Why a Donation Taking Effect Upon Death is Invalid

Why a Donation Taking Effect Upon Death is Invalid Under Philippine Law

In the Philippines, a donation is a voluntary act where one party, the donor, gives property or rights to another party, the donee, without expecting anything in return. While the concept seems straightforward, the law imposes strict rules to ensure the donation’s validity. One key rule is that a donation that takes effect only upon the donor’s death is not valid as a donation. Let’s explore why this principle exists and its implications under Philippine law.

Understanding Donations Under Philippine Law

Donations in the Philippines are governed primarily by the Civil Code of the Philippines (Articles 725-773). For a donation to be valid, the following elements must generally be present:

1. Donative Intent: The donor must voluntarily and intentionally transfer ownership to the donee.

2. Acceptance: The donee must accept the donation either personally or through a representative.

3. Delivery: There must be delivery of the property, particularly for movable items, or execution of a public document for immovable property.

A donation becomes effective during the donor’s lifetime and is considered a living transfer of ownership. The donor must relinquish control and ownership immediately or upon a specific condition.

Donations Upon Death Are Treated as Wills

If a donation is intended to take effect only upon the donor’s death, it is no longer a donation but instead resembles a testamentary disposition, which is governed by the rules on wills and succession.

The Civil Code explicitly states that for a donation to be valid, the donor must deliver ownership while still alive. Article 728 of the Civil Code provides:

"Donations which are to take effect inter vivos shall be governed by the rules established in the preceding Chapter. Those which are to take effect mortis causa shall be governed by the rules established in the Title on Succession."

In simpler terms, donations that are intended to take effect mortis causa (upon death) are not donations but are considered part of the donor’s last will and testament. For such dispositions to be valid, they must comply with the formalities required for a valid will under Philippine law, such as being executed in writing, signed by the testator, and witnessed by at least three competent witnesses.

Rationale Behind the Rule

The distinction between donations inter vivos (effective during the donor’s lifetime) and donations mortis causa exists to safeguard the integrity of property transfers. The following are some key reasons for this legal requirement:

1. Preventing Fraud or Coercion: By requiring strict formalities for testamentary dispositions, the law ensures that a donor’s final wishes are genuine and not the result of undue influence or fraud.

2. Preserving the Donor’s Rights: Until the donor’s death, they retain full ownership and control over their property. Allowing ownership transfers only through wills ensures the donor has ample time to modify or revoke their decision.

3. Protecting Legal Heirs: Testamentary dispositions are subject to the rules on legitimes, which guarantee the rights of compulsory heirs (e.g., children, spouse, and parents) to receive a portion of the estate. Donations made mortis causa must adhere to these rules to avoid depriving heirs of their rightful inheritance.

What Happens if a Donation Upon Death is Executed Without a Will?

If a donor attempts to execute a donation that takes effect upon their death without adhering to the formalities of a will, the donation is considered void. The property subject to the invalid donation becomes part of the donor’s estate and will be distributed according to the rules of intestate or testamentary succession.

Practical Implications

For individuals planning to transfer property or assets to loved ones, understanding this legal distinction is crucial. Here are some practical tips:

• Use a Deed of Donation: If you want to transfer ownership while you’re alive, execute a valid deed of donation with the required formalities.

• Draft a Will: For property transfers intended to take effect upon death, consult a lawyer to draft a legally compliant will.

• Consider Estate Planning: Explore other tools like trusts or insurance policies to streamline the transfer of assets to beneficiaries.

• 
  

Conclusion

The principle that donations taking effect upon death are invalid ensures fairness and compliance with the rules of succession. By recognizing this distinction, donors can make more informed decisions about how to distribute their property, and donees can avoid legal complications. Whether you intend to make a donation inter vivos or a mortis causa disposition, consulting a legal professional can help ensure your intentions are properly documented and legally binding.

Source: ZRE

Land Conveyed Under CARP Law Cannot Be Sold

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) has been a cornerstone of agricultural reform in the Philippines, aiming to promote social justice and equitable land distribution. However, one key aspect of this law often overlooked by land recipients and potential buyers is the restriction on the sale of land conveyed under CARP. Understanding this restriction is crucial to ensure compliance with the law and to avoid legal complications.

The Essence of CARP

CARP, enacted through Republic Act No. 6657 in 1988, seeks to redistribute agricultural lands to landless farmers and farmworkers to improve their quality of life and ensure food security. Beneficiaries, referred to as Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs), receive Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOA) as proof of ownership. However, this ownership comes with specific conditions to ensure that the land fulfills its intended purpose.

