The Provincial Court of Almería has confirmed the sentence of one year in prison and the payment of total compensation of 22,993 euros to a woman who, after the death of her partner, occupied the deceased’s home without authorization, emptied the property and caused serious material and emotional damage to the deceased’s daughter, her sole heir. He considers that his conduct represented a misappropriation of property and a deliberate impairment of the family patrimony, which caused moral damage to the daughter by depriving her of her father’s memories and personal objects.
According to the ruling of June 23, 2025, the woman had a romantic relationship with the deceased and they lived intermittently in the home. After her death, he refused to give the keys to his daughter, and kept the kitchen furniture, the sink, the countertop and other belongings, valued at more than 2,900 euros. In addition, he demolished the chimney and the family coat of arms, tore off the doors of the house, and dismantled the electrical installation and the bathroom.
You may be interested
An heiress is evicted by her brothers from the family house that she had occupied without permission: she received rent, did construction work and used it as her own without being accountable to the rest.
Some heirs put a wall on the terrace of the inherited house so that other relatives do not use it and justice forces them to tear it down and return it to its original state because it is not part of the inheritance
The Criminal Court No. 4 of Almería convicted her of a crime of misappropriation, understanding that she had appropriated other people’s property after the death of her partner and without having any title.
He caused serious moral damage to the heiress by leaving her without the memories of her father
The Provincial Court of Almería confirmed this sentence, considering that the woman intentionally seized the assets after the death of her partner, despite not having any right over them or the home. He stressed that there was no stable relationship or continued cohabitation that justified his permanence or the use of the assets, and that he did not prove that he had made reforms or improvements that could explain his actions.
He also highlighted that after the death, he prevented the daughter from accessing the house, taking advantage of it to take the deceased’s objects and dismantle the house, something that was confirmed by witnesses and experts.
The Court noted that these events caused especially serious moral damage to the daughter, having been deprived of the memories of her father. In this sense, the application of article 109 of the Penal Code, which recognizes the reparation of moral damage along with material damage, even without the need for an expert opinion, when the circumstances justify it, supported the compensation of 20,000 euros for this concept, added to the value of the missing objects.
For all these reasons, the woman must comply with the sentence initially established by the court. However, the sentence was not final and could be appealed in cassation before the Supreme Court.