Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

QUIJADA VS.

CA- Resolutory Condition in Donations

When a person donates land to another on a condition. The condition imposed is not a condition precedent or a
suspensive condition but a resolutory one.

FACTS:

Petitioners are the children of the late Trinidad Quijada. Trinidad and her siblings executed a deed of donation of a two-
hectare lot in favor of the Municipality of Talacogon (Agusan del Sur), exclusively for the purpose of constructing the
proposed provincial high school. However, possession remained with Trinidad. She subsequently sold the two hectares
on two separate occasions to Regalado Mondejar, who sold it to different persons. Eventually, the Municipality, failing
to construct the high school, reverted ownership to the donors. Petitioners filed an action for quieting of title and
recovery of possession and ownership. RTC ruled in favor of petitioners, but CA reversed.

ISSUE:

Whether the deed of donation had a suspensive condition or a resolutory condition

Whether the sale was valid

RULING:

When the donation was accepted, the ownership was transferred to the school, only subject to a condition that a school
must be constructed over the lot. Since ownership was transferred, and failure to fulfill the condition reverts the
ownership back to the donor, it is a resolutory condition.

(Not really a discussion in Property) When Trinidad sold the parcels of land to Mondejar, she was not the owner of the
land. Petitioners also did not sleep on their rights to recover the possession and ownership over the property since they
immediately filed the action when the municipality passed the resolution, reverting the ownership of land to the donors.
However, a sale being a consensual contract, it can be perfected upon meeting of the minds, and completing the three
essential elements of a valid contract of sale. Even when Trinidad was not the owner when the sale was perfected,
tradition through delivery is only important upon the consummation stage. Such transfer of ownership through actual or
constructive delivery only happened when the lands reverted back to petitioners. Art 1434 is applicable, stating that
seller's "title passes by operation if law to the buyer," and therefore making the sale valid. The donated lots cannot be
considered outside the commerce of man, since nowhere in the law states that properties owned by municipality would
be as such.
Quijada v. CA

Facts:

On April 5, 1956, Trinidad Quijada and her sisters executed a deed of conditional donation in favor of the Municipality of
Talacogon, the condition being that the land shall be used exclusively for the construction of a provincial high school.
Trinidad remained in possession of the land. On July 29, 1962, Trinidad sold the land to respondent Regalado Mondejar.
In 1980, the heirs of Trinidad, herein petitioners, filed a complaint for forcible entry against the respondent. In 1987, the
proposed campus did not materialize, and the Sangguniang Bayan enacted a resolution donating back the land to the
donor. In the meantime, respondent Mondejar conveyed portions of the land to the other respondents. On July 5, 1988,
petitioners filed a complaint for quieting of title, recovery of possession and ownership of the land.

Issue:

Whether the sale between Trinidad and Regalado is valid considering the capacity of the vendor to execute the contract
in view of the conditional deed of donation

Held:

The donor may have an inchoate interest in the donated property during the time that ownership of the land has not
reverted to her. Such inchoate interest may be the subject of contracts including a contract of sale. In this case,
however, what the donor sold was the land itself which she no longer owns. It would have been different if the donor-
seller sold her interests over the property under the deed of donation which is subject to the possibility of reversion of
ownership arising from the non-fulfillment of the resolutory condition.

Sale, being a consensual contract, is perfected by mere consent, which is manifested the moment there is a meeting of
the minds as to the offer and acceptance thereof on three (3) elements: subject matter, price and terms of payment of
the price. Ownership by the seller on the thing sold at the time of the perfection of the contract of sale is not an element
for its perfection. What the law requires is that the seller has the right to transfer ownership at the time the thing sold is
delivered. Perfection per se does not transfer ownership which occurs upon the actual or constructive delivery of the
thing sold. A perfected contract of sale cannot be challenged on the ground of non-ownership on the part of the seller at
the time of its perfection; hence, the sale is still valid.

The consummation, however, of the perfected contract is another matter. It occurs upon the constructive or actual
delivery of the subject matter to the buyer when the seller or her successors-in-interest subsequently acquires
ownership thereof. Such circumstance happened in this case when petitioners who are Trinidad Quijada's heirs and
successors-in-interest became the owners of the subject property upon the reversion of the ownership of the land to
them. Consequently, ownership is transferred to respondent Mondejar and those who claim their right from him. Article
1434 of the New Civil Code supports the ruling that the seller's "title passes by operation of law to the buyer." This rule
applies not only when the subject matter of the contract of sale is goods, but also to other kinds of property, including
real property.

Вам также может понравиться