opposed to
legal easement. In voluntary easement there is no need to observe the essential requisites.
For example, Easement of right of way, you will notice in Art. 649, the requisite is very strict. If
you file for compulsory easement, you have to prove all the requisites. In voluntary easement, you will
forget about the requisites in Article 649 because this is a product of agreement or by voluntary act by
servient owner.
CASE: Commercial vs Chung (take note)
Naa namay laing agianan. Niana na ang servient nga extinguish na kay naa nay laing
agianan. That argument will hold true if that is legal easement. If it arose from contract then the mode
to extinguish is any of the modes of extinguishment of contract (i.e payment, merger, recission, etc)
CASE: Nova vs Velasco
An easement which is partly voluntary and partly legal. Initially it was an agreement. When
the agreement expired, it became compulsory since there is no other way into the property.
3

In the case that I handled, disputed pa ang easement. Ako client pataka pag sturya nga naa
daw syay easement. Pataka sturya naa daw 4 kinds of easement daw. Iya d.i pasabot is 4 contracts diay
from which easement arose. In the four documents there was nothing there about right of way
constituted over the lot owned by the defendant so this cannot be voluntary easement. That was the
complaint. It is not voluntary because there is no agreement. The court said there was no clear legal
right because it is not in the document.
7. Easement over Co-owned Property
This is an Act of alteration so all co-owners must consent. It is not necessarily void because while
the consent of the other co-owners are still being secured, it may be suspended. Consent given by one
of the co-owners separately from the other already binds him and his successors.
CASE: Unisource (read full text)
ISSUE: What is the effect if the easement is not registered
RULING: If the easement is not registered on the servient estate there are some decisions to the effect
that if the servient owner will convey it and there is no annotation in his title that it is subject to an
easement then there will be no easement. Take note: this is for registration in the title of the servient
estate.
What about if in the dominant estates it is not annotated? Is the non-registration of the
easement in the title fatal to the cause? SC said that it is non-registration in the servient estate that
matter not in the dominant. Unsa may gamit ana if naas title sa dominant. Adtu nas title sa servient
estate. The purpose is in case there is transfer of ownership in the servient estate, it will bound the
subsequent transferee. Di sya kaingnung wa ko kabaw ana kay annotated man.
Although in some cases it is inconsequential because even if it is not annotated, remember
that it is inseparable to the estate to which it is attached. Furthermore, easement can be acquired not
only via title but also via the existence of apparent sign. (EXAMMABLE)
Nuisance
This is defined as any act or omission, failure to act, establishment, a business, a condition of property
(i.e. tree which is about to fall), or anything else which endangers the health or safety of others.
Ex: Videoke, billiard, maintaining of poultry and piggery, muffler.
Any act which annoys or offends the senses.
Morality hubu hubu. That is why prostitution is an example among the notable example of
nuisance per se. Meaning nuisance everywhere because we do not have any red light district.
SEPT 20 (first part)
NUISANCE
Okay, let us now go on the subject about nuisance. As I have mentioned, nuisance should not be a topic
under easement because this is basically a negative easement if we will insist on considering it as an
easement. But this cannot qualify as an easement because a negative easement has been defined to be
an encumbrance or a limitation imposed upon a property owner not to do things which he could have
lawfully done If not for the easement. If you are a maintainer of a nuisance, it could not be said that
you are doing something lawful. Nuisance, lets separate this subject from the rest.
NUISANCE has been defined as any:
Act,
Omission- failure to act
Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
Establishment- can be a building, a statute, or can even be a condition of a property for example you
have a property where there is stagnant water
or anything else which:
(1) Injures or endangers the health or safety of others;
(2) Annoys or offends the senses; (excluding common sense ha-ha, sir) HAHAHA. Example of sense of
sight kay kanang mga roofing materials gani na glaring kaayo. An example of sense of smell well kung
imo jud basahun ang balaod class kay maski ang kabaho sa kili-kili kay mu qualify as a nuisance kay
anything man na mu annoy sa senses daw. Unsaon man na pag abate? How do you deal with that
without offending the person? Kanang imo ipa feel good ra gani siya pero at the same time you can
achieve your purpose. Hahaha. Sense of hearing- jarring noise for example a chainsaw.
(3) Shocks, defies or disregards decency or morality; (for example- prostitution house, a nuisance per
se. being such, can be abated without a court order kay per se man. The violator cannot argue about
due process, granting that it is really a nuisance per se.
(4) Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any public highway or street (pariha anang nag
baligya ug butong, mga street vendors, or kanang basketball court sa streets. Pero we are a society of
tolerable people. Maynalang na kaysa mag adik-adik diba? Hahaha), or any body of water
(constructions in foreshore lands or along river banks); or
(5) Hinders or impairs the use of property.
Whats the remedy or the relief available if you are complaining this nuisance?
It can either be PREVENTIVE (abatement of a nuisance) or REACTIVE (presupposes that you already
suffered damages as a result of the nuisance)
Nuisance is a tort because legal liability for a nuisance is predicated on an invasion of the plaintiffs
legal rights by an act not warranted by law, or from a neglect of duty imposed by law. But nuisance is
NOT negligence. In other words, you can still be held liable for maintaining a nuisance even if there is
no negligence.
Nuisance can be classified as a PUBLIC NUISANCE or a PRIVATE NUISANCE. If public it affects a
community or a group, in your residence for example there is a big piggery or poultry house that
affects the whole sitio or municipality.
Why do we have to know whether it is private or public? Because depending whether private or
public, the issue of WHO MAY AVAIL OR WHO MAY COMMENCE THE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO
ABATE THE NUISSANCE will be raised. If public- only the mayor (general rule) exception- if the
nuisance is specially injurious to you, you may avail. Kanang mas dako ang epekto nimo- kung ikaw
man tuas duol.
A private nuisance is one that is not included in the foregoing definition. Kanang ikaw rajud intawn.
Nuisance may also be classified as:
NUISANCE PER SE- nuisance at all times- house of prostitution, gambling houses except pagcor. Bisan
pa nay namatyan nya mag tong-its mu, nuisance na! maski mu ingon ka na culture di na excuse!
nuisance gihapun na! pero kani atung palibut class, di ni nato ma solve by applying the law kay kung
istrictuhon ni, ma tukhang ta ani! HAHAHAHAHA
NUISANCE PER ACCIDENS- nuisance only under or because of certain circumstances.
Identifying whether per se or accidens is an issue because we have to determine the necessity of
getting a prior court order first before we abate it. If nuisance per se- NO NEED OF A COURT ORDER.
4

