Ganuelas v. Cawad G.R.No. 123968. April 24, 2003 FACTS: Celestina Ganuelas executed a Deed of Donation of a land in favour of her niece Ursulina Ganvelas containing: ‘That, for and in eansideration of the fove and affection which the DONOR has for the DONEE, and of the faith services the latter has rendered in the past {0 the former, the said DONOR des ay these presents iranster and convey, by way of DONATION. unto the DONEE the groperty above. described. fo become effective upan the death of the DONOR: butin the event that the OONEE should ate before the DONOR, the present danetion shall be deemed rescinded and of no Further Fores and ofect. Celestina executed a document denominated as Revocation of Donation purparting to set aside the deed of donation. More than a month later Celestina died without issue and any surviving ascendants and siblings. Ursulina therafter shared the fruits of the property with her cousins Unlil the former got tax declaration over said property in her name, The cousins filed for partition alleging that the Deed of Donation executed by Celestina in favor of Ursulina ‘was void for lack of acknowledgment by the attesting witnesses thereto before notary public Atty. Henry Valmonte, and the donation was a disposition mortis causa which failed to comply ‘with the provisions of the Civil Code regarding formalities of wills and testarents, hence, it was void. ISSUE: The issue is thus whether the donation is infer vivos or mortis cause. Held: It is @ donation mortis causa which shoud comply with the formalities of a wil Donation fnier vivos differs trom donation mors causa in that in the former, the act is immediately operative even if the ectual execution may be deferred until the death of the donor, ‘while in the latter, nothing is conveyed to or acquired by the donee until the death of the donor- testator. The distinction between a transfer inter vivos and mortis causa is important as the validity of revocatian of the donation depends upon its ature. If the donation is inter vivos, it must be executed and accepted with the forraities prescribed by Articles 748 and 749 of the Civil Cade, except when it is onerous in which case the rules on contracts will apply. If it is mortis causa, the donation must be in the form of a wil, with all the formalities for the validity of wills, athemmise it is void and canst transfer ownership, “The distinguishing characteristics of a donation montis causa are the folowing: 1. it conveys no tile or ownership to the transferee before the death of the transferar; or, what ‘amounts to the seme thing, that the transferor should retain the ownership (full or naked) and control of the property while alive 2. That befare his death, the transfer should be revocable by the transferor at will, ad nutum; but revocability may be provided for indirectly by means of a reserved pawer in the donor to dispose of the properties conveyed: 3. That the transfer should be void if the transferor should survive the transferee.There is nothing therein which indicates that any right, title or interest in the donated properties was to be transferred to Ursulina prior to the death of Celestina, The phrase “to become effective upon the death of the DONOR” admits of no other interpretation but that Celestina intended to transfer the ownership of the properties to Ursulina on her death, not during her lifetime. More importantly, the provision in the deed stating that if the donee should die before the donor, the donation shall be deemed rescinded and of no further force and effect shows that the donation is a post mortem disposition.