In the Matter of the Trusteeship of Minors Benigno, Angela and Antonio, all surnamed Perez y Tuason.

DONATION - INTEREST OF BENEFICIARIES

ARANETA VS PEREZ
Prepared by: Marielle L. Reynoso
 W/N a trustee (Araneta) can
validly donate land pertaining to
the trusteeship?
 Rules/Laws

ART 736 (NCC) ART 2253 and 2255 (NCC)

Guardians and trustees cannot Prohibits retroactive operation on

donate the property entrusted to acts or events that took place
them under former laws
ANALYSIS
Facts of the Case
March 20, 1948 April 30, 1955

ANGELA S. TUASON A DEED OF DONATION THE DONATION WAS

DIED WAS EXECUTED APPROVED
A trust was established By Araneta in favor of the City of By the CFI of Rizal, over the
pursuant to her will, with J. Manila covering the lot opposition of Antonio Perez
Antonio Araneta  as trustee pertaining to the trusteeship
and Benigno, Angela and
Antonio Perez y Tuason as
beneficiaries
Clause:
FOURTH. ...The two legacies in favor of
my mentioned grandchildren will be
administered by my executor, J. Antonio
Araneta (and failing this, his brother
Salvador Araneta), with broad powers to
sell them and with his product acquire
other goods and with the right to charge
for his administration, reasonable fees.
Administrator shall be those of a trustee
with the broadest powers permitted by
law...
 ARGUMENTS

Araneta
(and the lower court)
Perez
The donation would be Does not deny the beneficial
beneficial to the trusteeship aspects, but still invalid
The lots would be converted into a residential Presents Art 736 of the NCC
subdivision, and the lot donated to the City of Manila
would be included among the areas covered by the
street lay-outs as required by law

The donation would save the trusteeship the amount

of the realty tax and relieve it from the duty of
maintaining the lot in usable condition as a street.
Let's consider... THERE BEING NOTHING IN THE OLD CIVIL CODE WHICH

1
PROHIBITS A TRUSTEE FROM DONATING PROPERTIES
UNDER TRUSTEESHIP

THAT THE POWERS GIVEN TO ARANETA AS TRUSTEE

2
ARE OF A PLENARY CHARACTER, SUBJECT ONLY TO
THE LIMITATION THAT THEY SHOULD BE PERMISSIBLE
UNDER THE LAW

3
THAT WHEN ANGELA S. TUASON CONFERRED SUCH
POWERS, SHE MUST HAVE HAD IN MIND THE LAW
THAT WAS IN FORCE AT THE TIME
The New Civil
Code took
effect on
August 30,
4 THAT AFTER ALL A TRUST IS CREATED FOR THE
BENEFIT OF THE CESTUIS QUE TRUST AND THAT IN
THIS PARTICULAR CASE THE ACTS OF THE TRUSTEE
1950 ARE SUBJECT TO THE SUPERVISION OF THE COURT
Conclusion
YES, AS THE LAW DOES
NOT PROHIBIT SUCH
DONATION

THE NCC, IN PROHIBITING A TRUSTEE FROM DONATING PROPERTIES ENTRUSTED TO HIM

DOES SO FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE TRUST BENEFICIARIES
EVIDENTLY CONTEMPLATES GIFTS OF PURE BENEFICENCE, THAT IS, THOSE WHICH ARE
SUPPORTED BY NO OTHER CAUSE THAN THE LIBERALITY OF THE DONOR.

BUT WHEN THE DONATION, AS IN THE PRESENT INSTANCE, IS CLEARLY IN THEIR INTEREST,
TO SAY IT CANNOT BE DONE WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE
LAW.