When we sa abate, how do we do it? For example naa nay court order nya writ of execution. Ang
problema ga libog ang sheriff how to abate. Basta abate = stop. It depends unsa i.abate.
Who is liable for nuisance?
Owner, successive owner, or possessor of property who fails or refuses to abate a nuisance
started by a former owner. Aside from abatement as a remedy, he may also be held liable
for damages.
Okay, lets go to remedies.
If its a public nuisance,
1.) even if prosecution under the penal code may be a remedy. The question is, what are the possible
crimes that you can think of which will abate the nuisance? Alarms and scandals, malicious mischief
2.) Civil action- injuction
3.) abatement without judicial proceeding- if nuisance per se
The basis for the exercise of abatement of nuisance is of course, police power, especially if public
nuisance. Police power is inherent power under the constitution with regard to the state. But with
regard to LGUs as represented by the local chief executive, that is not inherent power. There must be a
formal gesture of his right in the form of a provison in the local government code under the general
welfare clause.
If private nuisance,
1.) The civil action should be commenced by the provincial or city mayor but regard to a person, file I
themselves especially if injurious to him
2.) abatement without judicial proceeding- strictly speaking, you yourself may avail it. Pwede ka! But
of course there is a danger if you take the law into your own hands. The rule say that the one who will
actually avail is the district health officer. But of course there are nuisance that has nothing to do with
health issue, so i.interpret pud na in a reasonable manner.
So there is such a thing as ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE, ang possible victim ani kay a child. There are
dangerous instrumentalities or appliances which are likely to attract children at play. Even if
technically the child is a trespasser. Example, ikaw in your property ga butang kag mga swing, seesaw.
Be careful if magbutang ka mga in ana kay if nay bata na ma disgrasya ana you will be held liable for
maintaining an attractive nuisance.
Nuisance
Doctrine of Attractive Nuisance
Hidalgo Enterprise Inc. v. Guillermo Balandan
This is a case where the owner of an establishment had a pool of water inside his premises. So this is
what happened, ni sulod ang bata then ni lumos ang bata. Pagka patay sa bata, gi kiha ang owner for
damages ang owner of the pool of water. Allegedly on the ground that he is a detainer of an attractive
nuisance. Attractive because it attracts children. SC: it is not an attractive nuisance because basta pool
of water lang they are merely a beautification of nature, sama ra na sa dagat. Nga naa siay coherent
risk. So kung ma lumos ka ana, kinsay ma blame ana? Ang parents. Way lain ma blame ana, duplication
Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
of nature ra ana. Pero lahi ang story kung naay water pool. So for it be an attractive nuisance, it has to
have an artificial attraction.
Remedies for Abatement, Abatement without Judicial Proceedings, Remedies against a Private
Nuisance
The principle there is can it be abated without any court order? In solving this issue, you have to
determine first if the nuisance is a nuisance per se or a nuisance per accidens.
Estate of Gregoria Francisco Et. Al. v. CA
This is a structure known as a concept building. So ang mayor iyang gi abate without a court order.
Reklamo ang owner: the mayor committed an illegal act, he abated the nuisance per accidens without
a court order. The SC agreed with the business man that the storage of copra in the building is a
legitimate business. So if its a nuisance per accidens it can be abated but only through securing a court
order first.
Parayno v. Jovellanos
This is a gasoline station which was further closed because allegedly it violates the zoning code of the
municipality. The problem is the order of closure was contained in a mere Sangguniang resolution. SC:
Cannot be. Operating a gasoline station is a legitimate business. The owner must first be given a
chance to dispute the stance of the municipality that it is a nuisance. So with no court order, it is an
illegal abatement.
Lucena Grand Termina Inc. v. Jac Liner
Ordinance prohibiting the bus-jeepney terminal. There is no problem on the ordinance. But if you
abate it on the basis of that ordinance, that is where the problem lies because this business is not a
nuisance per se but a nuisance per accidens.
All the cases involve the principle that if it is a nuisance per accidens, a court order must be first
secured.
Aquino v. Municipality of Malay, Aklan
However, it is a different sort in this case. This is a hotel structure which was built on a no build zone
in Boracay pero gipadayon ug construct without a building permit. Kung walay building permit class,
then that is an illegal construction. Permit first before build. So the mayor ordered the demolition of
the building on the strength of the ordinance declaring that there shall be no construction on the no
build zone. There was an order of demolition with no court order. Nag reklamo ang owner: my
building is not a nuisance per se, this is a nuisance per accidens so, Mr. Mayor, secure first a court
order before you order a demolition. Now on that issue, is the building owner correct? The building
owner is correct. But does it follow that it cannot be ordered demolished without a court order? Diha
na sayop ang owner because wala niya gi resolve in the light of the Civil Code, iyang gi resolve on the
light of the Local Government Code which states under Sec 444 nga ang mayor can demolish an illegal
structure. And when you say illegal structure, those are structures without a building permit.
Registry of Property & Modes of Acquiring Ownership
Art 712 Ownership is acquired by occupation and by intellectual creation.
5

