Bariata v. Carpio Morales

 

Bariata v. Carpio Morales

G.R. No. 234640

February 1, 2023

 

FACTS:

                Crispin Bariata (petitioner) filed a complaint against private respondents then Mayor Joselito A. Ojeda (Joselito) and Dulce R. Quinto-Ojeda (Dulce) for alleged unexplained wealth and for failure to file a true and detailed Sworn Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs) for certain calendar years. Among others, petitioner alleged that Joselito and his wife Dulce, is a co-owner together with a certain Apolinar Quinto (Apolinar) of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 343418, which was not declared. Joselito countered that the parcel of land covered by TCT No. 343418 is a paraphernal property of his wife who had already waived and assigned her interest in favor of her brother Apolinar, as evidenced by a Waiver/Quitclaim with Assignment of Rights dated February 2, 2002, and should no longer be included in his SALN. The Ombudsman dismissed both the criminal and administrative cases against Joselito and his wife. It was provided that the lot under TCT No. T-343418 has been waived and assigned by respondent Dulce to Apolinar as early as 2002 per Waiver/Quitclaim with Assignment of Rights. As the subject lot is a paraphernal property, it is considered as respondent Dulce's exclusive property under Articles 92 and 109 of the Family Code and could be disposed without the consent of her husband.

 

ISSUE:

                Whether the lot under TCT No. T-343418 has been validly donated.

 

HELD:

                YES. The lot under TCT No. T-343418 has been validly donated. Quitclaims, being contracts of waiver, involve the relinquishment of rights, with knowledge of their existence and intent to relinquish them. A mere waiver of rights is not an effective mode of transferring ownership under our Civil Code. Under Article 712 of the Civil Code, the modes of acquiring ownership are generally classified into two classes, namely, the original mode (i.e., through occupation, acquisitive prescription, law, or intellectual creation), and the derivative mode (i.e., through succession mortis causa or tradition as a result of certain contracts, such as sale, barter, donation, assignment, or mutuum). In this case, the Waiver/Quitclaim partakes the nature of a donation. In order that a donation of an immovable property be valid, the following elements must be present: (a) the essential reduction of the patrimony of the donor; (b) the increase in the patrimony of the donee; (c) the intent to do an act of liberality or animus donandi; (d) the donation must be contained in a public document; and (e) that the acceptance thereof be made in the same deed or in a separate public instrument; if acceptance is made in a separate instrument, the donor must be notified thereof in an authentic form, to be noted in both instruments. The foregoing elements are present in the instant case. A reading of the terms and conditions of the Waiver/Quitclaim shows that Dulce freely and voluntarily relinquished and waived her rights and interests over the subject property in favor of her brother, Apolinar without any material or valuable consideration. Moreover, the Waiver/Quitclaim was contained in a public document, having been acknowledged before a Notary Public. In addition, Apolinar's acceptance is shown by his signature on the same instrument executed by Dulce.