Short answer. No. Article 764 of the Civil Code states that when a donee fails to comply with the conditions of a donation, the property must be returned to the donor and any alienations or mortgages the donee made on that property are void. The transfer to the third person does not block your right to revoke.
What the law says
the alienations made by the donee and the mortgages imposed thereon by him being void, with the limitations established, with regard to third persons, by the Mortgage Law and the Land Registration laws.
Civil Code, Article 764 — Revocation For Non-Compliance With Conditions. Read the full provision →
The core rule: alienations during non-compliance are void
Article 764 gives the donor the right to revoke a donation when the donee fails to comply with the conditions attached to it. Crucially, the article goes further: when revocation is warranted, "the alienations made by the donee and the mortgages imposed thereon by him being void." This means that a donee who transfers the property to a third party after breaching the condition does not thereby secure that third party's title. The transfer is legally void in relation to the donor's revocation claim.
The four-year prescriptive period
Your right to sue for revocation is not unlimited. Article 764 states the action "shall prescribe after four years from the noncompliance with the condition." This means you must act within four years from the date the donee failed to comply with the condition — not from the date you discovered the transfer. If you are already close to or past that window, speak to a lawyer immediately. Time is the most common reason revocation actions fail.
Third-party buyers: the registered title complication
Article 764's rule that alienations are void applies subject to the limitations of the Mortgage Law and the Land Registration laws. In practical terms, this means that a buyer who acquired the property in good faith and for value, and who registered the title without notice of the donor's claim, may be protected under the Torrens system. The void-alienation rule is strongest when the third party had notice of the conditioned donation or when the condition was annotated on the title. If it was not, your ability to recover the land itself — rather than damages from the donee — may depend on the specific circumstances of that buyer's registration.
Heirs on both sides can pursue or be sued
Article 764 also provides that the revocation action "may be transmitted to the heirs of the donor, and may be exercised against the donee's heirs." If you die before the action is completed, your heirs can continue it. Equally, if the donee dies, the action runs against that donee's estate or heirs. This prevents the donee from extinguishing the donor's right simply by transferring the property and then dying.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Edgardo D. Dolar vs. Barangay Lublub (Now P.D. Monfort North) of the Municipality of Dumangas, herein represented by Its Punong Barangay, et al, G.R. No. 152663, November 18, 2005 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Camarines Sur Teachers and Employees Association, Inc., represented by its President, Dr. Antonio A, G.R. No. 199666, October 7, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Socorro T. Clemente, as substituted by Salvador T. Clemente vs. Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 220008, February 20, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- The Secretary of Education vs. Heirs of Rufino Dulay, Sr., et al, G.R. No. 164748, January 27, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →