My sister was given a condo by our mother years before she died — does that get deducted from my sister's share of the estate now?

Collation is arithmetic, not confiscation

A compulsory heir 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. The phrase people misread is bring into the mass. Your sister does not hand the condo back and it is not sold and divided. Its value is added to the estate on paper so that everyone's share can be worked out on the true total, and it is then treated as part of what she has already been given. Nobody is dispossessed by collation.

Which value counts, and it is not today's

Article 1071 settles the question that causes most of the argument. The things donated are not brought to collation and partition; only their value at the time of the donation is, even if no valuation was made then. Their subsequent increase or deterioration, and even total loss or destruction whether accidental or culpable, are for the benefit, account and risk of the donee. So if the condo has tripled in value since your mother signed the deed, the gain is your sister's. If it had burned down uninsured, the loss would have been hers alone and the old value would still be collated.

How the adjustment is actually made

Under Article 1073 the donee's share of the estate is reduced by an amount equal to what she already received, and the co-heirs are to receive an equivalent, as far as possible, in property of the same nature, class and quality. Where that is impracticable, Article 1074 provides the fallback: for an immovable the co-heirs may take the equivalent in cash or securities, and failing those, enough of the other property is sold at public auction. Article 1075 adds that the fruits and interest of collated property belong to the estate only from the day the succession is opened.

Check whether it is collationable at all

Three things can take the condo out of the calculation, and each is a document rather than an argument. Article 1062 excuses collation where the donor expressly so provided, so the deed of donation is the first thing to read. Article 1063 provides that property left by will is not deemed subject to collation unless the testator provided otherwise, though the legitime must remain unimpaired. And Article 1067 exempts ordinary support, education, medical attendance and customary gifts. If the condo was actually sold to her for a real price, it was never a donation to begin with.

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.

• Amelia P. Arellano vs. Francisco Pascual and Miguel Pascual, G.R. No. 189776, December 15, 2010 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Heirs of Ernesto Morales, namely: Rosario M. Dangsalan, et al. vs. Astrid Morales Agustin, G.R. No. 224849, June 6, 2018 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Rolando Sanchez, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 108947, September 29, 1997 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Thelma N. Aranas vs. Teresita V. Mercado, et al, G.R. No. 156407, January 15, 2014 — read the decision on LawPhil →

Related provisions

• Civil Code, Article 1061 — Collation Defined
• Civil Code, Article 1062 — When Collation Is Excused
• Civil Code, Article 1071 — Value at the Time of Donation
• Civil Code, Article 1073 — Reducing the Donee's Share