This is at the heart of the latest ultimate Court ruling on the support of married children by parents. But besides disputes, whether they were donations to the kid or to his spouse.
To live together.
This issue arose in a case for the division of the property of the matrimony union in which the territory and territory Courts of Radom did not divide the wife's position that her husband's father's donation should be included in the property of the spouses and consequently increase her share of the division.
These donations were made during the course of their matrimony by the parents of the man, to pay off the debt that they had taken together to acquisition the apartment. However, donations were not made in writing or in the form of a notarial act.
In a cassation complaint to the SN, the female argued that applying the rules of life experience and taking into account the cognition of the donors that these amounts would be utilized entirely for early repayment of the joint debt of the spouses contracted for their joint residence, it could be concluded that at the date of the donations made, the husband's parents wanted to financially assist both spouses as a family, i.e. both their boy and their daughter-in-law, in the faster repayment of their joint debt or the acquisition of the apartment. Thus, specified donations can be regarded as being made to a common property.
Will decide.
The ultimate Court did not divide this position. He besides referred to Article 33(2) of the household Code, which states that each spouse's individual property includes, inter alia, donations, unless the donor has decided otherwise. The SN indicated that it was the will of the donor alternatively than the intent of the donation that determines whether the donation enters a separate or shared property. The usage of a donation for the housing purposes of the spouses, including the repayment of a joint debt for the acquisition of the property, does not so find that a donation made to 1 of the spouses by his parents was to enter the property of the joint spouses.
Judge Roman Trzaskowski recalled in the explanatory memorandum that the donations were oral, so erstwhile interpreting the declarations of will to donate, the territory and territory courts took into account the circumstances accompanying the statements and statements of the donors. They determined that the applicant’s parents had promised their boy before the wedding that they would aid him finance the acquisition of the apartment. They made the first of their donations before his marriage.
Only the reason for submitting these donations to the taxation office, though his wife did so in the case of a donation made by her father. The donations made by the applicant's parents were made to his account, established before the wedding, and the donors did not know that the applicant had authorised his wife to do so. In addition, the applicant's parents besides made donations to their daughter (the applicant's sister), besides for her individual property.
– This is all in support of the fact that the verdict, according to which donations made the individual assets of the son, alternatively than the joint spouses, apt – stated justice Trzaskowski.
File number: I CSK 2673/24
lawyer Anisa Gnacikowska
The conclusion of this case is that, in order to avoid doubts as to the beneficiaries of the donation and the lengthy and complicated procedure, more serious donations to children who are married should be formalised. If it is not possible to conclude a written contract, at least a donation must be made to the account of the child, where the transfer title will say that it is simply a donation to the son. Understatements may complicate the possible proceedings concerning the division of children's marital property, as well as the inheritance of parents, if there are respective heirs.
