The Provincial Court of Girona has proved the right, although partially to a disinherited child in front of his sister, the only heiress of his father, recognizing him 159,435.04 euros as legitimate, that is, the minimum. The parent had justified disinheritance in the absence of family relationship, but the court concludes that said distancing was the responsibility of both, which invalidates the alleged cause and forces the heiress to pay the minimum part of the inheritance that by law corresponds to the child.
As explained by the SAP GI 2025 judgment of the Provincial Court of Girona, it all began with the death of Fidel on March 29, 2020. In his 2018 testament he had appointed his daughter Flor as a single heiress and had disinherited his son Romeo, justifying the decision in the “manifest and continuous absence of family relationship” with him.
You may be interested
Joaquín Serrano, Notary: “If you leave your partner the life usufruct of the house can live there until he dies, without anyone being able to throw it. Not even your children”
A man dies leaving a debt of 35,941.22 euros and CaixaBank claims his children, who must respond with the house they received in inheritance
The problem is that, for years, the father had disregarded the maintenance and care of his son, even ceasing to pay him food when he turned 18, which caused a lawsuit to originate in 1990. To this were added serious mental health problems that Romeo dragged from a young age, in front of those that the parent disregarded.
When he learned that he had been disinherited and that, in addition, there had been simulated sale of farms and social participations in favor of his sister and a legatee (Luis Andrés), Romeo decided to go to court claiming their legitimate, that is, the minimum part that corresponded to the inheritance that the law reserves to the children even if the testator tries to exclude them.
Unfair disinheritance
The Provincial Court of Girona analyzed whether the lack of relationship was attributable only to the child, as required by article 451-17 of the Civil Code of Catalonia, which contemplates the disinheritance only if the family rupture is exclusively due to the legitimary.
The court reviewed family history and concluded that there was shared responsibility: “The absence of family relationship between the deceased and the actor was attributable to both and not only this one, so the disinheritance was unfair.” In this way, Romeo recovered his status as legitimary and the right to perceive his share of the legitimate.
To make this decision, the court was mainly based on the Civil Code of Catalonia, and specifically, in article 451-17, which allows disinheritance only if the absence of family relationship is “exclusively attributable to the legitimary”; Article 451-20, which imposes on the heir the burden of proving the existence of the cause of disinheritance; and article 451-21, which declares disinheritance unfair when said case is not accredited, which led the court to recognize the right of the child to perceive its legitimate.
In addition, the audience corrected the assessment of the company they had, setting its value at 1,200,521.39 euros by the cash flow method, and confirmed the nullity of several simulated sale of real estate and participations.
Thus, the key to this sentence was to determine if the family breakup could only be attributed to the child. The Chamber understood that no, because the father had contributed to the distancing from childhood by breaching his obligations and disregarding his health. “You cannot penalize a child for not having a willingness to relate to a parent who previously disregarded him,” explains the audience.
For all the explained, the Provincial Court determines that Romeo is entitled to 159,435.04 euros as legitimate, lowering the figure set in the first instance (207,841.31 euros), but having the right to receive the minimum amount of inheritance.