Suppose someone says, “This is a gift for you.” In ordinary circumstances the recipient can act on that communication. Requiring a complete judicial proof procedure before receiving each gift would make everyday dealings unworkable.
But communication of an offered gift is distinct from a court determination of disputed ownership. The offer may be treated as meaningful in routine dealings. If it becomes clear that the property is stolen or already subject to another established right, simply calling it a gift does not cancel the right.
The distinction allows practical ease without making ordinary transactional words conclusive against third parties.