BUHAY DE ROMA vs. CA the clear language of Article 1062.

No implied prohibition to collate; it must be express and

equivocal Absent such a clear indication of that intention, we apply not the
exception but the rule, which is categorical enough.
The fact that a donation is irrevocable does not necessarily exempt
the donated properties from collation as required under Art. 1061 of
the Civil Code. Given the precise language of the deed of donation,
the decedent-donor would have included an express prohibition to
collate, if that had been the donor’s intention.
FACTS:
The decedent, Candelaria de Roma had 2 legally adopted daughters,
Buhay and Rosalinda

She died intestate and Buhay was appointed administrator and in due
time, filed an inventory of the estate. This was opposed by Rosalinda
because 7 parcels of coconut land earlier donated by Candelaria to
Buhay had not been included.

Rosalinda argues that the lands are subject to collation.

Buhay claims she has no obligation to collate because the decedent

prohibited such collation and the donation was not officious.

RTC: ruled in favour of Buhay

 decedent expressly prohibited collation in the donation and
 that it did not impair the legitimes of the adopted daughters
s it could be accommodated and imputed to the free
portion of Candelaria's estate.

CA: REVERSED the decision; ordered the collation and equal

division of the estate between Buhay and Rosalinda;
 Emphasized the requirement of an express prohibition to
exempt a donation from collation

ISSUE: WON Donated Properties are Subject to Collation

RULING:
Yes. There is nothing in the deed of donation that expressly
prohibited collation of the donated properties.

In this case, the phrase “sa pamamagitan ng pagbibigay na di na

mababawing muli” merely described the donation as
“irrevocable” and should not be construed as an express
prohibition against collation.

Candelaria would have included therein an express prohibition to

collate if that had been her intention.

The Court stated that the fact that a donation is irrevocable does
not exempt it from the collation required under Article 1061.

There can be no implied prohibition even if the properties donated

were imputable to the free portion of the estate. The intention to
exempt from collation should be expressed plainly and
unequivocally.
Article 1061. Every compulsory heir, who succeeds with other
compulsory heirs, must bring into the mass of the estate any
property or right which he may have received from the decedent
during the lifetime of the latter, by way of donation, or any other
gratuitous title, in order that it may be computed in the
determination of the legitime of each heir, and in the account of the
partition

Article 1062. Collation shall not take place among compulsory

heirs if the donor should have so expressly provided, or if the
donor should repudiate the inheritance, unless the donation should
be reduced as inofficious.

Anything less than such express prohibition will not suffice under