Abellana vs Ponce

Implied trust FELOMINA ABELLANA vs. SPOUSES ROMEO PONCE and LUCILA PONCE and the REGISTER OF DEEDS of BUTUAN CITY

G.R. No. 160488

September 3, 2004

YNARES-SANTIAGO,  J.:

FACTS: Felomina Felomina Abellana is the aunt of respondent Lucila Ponce; on 15 Jul 1!"1# Felomina bou$ht a parcel of a$ricultural land %hich she intended to $i&e to her niece# Lucila' (ecause of this# the deed of sale sho%ed that it %as Lucila %ho bou$ht the land' )o%e&er# Felomina remained in possession and de&eloped the same land and continued pain$ real propert ta*es relati&e to it' +ean%hile the relationship of the aunt and niece turned sour# as the latter e&en threatened Felomina phsicall and has become disrespectful' (ecause of this de&elopment# Felomina Felomina ,led a case for re&ocation of implied trust to reco&er the propert and its le$al title o&er it' -n Au$ust ."# .///# the trial court rendered a decision holdin$ that an implied trust e*isted bet%een Felomina and Lucila# such that the latter is mer merel el hold holdin in$ $ the the lot lot for for the the bene bene,t ,t of the the for former mer' It thus thus orde orderred the the con&eance of the sub0ect lot in fa&or of Felomina' -n appeal# the Court re&ersed the lo%er courts decision and said that Felomina %asnt able to pro&e an implied trust' ISS23: 4hether or not there %as implied trust in the case at bar' )3L: The Supreme Court ruled that it %as Felomina and not Lucila %ho trul o%ned the parcel parcel of land' The lone testimon testimon of Felomina Felomina is su6cient su6cient to pro&e her her clai claim m if it is credi credibl ble' e' The The pres presen enta tati tion on of the the brot brothe herr of the the sell seller er %ho %ho %itnessed %itnessed Felom Felomina ina as the real buer and paid the purchase purchase price# price# debun7s the claim of Lucila' In the instant case# a donation of an immo&able %as e8ected 9-T on a public instrument as reuired b la%' (ecause it %as onl an oral donation# it is thus &oid' 2nli7e ordinar contracts %hich are perfected b the concurrence of  the reuisites of consent# ob0ect and cause pursuant to Article 1?!' -ther%ise stated# absent the solemnit reuirements for &alidit# the mere intention of the parties does not $i&e $i&e rise rise to a cont contra ract ct'' )enc )ence# e# Felom elomin ina a can can stil stilll reco& eco&er er titl title e from from Lu Luci cila la'' ispensation of such solemnities %ould $i&e rise to anomalous situations %here the formali formalitie ties s of a donati donation on and a %ill %ill in donati donations ons inter vivos  vivos   # and donations mortis mortis causa causa respe respecti cti&el &el# # %ould %ould be done done a%a a%a %ith %ith %hen %hen the transfer transfer of the propert is made in fa&or of a child or one to %hom the donor stands in loco  pa  parentis ' Such a scenario is clearl repu$nant to the mandator nature of the la% on donation'