Category Territorial cession
Sub-Category Limbo
Question In the 1952 treaty, Japan ceded Taiwan, but did not designate a "receiving country." Has such a situation ever occurred before?
Answer Yes, a similar situation was seen in the 1899 Spanish American Peace Treaty, with regard to the situation of Cuba.

A definition of “cession” is useful for reference –

cede: (1) to renounce possession of, especially by treaty, (2) to transfer control of or sovereignty over specific property or territory, especially by treaty, (3) to relinquish and/or give up something such as land, rights, or power, (4) [noun] cession

Note: According to the dictionary definition of cede as given above, there is no strict requirement that a "receiving country" be designated in order to complete the act of ceding, or making a cession.

When territory is ceded without the specification of a "receiving country" it may simply be called a limbo cession.

A chart which compares the peace treaty specifications for Cuba and Taiwan is given below –

Item Treaty of Paris specifications for Cuba SFPT specifications for Taiwan
United States is the (principal) occupying power Article 1 Article 23(a)
Original "owner" did indeed cede the territory Article 1 Article 2(b)
No "receiving country" was specified  (i.e. "limbo cession") Article 1 Article 2(b)
USMG has disposition rights over the territory Article 1 Article 4(b)
Military government is present, and military occupation is a reality Article 1 Article 4(b) and the Hague Conventions (1907)
USMG jurisdiction continues past the date when the peace treaty comes into effect Article 1, and the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Cross v. Harrison (1853) Article 4(b), Article 23(a), and the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Cross v. Harrison (1853)

Further References and Links
Taiwan's Legal Status: Taiwan's Legal Status: An Overview of the San Francisco Peace Treaty

Areas Conquered by U.S. Military Forces and therefore under USMG Jurisdiction -- with later "new disposition" by peace treaty