Short answer. Yes, if he had no children or descendants when he made the donation. Article 760 allows revocation of a donation inter vivos made by a childless donor if the donor should have legitimate, legitimated, or illegitimate children after the donation, even if the child is born posthumously.
What the law says
Every donation inter vivos, made by a person having no children or descendants, legitimate or legitimated by subsequent marriage, or illegitimate, may be revoked or reduced as provided in the next article, by the happening of any of these events: (1) If the donor, after the donation, should have legitimate or legitimated or illegitimate children, even though they be posthumous
Civil Code, Article 760 — Donation Revoked by the Birth of a Child. Read the full provision →
The donation must have been made while the donor had no children
Article 760 applies specifically to every donation inter vivos, made by a person having no children or descendants, legitimate or legitimated by subsequent marriage, or illegitimate. So this ground for revocation only opens up if your father, at the time he made the donation, had no children or descendants at all. If your father already had another child before making that donation, this particular ground would not apply to the situation, since the article is addressed to a donor who gave the property away believing he had no children to consider.
Your birth after the donation fits the first ground squarely
The article lists as its first revocation event: if the donor, after the donation, should have legitimate or legitimated or illegitimate children, even though they be posthumous. Your birth after your father made the donation is exactly this situation. The law expressly includes children born after the donation, and even covers a posthumous child, one born after the donor's own death, which shows how broadly the provision protects children who were not around, or not yet born, when the donor gave the property away.
Why the law lets this new fact reopen a completed donation
A donor who has no children when making a substantial gift is making that decision without the responsibilities a child later imposes on his estate. The law recognizes that having a child afterward materially changes the donor's circumstances and the interests that ought to be weighed, since children have a strong claim on their parent's property. Revocation on this ground is not about anything wrong with the donation when it was made; it responds to a change in the donor's family situation that the donor could not have accounted for at the time.
What revocation actually depends on
Article 760 makes the birth of a child a ground the donor may invoke; it is the donor's decision whether to actually revoke or reduce the donation on this basis, referring to the next article for how that revocation or reduction proceeds. If your father is still living and no children existed at the time of the donation, he retains the option under this article to revoke or reduce the gift now that you have been born, rather than the donation remaining automatically unaffected by your birth.
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.
- Heirs of Cesario Velasquez, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 126996, February 15, 2000 — read the decision on LawPhil →