The Provincial Court of Valladolid has partially estimated the demand of a child who, after the death of his mother, claimed that donations made in life to his brother and his niece harmed the legitimate part of the inheritance that corresponded to him as heir apparent. Although the testament was clear when appointing his brother universal, justice considers that the remaining heritage was not enough to cover that minimum right, so he has ordered to reduce part of the donations made to his brother and cancel the legacy to the niece.
According to the Judgment of June 2025, the mother’s will, left one of her children as a heir and the other granted her only her legitimate strict. In addition, in life, he had donated to his heir son several farms, all of them as Donations “Non -collationable”that is, they should not join the inventory to distribute the inheritance. Also, he had bequeathed to his granddaughter (daughter of the heir) two farms worth more than 36,000 euros.
You may be interested
A heiress forced to pay the succession tax of all the money of a shared account he inherited, and not for 50% as he intended
An expert inherit
The son who was not appointed heir resorted to the cast, considering that with the assets in the inheritance his legitimate could not be charged. He claimed that the value of donations should be taken into account and that the legacy to his niece should also be annulled, since he compromised the fair distribution of what corresponded by law.
“The forced heir must perceive the full amount of his legitimate, although the legacy must be reduced and, where appropriate, donations made in life”
The Court of First Instance No. 5 of Valladolid dismissed the lawsuit, considering both donations and the will. He understood that the mother’s will was respectful of the law and that the heir was not obliged to collapse the assets received, since it had been expressly arranged.
However, after resorting to the sentence, although the Provincial Court of Valladolid, confirmed that the will was valid, considered that the heritage that remained in the inheritance was not enough to cover the 69,398.78 euros that corresponded to the other child as a strict legitimate.
For the audience, the legacy in favor of the granddaughter should be revoked, since its value, 36,350.47 euros, prevents attending the right of the legitimary. This amount must, therefore, be allocated to the payment of the legitimate, as required by article 817 of the Civil Code, which establishes the preference of the legitimate on the legacies.
In addition, according to the sentence, if after revoking it, due amount will not be reached, the non -collationable donations made in life to the heir son should be reduced, in accordance with articles 636, 654, 656 and 820 of the Civil Code. In the words of the audience, “the forced heir must perceive the full amount of his legitimate, although the legacy must be reduced and, where appropriate, donations made in life.”
Tas revoke the legacy of the niece, still subtracted 25,228.85 euros legitimate. That amount, indicated the sentence, which should be paid by the heir to the other child, whether in cash or charged to the value of donated goods. In the case of not doing so, we could proceed to the sale in auction from the donated goods to cover the difference.
In summary, the audience did not annul the will or considered donations invalid, but clarified that they cannot be done at the cost of harming the right of the legitimary. Therefore, although one of the children inherited exclusively and received important donations, the other should receive at least what the law guarantees.
Despite this, the sentence issued was not firm and could be appealed before the Supreme Court.