Revocation action for donation – Can the donation be considered as a transfer for consideration if the donor subsequently receives loans from the donor?
I received a house in donation from the spouse (debtor) three years before the citation for revocation, after about three months from the donation I paid the spouse numerous loans (never returned) by wire transfers with a causal loan, we could consider the aforementioned donation as an act for consideration, considering all the loans I gave to the spouse after the donation.
The amount of the loans exceeds the value of the property donated.
Absolutely not: more than the comparison between the date of the deed of gift and that of the citation for revocatory action by the creditor, the date of the onset of the credit is worth.
If the claim arises before the deed of gift, the creditor has a very good chance of seeing
With reference to my previous question on the revocation, I specify that the debt arose after three years from the deed of donation: November 2013 donation of debt arisen in December 2016. Thanks, Maria
In November 2018 the statute of limitations would have been taken and the creditor would no longer have been able to initiate the revocatory action for the transfer of ownership of the property from a debtor spouse to a non-debtor spouse.
Moreover, Article 2901 of the Civil Code considers the revocatory action admissible if the debtor knows the prejudice that the act causes the creditor’s reasons or, since it is a deed prior to the credit , if the deed is maliciously preordained in order to jeopardize the fulfillment of any coercive tax collection.
Another condition for the admissibility of the revocatory action also against an offense (and not for a donation) is that the third (in this case the spouse not debtor) was aware of the injury and, in the case of an act prior to the credit, participated in the malicious preordination.
I would also like to add that after the donation of property the donor signed a surety in favor of the donor putting at risk not only the property donated but also all the rest of his assets, it may be sufficient to make the judge of the revocatoria understand that there was dolorous preordination.
I also specify that the revocatory action was taken by another creditor and that the debt arose after three years from the donation.
One understands with this discussion because we ask that the question be framed in a clear and intelligible context and the problem sufficiently described and detailed. The flow loses its clarity and readability if the elements are exposed to.