GESTOPA VS.

CA FACTS- Acceptance
in Donation
Acceptance is a mark that the donation is inter vivos. Donations mortis causa, being in the form of a will, are not
required to be accepted by the donee during the donors lifetime.

FACTS:
Spouses Danlag own six parcels of land. To four parcels of land, they executed a donation mortis causa in favor of
respondent Mercedes Danlag-Pilapil, reserving donor's rights to amend, cancel, or revoke the donation and to sell or
encumber such properties. Years later, they executed another donation, this time inter vivos, to six parcels of land in
favor of respondents, reserving their rights to the fruits of the land during their lifetime and for prohibiting the donee to
sell or dispose the properties donated. Subsequently, the spouses sold 2 parcels to herein petitioners, spouses
Gestopa, and eventually revoking the donation. Respondent filed a petition to quiet title, stating that she had already
become the owner of the parcels of land. Trial Court ruled in favor of petitioners, but CA reversed.

ISSUE:
Whether the (second) donation was inter vivos or mortis causa

RULING:
It was donation inter vivos. The spouses were aware of the difference between the two donations, and that they
needed to execute another deed of donation inter vivos, since it has a different application to a donation mortis
causa. Also, the court stated four reasons to the matter: (1) that the spouses donated the parcels of land out of love
and affection, a clear indication of a donation inter vivos; (2) the reservation of a lifetime usufruct; (3) reservation of
sufficient properties for maintenance that shows the intention to part with their six lot; and (4) respondent's
acceptance, contained in the deed of donation. Once a deed of donation has been accepted, it cannot be revoked,
except for officiousness or ingratitude, which the spouses failed to invoke.

Civil Law; Property; Donations; Crucial in resolving whether the donation was inter vivos or mortis causa
is the determination of whether the donor intended to transfer the ownership over the properties upon
the execution of the deed.Crucial in resolving whether the donation was inter vivos or mortis causa is
the determination of whether the donor intended to transfer the ownership over the properties upon
the execution of the deed. In ascertaining the intention of the donor, all of the deeds provisions must
be read together.

Same; Same; Same; Acceptance clause is a mark that the donation is inter vivos. Donations mortis causa,
being in the form of a will, are not required to be accepted by the donees during the donors lifetime.
In the case of Alejandro vs. Geraldez, 78 SCRA 245 (1977), we said that an acceptance clause is a mark
that the donation is inter vivos. Acceptance is a requirement for donations inter vivos. Donations mortis
causa, being in the form of a will, are not required to be accepted by the donees during the donors
lifetime.

Same; Same; Same; A limitation on the right to sell during the donors lifetime implied that ownership
had passed to the donees and donation was already effective during the donors lifetime.The Court of
Appeals did not err in concluding that the right to dispose of the properties belonged to the donee. The
donors right to give consent was merely intended to protect his usufructuary interests. In Alejandro, we
ruled that a limitation on the right to sell during the donors lifetime implied that ownership had passed
to the donees and donation was already effective during the donors lifetime.

Same; Same; Same; A valid donation, once accepted, becomes irrevocable, except on account of
officiousness, failure by the donee to comply with the charges imposed in the donation, or
ingratitude.A valid donation, once accepted, becomes irrevocable, except on account of officiousness,
failure by the donee to comply with the charges imposed in the donation, or ingratitude. The donor-
spouses did not invoke any of these reasons in the deed of revocation [Gestopa vs. Court of Appeals,
342 SCRA 105(2000)]