SUBJECT:

TOPIC: CASE NAME: MATEO v LAGUA

Persons Bonifacia Mateo v Gervasio Lagua
RELEVANT PROVISIONS:
Article 908. To determine the legitime, the value of the property left at the death of the testator shall be considered, deducting all debts and
charges, which shall not include those imposed in the will.
To the net value of the hereditary estate, shall be added the value of all donations by the testator that are subject to collation, at the time he
made them. (818a)
Article 132. A donation by reason of marriage is not revocable, save in the following cases:(1) If it is conditional and the condition is not
complied with;(2) If the marriage is not celebrated;(3) When the marriage takes place without the consent of the parents or guardian, as
required by law; (4) When the marriage is annulled, and the donee acted in bad faith;
(5) Upon legal separation, the donee being the guilty spouse;
(6) When the donee has committed an act of ingratitude as specified by the provisions of this Code on donations in general. (1333a)

FACTS:
Cipriano Lagua owned 3 parcels of land in Asingan, Pangasinan.
In 1917, he and his wife Alejandra donated 2 parcels to their son Alejandro, in consideration of the his
marriage to Bonifacia Mateo. The donation was made in a public instrument.
A few years later, Alejandro died and Bonifacia with their daughter lived with their father-in-law, Cipriano.
At the beginning, Cipriano still gave Bonifacia her share in the harvest from the land however he eventually
stopped doing so. Bonifacia filed a suit from where she obtained a judgement in her favor, awarding to her
possession of the two lots.
Years later, Cipriano executed a deed of sale of the same lands to his younger son, Gervasio. It was only
several years after the said sale that Bonifacia found out.
She filed and won a case to nullify the said sale.
Gervasio and his wife subsequently filed an action against Bonifacia for reimbursement of the improvements
made by them on the land. Gervasion and his father Cipriano, filed a second case for the annulment of the
donation of portion of the lands. Cipriano alleged that he has prejudiced the legitime of his son and heir,
Gervasio. Cipriano died during the pendency of the case.
ISSUE: HOLDING:
WON the donation may be reduced for being inofficious. YES The case is not exclusively a revocation of the
YES entire donation, but merely a nullification of a portion
thereof that is allegedly trenching on the legitime of
Inofficious - relating to a disposition of property that Gervasio. Having accrued only upon the death of the
has the effect of depriving descendants of the father, donation propter nuptias may be reduced for
shares of a succession to which they are entitled by being inofficious.
law
DPN are without consideration, marriage being merely
the motive for the donation and not its cause hence they
may be subject to reduction in case of inofficiousness
upon the death of the donor.

Steps to determine the shares of compulsory heirs:
(1) Net estate must be determined, by deducting all
payable obligations and charges
(2) Net estate + all donations subject to collation
(3) Determine the legitimes of the heirs
Only after these steps, can It be ascertained whether any
of the donations had prejudiced the legitimes. In order to
say a donation is inofficious, there must be proof that
the value of the donated property exceeds the
disposable free portion plus the donees share in the
estate of the donor.
RULING:
DISMISSED, without prejudice to the parties litigating the issue of inofficiousness in a proper proceeding.

JMEEGAM_A2021 1