Short answer. Generally no. Article 754 of the Civil Code provides that a donor is not obliged to warrant donated property, except when the donation is onerous — in which case the donor is liable for eviction up to the value of the burden imposed — or when the donor acted in bad faith.
What the law says
The latter, on the other hand, is not obliged to warrant the things donated, save when the donation is onerous, in which case the donor shall be liable for eviction to the concurrence of the burden. The donor shall also be liable for eviction or hidden defects in case of bad faith on his part.
Civil Code, Article 754 — Warranty And Eviction In Donations. Read the full provision →
The general rule: no warranty in a gratuitous donation
Article 754 of the Civil Code distinguishes a donation from a sale in a fundamental way: "The latter, on the other hand, is not obliged to warrant the things donated." A seller who receives consideration has an inherent interest in standing behind the title they transfer. A donor who gives something for free does not. The law therefore does not impose the same eviction warranty on donors that it places on sellers. If you received property as a pure gift and someone with a better title later evicts you, you generally cannot hold the donor liable the way you could a seller who sold you defective title.
What you get instead: subrogation to the donor's rights
Article 754 does give the donee something useful: "The donee is subrogated to all the rights and actions which in case of eviction would pertain to the donor." This means that if the property was subject to a claim the donor could have defended against, you step into the donor's shoes and can assert those same defenses or causes of action. If the donor had a counterclaim against the person asserting a better title, or had a right to recover from a prior owner who transferred defective title to the donor, those rights now belong to you as the donee.
The exception for onerous donations
An onerous donation is one where the donee is required to fulfill a charge or burden as a condition of receiving the gift — for example, donating a property on the condition that the donee pay the donor's debts up to a certain amount. In that case, Article 754 makes the donor liable for eviction, but only "to the concurrence of the burden." The donor's warranty exposure is limited to the value of what the donee was required to give or do. This is not a full seller-style warranty — it is capped at the value of the consideration the donee provided.
The exception for bad faith
The second exception under Article 754 applies when the donor acted in bad faith: "The donor shall also be liable for eviction or hidden defects in case of bad faith on his part." If the donor knew at the time of the donation that the title was defective, that the property was encumbered, or that a third person had a superior claim — and concealed this — the donor cannot hide behind the no-warranty rule. Bad faith opens full liability for both eviction and hidden defects. If you believe the donor gave you property knowing of a title problem and did not disclose it, that avenue of accountability is open to you.