Ownership and other real rights over property are acquired and transmitted by law, by donation, by
testate and intestate succession, and in consequence of certain contracts, by tradition.
They may also be acquired by means of prescription.
When you say modes of acquiring ownership class, this answers the question on how did you become
the owner of a thing or a right. So there are only seven modes of ownership recognized by the Civil
Code These are classified as original modes of acquiring ownership and derivative modes of acquiring
ownership. Original meaning wa kay predecessor ani. Occupation is a mode of acquiring ownership.
But take note, the occupation mentioned in Art 712 is not the occupation as an element of possession.
Ill make that clear when I discuss about possession. The occupation here has a legal meaning, the
occupation here as an element of possession should be taken in its literal sense. Intellectual creation is
also a mode of acquiring ownership. This happens when you are an author of a thing or a composer.
Ownership and other real rights can be acquired or transmitted by law. Then there is donation which I
will discuss further. Then in consequence of a contract, tradition. Then last is prescription.
You will notice here that obtaining a certificate of title is not a mode of acquiring ownership, it merely
confirms ownership. Kung i.question imong ownership sa yuta, honored by a COT in your name, as a
lawyer dili nga diha ra ka kutob. If we talk about a parcel of land, not all modes of acquiring ownership
is the applicable mode. So unsay possible mode ani, donation? Ngnanu tag iya ka ana? It was
donated to me inter vivos or mortis causa. It was inherited by me through a last will and testament
through succession. Or it was sold to me through a Deed of Absolute Sale duly notarized. Remember
class, execution in a public document and ___ thereof is a transfer of ownership. That is why I have my
COT to confirm my ownership acquired through any of the means of acquiring ownership. So these are
the modes ha?
Law can also be a mode of acquiring ownership. When you say that law is a mode of acquiring
ownership, what we basically mean is that there is a provision of law that says that you are the owner
of the thing. Example, fruits naturally falling on your land and coming from a tree that does not belong
to you. The fruits belongs to you. Tagak, adto sa imong yuta, imoha to. Because naay balaod nga
specific man. Changes in the course of river- kinsa man nag ingon nga if your land is traversed by the
new river course, you will own the old river bed? Its the Civil Code. Although this is under accession,
this is an example of a law vesting the right of ownership. So if you say law, its because the provision
of law says so.
Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
One thing here in occupation is that a piece of land cannot be acquired through occupation even when
there is no known private owner. I said no known private owner because if there is no known
private owner, the State is the owner pursuant to the Regalian Doctrine. Well that appears to be
settled. How about when the piece of land has a known owner then the owner died with no heirs. Can
you acquire ownership through occupation? Well I know ang State may institute estate proceedings,
the fact that the State can institute estate proceeding presupposes that the Sate is the automatic owner
so what if wa naka una ang State? Obviously you cannot apply the Regalian Doctrine here because
there is no legal basis that if the land has no original owner then it reverts back to the State. Regalian
Doctrine mu apply only kung walay known owner.
1. DONATION ( TITLE III, BOOK III):
a. Donation is an act of liberality, whereby there is a disposal in a gratuitous
manner of a thing or right in favor of another who must expressly accept it.
i. Liberality is a valid consideration in itself. It does not have to always
have a value.
ii. He must expressly accept it. No donation if the acceptance is not made
known to donor during lifetime or before donor is incapacitated.
Donor must know the acceptance.
1. Remember I discussed a case when we were on the topic of
property in public dominion, that subdivision road lot thats
an open space. It is required by law to be donated to LGU
where it is situated but there must be acceptance by LGU for
it becomes property of public dominion because if no
acceptance yet, it is private property.
b. ONLY GRATUITOUS AND REMUNERATORY DONATIONS ARE GOVERNED BY
THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE III
c. DONATIONS WITH AN ONEROUS CAUSE ARE GOVERNED BY THE RULE ON
CONTRACTS
i. There is another type of donation which is onerous

Occupation 1. Equivalent value is given by done

What may be the object of occupation? In other words, unsay ma acquire by ownership?
ii. Pure and unadulterated donation
Art 713 Things appropriable by nature which are without an owner, such as animals that are object of
1. Walay kapalit. Mau bitaw na nga title 3 has nothing to do
hunting and fishing, hidden treasure and abandoned movables, are acquire by occupation.
with onerous but it is covered by laws on contract

Abandoned movables- for example, you found a lost movable. What is the procedure? Send a notice to d. DONATIONS MORTIS CAUSA GOVERNED BY THE FORMALITIES REQUIRED IN
the mayor, mayor makes an announcement, public auction, etc So posible ang lost movable as an EXECUTION OF NOTARIAL WILL ( Art. 805, CC)
object of occupation.
2. Two types of donation
Art 714 The ownership of a piece of land cannot be acquired by occupation.
a. Inter vivos

i. Takes effect during lifetime of donor

6

ii. Title 3 there are specific legal requirement as to execution
1. Movable less than 5k not required in writing. Required
that there be simultaneous delivery of the thing. Di pwede
ugma ihatag dapat karon jud. Di na pwede. Donation is not
perfected if wala karon
a. Sale it required that the thing must exist. What
is required at the time of transfer it is there.
Perfection what is needed is only subject. In
donation it is needed to be simultaneous. No
delivery no donation.
2. Movable exceeds 5k required to be made in writing. Not
needed to be public document. It doesnt even say on what
material. It is still valid.
3. Immovable stricto kaayu ang law. Not contended by plain
writing. It must be in PUBLIC document. Based on oblicon it
may be be for convenience or it may be validity in donation
it not for mere convenience, it is for is validity. For inter
vivos donation.
b. Mortis causa
i. After the death
ii. Covered by the formalities required in the execution of notarial will
iii. What is a will
1. Act of person disposing of gratuitously, properties he own
that will take effect after his death
iv. Requirement
1. 805 every will must be in writing and executed in
language or dialect known to testator. You need to follow
this.
a. First there must be 3 witnesses who must sign in
the presence of the testator and presence of one
another. Imagine that requirement? Ceremony
jud ni. Naa na dapat naa jud na sila. Kada witness
dapat naa ang testator at the same time di pwede
nga usa ka witness karon ugma ang sunod.
Invalid ang will ana. In the document naa gyuy
attestation clause.
b. Attestation clause is what differentiate last will
and testament from an ordinary contract. Mortis
Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
causa follows last will formalities so there should
be attestation clause without which it will not be
valid. If you go into practice class pwede ra inyu
ivideo. Why do you have to do that? After ana if
mamatay na ang testator i-probate naman na.
probate is proceeding to prove whether or not
testator signed the will with sound mind or if it
complies with law. After the probated will can it
cause transfer of ownership. You will follow same
formalities in donation mortis causa.
3. 3 types
a. Simple donation
i. Liberality is the consideration
b. Remuneratory
i. There is reason but the reason is does not constitute a demandable
debt.
1. Like saving my life during the gulf war, so I made a promise
to you that this is my second life due to you and I will give
you parcel land. If you did not save my life I will not give to
you. I am not bound of my promise you cannot file specific
performance
c. Purely onerous
i. Not really donation, sukwahi nis description sa donation. Donation
does not require you to give something in return. Here you have to
give something in return.
4. Why is this important?
a. Due to what is the document to execute to make effective the donation
b. Our problem is whether it is inter vivos or mortis causa. That I s a question that
needs to be resolved to determine what formality should be used. Ari ang sadya.
Ang mga kaso or questions kay mga hybrid. Naay mga provisions on its face inter
vivos but if you will analyze it it really is mortis causa
i. Ex I donate to you parcel of land but I incorporated there the provision
that says in the meantime I'm alive possession and fruits shall remain
with me. If you were a layman, or a student who thinks like a layman,
who does not care what donation is all about, first impression will be
mortis causa assuming you know mortis causa kay di man i.deliver
after my death. If you analyze and is conscientious as a student and
7

