Simulation in Contracts and Indirect Donations: Commentary on the Judgment of Cass. Civ., Ord. n. 19230/2024

The recent order of the Supreme Court of Cassation, n. 19230 of 2024, offers significant insights for understanding the legal dynamics regarding indirect donations and actions for reduction and collocation in the context of inheritances. The ruling clarifies important differences between legal actions and the rights of heirs, highlighting the challenges that may arise in the division of inherited assets.

The Expectations of the Parties and the Role of the Court

In the case examined, the plaintiffs A.A. and B.B. contested the decision of the Court of Appeal of Florence, which had rejected their request for reduction and collocation of the donations made by the deceased E.E. in favor of his sister C.C. The Court of Appeal justified its decision by referring to the difference between the action for reduction and that of collocation, emphasizing that the evidence presented did not justify the action for reduction. This distinction is crucial, as it implies that the legitimate heir must prove the infringement of their legitimate share in order to take action for reduction.

Case law has progressively revised its stance regarding the burden of proof in cases of action for reduction, simplifying the need for specific deductions.

Indirect Donations and Collocation: A Necessary Deep Dive

The Court clarified that an indirect donation occurs when an asset is purchased with funds provided by the donor but titled in the name of a beneficiary. In this case, the request for collocation, which involves contributing what was received during the donor's lifetime to the estate, must be considered even in the absence of a formal action for reduction. The ruling emphasizes that proof of indirect donation can also be provided through presumptions and is not subject to the evidentiary limitations provided for simulated transactions.

  • The differences between the action for reduction and collocation are fundamental for managing inheritances.
  • Collocation can occur by attribution, retaining ownership of the asset in the donee.
  • The legitimate heir has the right to the reinstatement of their legitimate share, even in the case of indirect donations.

Conclusions on the Judgment and Legal Implications

The ruling Cass. n. 19230/2024 represents an important evolution in case law regarding inheritances and donations. It clarifies that the legitimate heir has the right to assert their claims both through the action for reduction and through the collocation of donations, with the related consequences on the division of inherited assets. This approach aims to ensure greater equity among heirs, preventing indirect donations from compromising the right to the legitimate share.

Bianucci Law Firm