When a person donates land to another on the condition that a construction be made, the condition is akin to a resolutory (not suspensive) one. The non-compliance to the condition extinguishes the right to the donation, but it need not occur first in order for the donation to be effected and validated.
In 1939, the late Don Ramon Lopez was a member of the board of trustees of Central Philippine University when he executed a donation to the school, stating that the land must be for exclusive use of a medical college. 50 years later, The heirs of Ramon Lopez filed an action to annul the donation, stating the failure of the school to construct the medical college over the land. RTC ruled in favor of respondents, which the CA affirmed.
ISSUE: Whether there is a resolutory condition
The donation was an onerous one, where failure of the school to construct a medical college would give the heirs the power to revoke the donation, reverting the property back to the heirs of the donor. It is therefore a resolutory condition. Although, the period was not stated, and the courts should have fixed a period, in this case, 50 years has lapsed since the donation was executed, thus fixing a period would serve no purpose and the property must already be reverted back.
Davide considered the donation as "modal" where the obligations are unconditional, and the fulfillment, performance, existence or extinguishment is not dependent on any future and uncertain event. It is more accurate to say that the condition stated is not a resolutory condition, rather a obligation itself, being an onerous donation. Since this is an onerous donation, it has to comply with the rules on Oblicon, and therefore the courts should have fixed a period.