remember that is discussed something about usufruct so what is
usufruct? When somebody enjoys the use and the fruits he is not
necessarily the owner the owner is naked owner. So in donation
where there is no conveyance of the possession and use of the frits not
necessarily inconsistent with transfer of ownership so inter vivos.
Follow formalities by book 3 of the book. We do not need to follow
requirements under 805.
c. Donation contains reservation to sell property while donor is still alive. I am
donating the property but in the meantime that I am alive, I am reserving the
power to sell the property. nya pakapinan pajud the ownership anyway is
transferred during the lifetime. First of all you have to analyze what is power to
sell? Is this significant to ownership of a person. Significant na kay if ideprive ka
tiaw tiaw imu right. It is indicator that it is mortis causa donation. If the testator
reserves right to sell is in effect reserving right to revoke. That is essence of
mortis causa. Inter vivos is generally irrevocable. It can be revoked but only in
specific grounds like birth or reappearance of a child. Donate nya limut nga naa
man diay ko anak. Muabut ang anak muana pa nalimut mn ka nako. Pwede
irrevoke pero specific. Mortis causa class the donor does not need to explain.
Muana ang donor murag di ko ganahan sa imu hitsura dah irevoke nako. Pwde
na.
d. Donation inter vivos it needs acceptance. Sa format sa donation naa juy portion
nga acceptance nga pirma ang donor there is acceptance clause because
acceptance and conveying the acceptance to donor will perfects the donation
e. Be meticulous on what is the formalities required, is it book 3 or 805. So be very
careful
5. Book 3 focused on simple and remuneratory
a. Book 3 has nothing to do with onerous donation except in a suppletory manner
6. Other types
a. Propter nuptias
i. Donation reason by marriage. Done before celebration
ii. Governed by rules in ordinary donation. Insofar as not modified by
article 83 of family code
1. Take note of this and read it
7. Elements of donation
a. Essential reduction of patrimony of the donor
i. In other words if gipahuwamn ra ka no donation because there is no
reduction of the asset of the donor
Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
b. Increase in the patrimony of the donee
i. I must decrease and you shall increase asa mu kabasa ana? Bible
c. Intent to do an act of liberality
8. Is donation contract?
a. Yes, meeting of minds , consent, does not become perfect until there is
acceptance
9. Intervivos
a. The act is operative and final while mortis causa takes effect after the death of the
donor
SEPTEMBER 26, 2016
(Atty. Gravador flashes a PPT slide showing an example of a deed of donation)
In a donation, there must be acceptance by the donee and the deed of donation must be signed by the
donor and the donee. The donee should sign because it is a requirement in a donation that the donee
must accept the donation and it is not mere acceptance because the acceptance must be made known
to the donor when the donor is still alive or still capacitated.
(Please refer to the PPT slides for the example of donation inter vivos)
What is the most important in a donation inter vivos is there is already a transfer of ownership.
(Please refer to the PPT slides for the example of donation mortis causa and last will and testament)
In a donation mortis causa, it follows that this form of donation must follow the formalities of the
execution of a last will and testament. However, a last will and testament and donation mortis causa
are two different things. In donation mortis causa, except for the fact nga it does not transfer
ownership immediately, it looks like an ordinary donation inter vivos (you will not find in a last will
and testament such considerations as love and affection). And since a donation mortis causa must
follow the formalities of a last will and testament, it shall take effect upon the death of the donor (The
main difference between inter vivos and mortis causa because of the incorpation of an attestation
clause to the latter; presence of 3 witnesses; witnesses must sign in the presence of each other and in
the presence of the testator). Also remember that an attestation clause is not an empty ceremony that
may be disregarded because your last will and testament may be denied without this (the donation
cannot effect a transfer of ownership).
(Atty. Gravador flashes PPT slides on donation inter vivos)
This is donation inter vivos, Sir asa man ang acceptance? In the document. Mere saying that you are
accepting the donation is enough (I hereby accept the foregoing). Title 3 is very strict in terms of
acceptance as an indispensable requirement. The acceptance may be done on a separate day, not like
the attestation clause. There may also be two separate documents, i.e. the deed of donation itself and
the acceptance, provided that it must be noted in each document that the donation is already accepted
to show that the donor knows of the acceptance by the donee.
8

