Short answer. The donation is void. Article 745 requires the donee to accept personally, or through someone holding either a special power for that specific purpose or a general and sufficient power; without acceptance made in one of those ways, the donation does not take effect at all.
What the law says
The donee must accept the donation personally, or through an authorized person with a special power for the purpose, or with a general and sufficient power; otherwise, the donation shall be void.
Civil Code, Article 745 — Acceptance Must Be Personal Or By Special Power. Read the full provision →
Three valid ways to accept
Article 745 gives the donee three routes to a valid acceptance: personally, or through an authorized person with a special power for the purpose, or with a general and sufficient power. Any one of these three is enough — the donee does not need to accept in person if he has properly authorized someone else to do it, whether through a power drawn up specifically for this donation or a broader power sufficient to cover it.
The consequence of failing all three: nullity, not a curable defect
If none of the three ways is satisfied, Article 745 does not describe a merely defective or delayed donation — it says the donation shall be void. Void means the donation produces no legal effect from the start, as though it never validly existed, rather than something the donee could still ratify or fix later on his own initiative after the fact.
Why the acceptance requirement exists at all
A donation is a contract, and like other contracts it needs the assent of both parties to exist — the donor's act of giving is not, by itself, enough to transfer ownership. Requiring the donee's acceptance, made personally or through someone properly empowered to do it, is what completes that mutual assent. An unaccepted donation leaves the donor's offer unmatched, which is exactly the gap Article 745 addresses by voiding the transaction outright.
What a proper authorization actually needs to show
Because an agent can accept on the donee's behalf, the practical question in these situations often comes down to whether the person who accepted actually held the kind of power Article 745 requires — a special power specifically covering this donation, or a general power broad and sufficient enough to reach it. An agent acting without either kind of authorization has not accepted in a way the article recognizes, which puts the donation back in the same void position as if no one had accepted at all.
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.
- The Missionary Sisters of Our Lady of Fatima (Peach Sisters of Laguna), represented by Rev. Mother Ma. Concepcion R. Realon, et al. vs. Amando V. Alzona, et al, G.R. No. 224307, August 6, 2018 — read the decision on LawPhil →