G.R. No. 38499, December 6, 1933
Faustina Udarbe, et al. vs. Marciana Jurado, et al.

FACTS

The plaintiffs, descendants of the deceased Agustin Udarbe, filed an action for partition of 38 parcels of land and to compel the defendants (other descendants) to collate (bring into the hereditary estate) the properties they received as donations inter vivos and propter nuptias from the deceased, along with the fruits thereof. Agustin Udarbe was married twice and left properties, some of which were donated to certain children during his lifetime. The trial court ordered the partition of specific parcels, allocating one-half to the children of the first marriage and the other half to all children from both marriages. It also declared other parcels as absolute property of certain defendants. The plaintiffs appealed, contesting the denial of their motion to compel an accounting and collation of the donations.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in not ordering the collation of the donations inter vivos received by some heirs.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment. Under Article 1035 of the Civil Code, collation of donations is required only if the donations are inofficious (excessive) and prejudice the legitime (lawful share) of the forced heirs. The plaintiffs failed to allege and prove that the donations were inofficious or prejudicial to their legitime. The existence of 18 other parcels not included in the complaint and subject to partition indicated that the donations might not be inofficious. Thus, the collation sought lacked a legal basis. The Court found it unnecessary to address the issue of prescription raised.

AI Generated by Armztrong.