CLASSIFICATION OF DONATIONS INTO SIMPLE, REMUNERATORY, ONEROUS, & MODAL
This classification is important for the purpose of determining the rules governing each situation. If it
is an onerous donation, the law on obligations and contracts shall govern (e.g. impossible conditions
which annuls the onerous donation with an impossible condition). On the other hand, If it is a simple
or remuneratory donation, Title III provides that the impossible condition may simply be considered
as not imposed or disregarded.
Formalities to be followed:
In simple inter vivos:
a.1. If object is movable, 5K and below, may be made orally and the requirement on simultaneous
delivery;
a.2. If object is movable, 5K or more, must be in writing and not necessarily in public instrument;
b. Immovable, must be in a public document
Onerous donation:
a. Perfected by mere consent
b. Kung yuta2, although niingon sa statute of frauds nga not all transactions involving a property must
be in writing, and when the compliance with the condition will exceed 1 year, unsa may ingon sa
statute of frauds? It is not enforceable. Example: I donate to you a parcel of land with the condition
that within 5 years you have to construct a building. Here it is required that it must be in writing
(private document at the very least). But unlike in simple donation inter vivos, there is a strict rule
that it must not only be in writing but also in a public instrument. By the time you are already to
register the property, can you just present the private document and cause the cancellation of the title
of the donor? Of course no, because under P.D. 1529, you are required to have a registrable document
(public document).
ELEMENTS OF DONATION
Donation also partakes of a contract. What do you normally find in a contract? Of course the elements,
i.e., consent, object, consideration. In donation take note that we are very meticulous about the
perfection of the donation because it is only when the donation is perfected where we can say that the
donation is valid. So when is the donation perfected? The law says it is perfected when there is
acceptance.
But if you relate all the other provisions relating to perfection of donation, it is not only the acceptance
which is the determinative factor. THE ACCEPTANCE MUST BE MADE TO THE DONR DURING HIS
LIFETIME. So if ako ang donee, gi accept na nako pero kung wa hibaw ang donor sa akong acceptance
kay akong plano ig Sunday na nako siya pahibaw.un. Is there a perfected donation? Not yet. It will only
be perfected on Sunday, kay Sunday paman nako siya pahibal.un.
So for example from today to Sunday, something happened to the donor, he died on Saturday. The
donation is not perfected and I cannot also deal with the property from the moment I accepted it
unless when I accepted it the donor also knew of my acceptance. For example, pag accept nako, ni adto
dayun kos bangko kay this is already my property, I will apply for a loan with this. That mortgage
that i executed will be invalid because the donation is not yet perfected. Thats how important
perfection is.
CAPACITY
(with regard to the donor)
Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
He must be capacitated at the time of the making of the donation. at the time of making literally
means at the time of signing. So kung ato pa, kung he becomes crazy later, okay ra ang donation????
Literally yes but if you will consider the rule on when is there is perfection, the capacity of the donor
must not exist only at the time of the making, but it exist as well at the time he has KNOWLEDGE OF
THE ACCEPTANCE of the donee.
(with regard to the donee)
Not required to be at least 18, basta naa lang kay capacity to act. But who may accept on their behalf if
minor? Iyang mga parents. Pwede pud lain taw ut must be pursuant to an SPA giving the power to
accept. If 50,000 above ang value sa property, you need to file a verified petition for approval of a
bond.
- all those who may contract and dispose
- all those not disqualified by law. (Art 740)
Donations made to incapacitated people are void:
Art. 1032. The following are incapable of succeeding by reason of unworthiness:
(1) Parents who have abandoned their children or induced their daughters to lead a corrupt or
immoral life, or attempted against their virtue;
(2) Any person who has been convicted of an attempt against the life of the testator, his or her spouse,
descendants, or ascendants;
(3) Any person who has accused the testator of a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment for
six years or more, if the accusation has been found groundless;
(4) Any heir of full age who, having knowledge of the violent death of the testator, should fail to report
it to an officer of the law within a month, unless the authorities have already taken action; this
prohibition shall not apply to cases wherein, according to law, there is no obligation to make an
accusation;
(5) Any person convicted of adultery or concubinage with the spouse of the testator;
(6) Any person who by fraud, violence, intimidation, or undue influence should cause the testator to
make a will or to change one already made;
(7) Any person who by the same means prevents another from making a will, or from revoking one
already made, or who supplants, conceals, or alters the latter's will;
(8) Any person who falsifies or forges a supposed will of the decedent. (756, 673, 674a)
Di pud pwede and pari who took the last confession ug and physician/nurse/doctor who took care of
you on your last illness
9

