The Court of First Instance No. 1 of Oviedo, has determined that the 26,280.19 euros donated by the parents to their daughters are not part of the GANIAL HERITAGE With her husband. He considers that, having given the daughter the money before they buy her home, and there is no proof that the donation also became the husband, should be described as a proprietary good of the heiress and join with that character to the partitional notebook.
According to the sentence of May 2025, the conflict arose because one of the brothers defended that, being the beneficiary married in a marriage regime, the amount should be understood donated to both spouses, which would alter the distribution of the inheritance. The heiress and the counter-party maintained that the money was delivered before the purchase of the property and that there was no proof of an intention to also benefit the son-in-law.
You may be interested
Inherits in Madrid and the Inheritance Tax they charge 228,743 euros for the furniture without any housing: Justice orders to remake the liquidation by the domestic trousseau
Irene Gramage, expert lawyer in inheritances: when disinhering a child “it is recommended that all precautions be taken so that the will cannot be challenged”
This brother challenged the partition notebook prepared by the accountant-party, and although in the trial both parties accepted the rest of the dividing operations, they did not do so about these 26,280.19 euros.
The donation is not presumed gain
The Court of First Instance No. 1 of Oviedo, considers that such donation is not presumed as a gain good. It bases its decision on article 1346.2 of the Civil Code, which establishes that they have a private character “the assets and rights acquired free of charge”, as is the case with donations.
Likewise, it cites article 1353, which establishes that if the donation is made to only one of the spouses, the good will be private of that spouse, unless the donor’s will be proven to favor both.
It also recalls the doctrine of the Supreme Court that warns that the fact that a marriage is married under marriage regime does not imply that donations made to one of the spouses are automatically extended to the other, and that the mood of liberality towards the spouse of the son or daughter “is not presumed.”
In this case, the Court emphasizes that there is no document or evidence that proves that parents would like to donate the money to the son -in -law, nor that the delivery was made to both “without attribution of quotas.” In literal words of the sentence:
“There is no point that the transfer of 26,280.19 euros had as recipients both spouses, nor that it would be carried out with the intention of attributing joint ownership, so it must be described as a privative good of the daughter.”
In addition, it emphasizes that the transfer was made before the purchase of the house and without formal linking to that acquisition, so it should not be presumed to be part of the gain assets.
It concludes, therefore, that the donated amount maintains its private character and that it must be incorporated into the partition notebook with that value for collation purposes, because it comes from a donation made by the parents, and the collation is mandatory among forced heirs except express dispensation.
Despite this, the ruling was not firm and could be appealed before the Provincial Court of Asturias.