This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2009-02-18 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| In Sumipat v. Banga,[37] this Court declared that title to immovable property does not pass from the donor to the donee by virtue of a Deed of Donation until and unless it has been accepted in a public instrument and the donor duly notified thereof. The acceptance may be made in the very same instrument of donation. If the acceptance does not appear in the same document, it must be made in another. Where the Deed of Donation fails to show the acceptance, or where the formal notice of the acceptance, made in a separate instrument, is either not given to the donor or else not noted in the Deed of Donation and in the separate acceptance, the donation is null and void.[38] | |||||
|
2007-07-24 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| True, the prohibition on contracts respecting future inheritance admits of exceptions, as when a person partitions his estate by an act inter vivos under Article 1080 of the Civil Code.[12] However, the private deed of sale does not purport to be a partition of Bernabe's estate as would exempt it from the application of Article 1347. Nowhere in the said document does Bernabe separate, divide, and assign to his children his share in the subject lot effective only upon his death.[13] Indeed, the document does not even bear the signature of Bernabe. | |||||