OCTOBER 1, 2016
One of the single characteristics of donation inter vivos is that it cannot be revoked unlike in mortis
causal which can be revocable at the discretion of the donor.
General rule: Donation inter vivos is not revocable.
Exceptions:
1) Appearance of children
There are several instances which will fall under the appearance of children. Whats the purpose if the
donation is allowed to be reduced when theres appearance of children? To protect the legitime.
These are the specific instances: the donor after donation should have legitimate or legitimated
children. E.g. The donor seemingly lost hope of having children. One day, ingon sia nga there is no
point in having property so gi donate niya iyang tanan properties. In that case, the donation will be
reduced, not revoked. The difference is that in revoked, the entire donation is affected. In reduction,
the donation will only be reduced at the extent that the children will be affected.
Later, I will show you a formula for the table of legitimes. Naa formala ang law nga pila ang legitime
i.reserve depending on who will survive the testator at the time of his death. The usual is the legitime
of 50% is reserved for the legitimate children, the surviving spouse is entitled to each of that of the
legitimate children but will be taken from the free portion. Ang sobra will be distributed. I will show
you the later of the instances. Kay naay instances where ang asawa ni survive. Naay uban nga ang
asawa ni survivie and the illegitimate children.
Another instance of appearance of children is when the child who is believed to be dead turned out to
be living. One of the options the donor can resort to to reduce donation is to adopt a minor child.
These instances are appearance of children.
In the extent of the revokation, it can only be revoked or reduced to the extent that it exceeds.
Donation shall be reduced insofar as it exceeds the portion that may be freely disposed of and upon
reduction, the property affected shall be returned.
Explains pie chart:
In this case, this is the legitime here and the free portion for 2 or more children and surviving spoue.
So ing ana class, lets assume at the of his death the net estate was 10 million. Na tunga na because the
law says 50% of that is reserved for the children and the surviving spouse has a share equivalent to a
child. Ang 5 million mao na ang share sa legitimate children. Kung naay 5 ka anak, tag 1 million each
ang anak. Then ingon ang law that ang spouse is equivalent to the share of a legitimate child so naay 1
million ang spoue pero kuhaon sa free protion. In other words, ang free portion is only 4 million.
Kaning 4 million, mao ni ang pwede para donation inter vivios. So if the donor donates 6 million, it is
subject to reduction of 2 million.
Lets talk about the prescriptive period. The law provides for a prescriptive period for appearance of
children. When we talk about a cause of action class, never forget when you are supposed to file it
because that factor is to be considered. If you note the ground to revoke, naay specific period of years.
4 years from the birth of the first child, from the recognition of filiation.
2) Breach of condition
In obligations and contracts, we learned about suspensive and resulatory condition. It can be
understood as a charge on the burden.
Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
What is the condition referred to here as the ground whose breach will constitute as a ground for
breach of condition?
Art 764- resulatory condition. That in effect, once the donor imposes a certain obligation on the done
and the donee failed to comply with such condition then it serves as a resulatory condition in that the
donation will not take effect.
Will it be correct to say the condition reserved to heir will be assigned a monetary vale? Like a charge,
burden. Can you give me an example of a condition which may be revoke based on this ground?
An owner of a parcel of land donated to a municipality place and the condition is that I want to build a
playground or nursery (Parks v. Municipality of Argao, Central Philippine University v. CA)
So that is the condition referred to by the law. Before we go back there, what is the appropriate cause
of action resorted to by donor in case of beach? Is it an acton to reduce or revoke?
Action for revocation. It should affect the entirety of the donation. And if the donee has conveyed to
another person, the property will be returned. Subject to the condidtion that rights of innocent third
persons should be respected.
If you are the donor and you anticipate the condition cannot be complied to by the donee, what should
you do so that this third person cannot invoke that he is innocent? Can you suggest a legal remedy to
your client so that you can still recover the property you donated in the case of non-compliance of
donation?
That will be to annotate the donation with reservation. He can recover it from the hands of innocent
third persons but only the value.
What is the prescriptive period for action to revoke on the ground of breach of condition?
Art 764 mandates that the action to revoke the property should be 4 years from non-compliance of
condition. The SC held in Evelyn De Luna, that what is involved is an onerous donation so the SC held
that this goes beyond the limitation provided by donation. What controls is the rules of contracts
which is 10 years.
If that is the case, when can we apply this 4 year prescriptive period?
We can apply that in the absence of a stipulation of the parties that non-compliance of the parties ipso
facto revoke the property to the donor as in the case of Roman Catholic Archbishop. In this case it is
being clarified by the parties that non-compliance of the condition will ipso facto effect to revocation
by the donor. If the deed of donation is silent as to the right of the donor to revoke, we will apply the 4
year period. But if the deed of donation has an automatic reversion clause, as in Roman Catholic the
period is 10 years.
*At this point there is no authority for the view that if the donation, even if onerous, but does not
contain an automatic reversion clause, the period is 4 years.
Question is when can we apply this 4 year prescriptive period instead of the 10 year period?
It is clear in the De Luna Case where if its onerous then it is 10 years.
Can you think of a donation na dunay condition and yet it is simple donation para mu apply ning four
year period? Because if it is a charge then it is onerous so ang mu apply ang obligation and contracts
so the prescriptive period is 10 years. So what is an example where it imposes a condition yet it is
simple? In other words if you stick to that doctrinal rule of De Luna, it will render Art 764 inoperative.
How about modal donation? Value of the charge is less than the value of the property. Is it not
dimunatory? If dimunatory then we apply Art 943. The other view by Rabuya is that the general rule is
onerous donation should be governed by contracts but in regard to prescription it should give way to
Art 943. We apply the rule in Statutory Construction where the special rule shall apply.
3) Ingratitude
10
 Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
4) Inofficiousness- Surprisingly, the Civil Code forgot to fix a prescriptive period. Example 2: When testator died, he was survived by his spouse, illegitimate children and legitimate
parents. children, 1/8 spouse, and 1/2 parents.

