Simulation in Contracts and Reduction of Donations: Supreme Court No. 19010/2024

The recent order of the Supreme Court No. 19010 dated July 11, 2024, provides important insights into the complex matter of donations and simulation in contracts. In particular, the decision focuses on the protection of the rights of omitted heirs, clarifying certain aspects related to the acceptance of inheritance and the possibility of acting for the reduction of donations.

The Case and the Decision of the Court of Appeal

In this case, B.B., C.C., D.D., and E.E., legitimate heirs of F.F., contested the validity of sales agreements made by the deceased in favor of the grandson A.A., arguing that these were actually disguised donations. The Court of Appeal of Caltanissetta, accepting the appeal, had declared the simulation of the acts and ordered the reduction of the donations. However, A.A. opposed this, claiming the inadmissibility of the reduction action due to the plaintiffs' failure to accept the inheritance with the benefit of inventory.

The Court reiterated that the omitted heir can exercise the reduction action without having to accept the inheritance with the benefit of inventory, provided that they prove to have been completely omitted.

The Legal Principles Established by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court accepted the first ground of appeal, stating that the obligation to accept the inheritance with the benefit of inventory does not apply to totally omitted heirs. In particular, the Court referred to previous case law establishing that:

  • The omitted heir acquires succession rights only after having pursued the actions of reduction or annulment of the will.
  • Complete omission can occur both in testamentary succession and in intestate succession.
  • It is possible for omitted heirs to propose actions of simulation without the necessity of accepting the inheritance with the benefit of inventory.

The Court also emphasized that, to act for reduction, the plaintiffs would need to demonstrate their condition of omission, but it was not necessary for them to prove the existence of assets in the estate.

Conclusions

Supreme Court ruling No. 19010/2024 represents an important step forward in the protection of the rights of omitted heirs, clarifying that the simulation of acts disguising donations can be contested even without the acceptance of the inheritance with the benefit of inventory. This decision offers significant protection to those in situations of omission, ensuring the possibility of reinstating the legitimate share without onerous procedural conditions. However, it remains essential that the omitted heirs demonstrate their position of omission in order to assert their rights.

Bianucci Law Firm