Restrictions on Selling CARP Land

Land distributed under CARP cannot be sold, transferred, or conveyed within ten years from the issuance of the CLOA, as stipulated in Section 27 of R.A. 6657. The restriction aims to prevent the reconsolidation of landholdings in the hands of a few and ensure that ARBs genuinely benefit from the land.

Even after the ten-year period, the sale or transfer of CARP land remains restricted. The land can only be sold to individuals who are also qualified ARBs or to the government, through the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), for redistribution to other eligible beneficiaries.

Exceptions to the Rule

There are limited exceptions to these restrictions. For instance, if the ARB can no longer farm the land due to permanent incapacity or death, the land may be transferred to an immediate family member who is willing and qualified to work the land. Additionally, judicial processes such as foreclosure proceedings can result in the transfer of ownership, but these are subject to DAR's approval.

Penalties for Violations

Violating the non-transferability clause of CARP land can lead to severe consequences. The DAR has the authority to revoke the CLOA and redistribute the land to other qualified beneficiaries. Buyers who purchase such land without proper authorization may lose their investment and face legal repercussions.

Implications for Buyers and Sellers

For ARBs: Selling CARP land outside the stipulated conditions defeats the purpose of agrarian reform and can result in the loss of their rights to the land. ARBs must fully understand their responsibilities and the legal implications of any transaction involving CARP land.

For Buyers: Purchasing land covered by CARP involves thorough due diligence. Potential buyers should verify the land’s status with the DAR and ensure compliance with all legal requirements. Ignoring these restrictions can lead to disputes and financial losses.

Upholding the Spirit of CARP

The restrictions on selling CARP land highlight the government’s intent to prioritize landless farmers and ensure long-term agricultural productivity. By respecting these provisions, stakeholders contribute to the overarching goal of agrarian reform: empowering farmers and fostering rural development.

In conclusion, land conveyed under CARP is not just a piece of property but a vital instrument for achieving social justice and agricultural sustainability. Compliance with the law ensures that the program’s benefits extend to future generations and uphold the vision of equitable land distribution in the Philippines.

Source: ZRE

Can the open space be converted into a residential lot?

Can the open space in a subdivision be sold and converted into a residential lot?

Please be informed of Presidential Decree 1216, which defines the term "open space" as an area reserved exclusively for parks, playgrounds, recreational uses, schools, roads, places of worship, hospitals, health centers, barangay centers, and other similar facilities and amenities. Moreover, Section 2 thereof states:

"Section 2. Section 31 of Presidential Decree No. 957 is hereby amended to read as follows:

"Sec. 31. Roads, Alleys, Sidewalks and Open spaces. The owner as developer of a subdivision shall provide adequate roads, alleys and sidewalks. For subdivision projects one (1) hectare or more, the owner or developer shall reserve thirty percent (30%) of the gross area for open space. Such open space shall have the following standards allocated exclusively for parks, playgrounds and recreational use:

"(a) 9% of gross area for high density or social housing (66 to 100 family lot per gross hectare).

"(b) 7% of gross area for medium-density or economic housing (21 to 65 family lot per gross hectare).

"(c) 3.5% of gross area low-density or open market housing (20 family lots and below per gross hectare).

"These areas reserved for parks, playgrounds and recreational use shall be non-alienable public lands, and non-buildable. The plans of the subdivision project shall include tree planting on such parts of the subdivision as may be designated by the Authority.

Upon their completion as certified to by the Authority, the roads, alleys, sidewalks and playgrounds shall be donated by the owner or developer to the city or municipality and it shall be mandatory for the local governments to accept provided, however, that the parks and playgrounds may be donated to the Homeowners Association of the project with the consent of the city or municipality concerned. No portion of the parks and playgrounds donated thereafter shall be converted to any other purpose or purposes."

Under the abovementioned provision of law, the parcel of land in a subdivision designated as an open space must be exclusively used for open space purposes such as parks, playgrounds, recreational uses, schools, roads, places of worship, hospitals, health centers, barangay centers, and other similar facilities and amenities and may not be converted to any other purposes.

In the case of White Plains Association, Inc. v. Legaspi (GR 95522, Feb. 7, 1991), the Supreme Court, through Associate Justice Emilio Gancayco, held:

"Subdivision owners are mandated to set aside such open spaces before their proposed subdivision plans may be approved by the government authorities, and that such open spaces shall be devoted exclusively for the use of the general public and the subdivision owner need not be compensated for the same. A subdivision owner must comply with such requirement before the subdivision plan is approved and the authority to sell is issued."

Hence if a lot is indeed designated as the subdivision's open space, it should be exclusively utilized as such and cannot be sold as a residential lot.

Source: Manila Times