To determine if the donation is inofficious, take a look on the legitime because the law says that a
donation is inofficious if it impairs a legitime.
It is true that the general rule in onerous donation is governed by the law on obligations and contracts.
However, in regard to prescription it has to give way to the specific rule under the doctrine. In other
TAKE NOTE: Only those who have a right to the legitime may question.
words, he advocated the view that we will apply the rule in statutory construction that as between
two provisions which are in pari materia, special rule will prevail over the general rule.
Is there any other that will question? Yes, those who are legatees (donee of a personal property) and
devisees (donee of a real property) who are not compulsory heirs. They cannot question because they
In Attys opinion, maybe this will apply only in renumeratory donation. This is because if it is less than
are not compulsory heirs base on the principle that First in time, first in right.
in value, it is governed by Title III. However, it should presuppose that if there is a burden, the value of
the burden must be stated on the first instance, otherwise, if it is silent, the value of the burden is
October 3, 2016
deemed to be equivalent to the value of the property, hence, it is onerous.
Inofficiousness is a ground to reduce a donation. If the basis is inofficiousness, unlike the other
CASE: De Luna vs. Abrigo
grounds like ingratitude, breach of condition, birth or appearance of children, the appropriate cause of
SC said that if the donation is an onerous donation, the period to file an action to revoke donation is 10
action here is reduction. In reduction, we will not totally set aside the donation.In article 752, donation
years.
shall be inofficious in all that it may exceed this limitation.

TAKE NOTE: Apply De Luna vs Abrigo rather than Article 764, par. 3 which states that
Although 752 says that no person may give or receive, actually this is more addressed to the giver. No
prescription is 4 years.
person may give more than he may give. Ang pangutana karon is what extent of his property holdings
can he give? The answer there is subject to the limitation that he may not impair the legitime of his
CASE: Roman Catholic Archbishop Case
compulsory heirs. Compulsory heirs only, i.e. surviving spouse, legitimate children and descendants
The enforcement of a donation with automatic reversion clause is within 10 years.
this includes the grandchildren incase the direct descendant is already dead or incapacitated. The
illegitimate children if he is recognized. I showed you a table of legitime last time. Katong legitime
Ingratitude commission of an offense against the person, honor, property of the donor, wife or
meaning kanang di na nila pwede hilabtan. When I say hilabtan I mean the donor cannot dispose of
children, or any criminal offense by the donee to the donor.
it gratuitously pero kung gusto gyud niya hilabtan unya iya ibaligya tanan wala gyuy mahimo ang heir.
How shall we determine the legitime class. The legitime is determined after we determine the net
It further provides that even though he should prove it. Can you imagine that, unsaon pagpaprove
estate. So ang pag determine sa legitime class, we have to first know what is the net estate. How do we
nimo?
determine the net estate? Gross estate niya then if there are liabilities we subtract. For example 10
million unya 5 million ang debt so 5 million ang net estate. After ma determine ang net estate ara na
Third, if donee refuses to give support wherein donee is legally or morally required to give support.
nimo i determine ang legitime. This cannot be tinkered by the donor by performing acts in a
This is a thing that Atty cannot understand because, you donate but still asks for support. It is not only
gratuitous manner. The question is what if the donor has, during his lifetime, made some donations.
limited to legal support but also for moral support.
(Talks about examples of donation like the SCRA and campaign funds given by the father) those are
called collatable expenses. Unsa may pasabot kung collatable expenses class. Naa na sa article 1061 sa
The prescriptive period here is one year from the time the donor has the knowledge of the fact.
Civil Code, every compulsory heir, who succeeds with other compulsory heirs, must bring into the
mass of the estate any property or right which he may have received from the decedent, during the
Inofficiousness No person may give or receive, by way of donation, more than he may give or
lifetime of the latter, by way of donation, in order that it may be computed in the determination of the
receive by will.
legitime of each heir. Kasabot mo ani class? So paghuman sa net estate class, tanan nga mga donation
which were given by the donor during his lifetime, ibalik ang value ato. Unsa may purpose ana class?
When the law says inofficious, it is referring to what can be given. This should be addressed to the one
To determine pila gyud ang legitime to which each compulsory heir is entitled to.
who would be giving rather than the one who would receive. (Refer to the Simpler Table of
Legitimes)
Expenses for the support of children (enumerated under the Family Code), including the advancement
of the professional career, are not collatable. Ang collatable lang kay donations, election expenses.
Example 1: When the testator died, he was survived by his spouse, and legitimate children. 1/3 is
When we say donation, it does not mean nga ma void ang donation. Gi account lang nah cya to
reserved to illegitimate children and 1/3 to the surviving spouse. Hence, the maximum donation that
determine if naapil ba sa free portion. If wala, subject to reduction.
can be made by the testator is only up to 1/3.

11
 Property 2016-2017 | Atty. Gravador
Caveat: Kaning collation doesnt mean nga automatically ma void ang donation. Ma void rana only
when it impairs the legitime, or if the donation made to strangers exceeds the free portion.

When you determine whether a donation is inofficious, take note of this Article on Collation.

In collation, you are not bound to return the very same property, but only the value thereof.

Who may ask that the donation be reduced on the ground of inofficiousness? Only those who are
entitled to the legitime, i.e. compulsory heirs. So if donee ka nya ma affected ka but di ka compulsory
heir, wa kay labot diha. (or if compulsory heir ka but the donation kay part of the free portion) In
other words, legatees and devisees have no personality to ask for the reduction.

When are you supposed to file? 10 years.

12