Spain’s highest court has put an end to the debate over whether a passive stance by an heir in legal proceedings can be considered consent to accept an inheritance. In its decision dated September 25, 2025, the court made it clear: silence in response to a legal claim does not amount to accepting the inheritance.
The case began with a lawsuit filed by a widow. She demanded that the children of her late husband, named in the will as heirs, pay off debts related to the estate. The children countered that they had not accepted the inheritance and therefore could not be held liable for its obligations. Nevertheless, a lower court in Granada ruled otherwise. The judge decided that since the heirs were aware of the lawsuit and had not officially renounced the inheritance, their inaction should be interpreted as tacit agreement. Essentially, their passivity was equated with having actively accepted the inheritance.
The Supreme Court completely rejected this reasoning. The judges emphasized that until heirs officially accept an inheritance, it remains in a status known as ‘herencia yacente’—meaning it has no legal owner. Acceptance of an inheritance is a deliberate act that must be made clearly and unequivocally, as required by the Civil Code. Merely participating in legal proceedings or responding to a lawsuit is not enough to be considered an acceptance of inheritance. Defending one’s interests in court is reasonable legal conduct, not an action that makes someone an heir.
The key point in the ruling was the distinction between a court summons and a notarial request. Since the 2015 reform, only a notary has the authority to officially require a potential heir to decide whether they will accept or renounce the inheritance. It is the notary who warns about the consequences of remaining silent. If the heir, after receiving such notification, does not respond within 30 days, the inheritance is considered accepted ‘purely and simply.’ As the court emphasized, a judicial summons cannot substitute this procedure. Therefore, silence in court does not have any legal consequences in terms of accepting an inheritance.
So, when is an inheritance considered accepted by default? The Civil Code defines this as performing actions that only an owner could take. For example, selling, renting out, or letting someone use the inherited apartment, receiving dividends from the deceased’s shares, or managing their bank accounts. Such steps, even if taken unknowingly, have irreversible effects. Meanwhile, actions taken to preserve the property, such as paying insurance or making minor repairs, are not regarded as acceptance.
The consequences of unknowingly accepting an inheritance can be disastrous. If it is accepted “purely and simply,” the heir becomes liable for all the deceased’s debts, not only with the inherited assets but also with their own personal property. If the debts exceed the value of the assets, creditors can recover the difference from the heir. That is why, before taking any action with the deceased’s property, it is essential to carefully examine their financial situation. If there is any doubt about outstanding debts, the safest option is to accept the inheritance “under benefit of inventory.” This option limits the heir’s liability to the value of the assets received and protects their personal property from creditors’ claims.
