Estate: housed for free by his father, he is asked for 180,000 euros by his brothers and sisters

Can housing your adult child almost for free be considered a gift to be taken into account when inheriting from the parents? The Court of Cassation answers this question in a recent decision.

• 
  

  To safeguard
  

  
  
  

  Saved
  

If there is a moment of sacred union between brothers and sisters, it is when one of the parents dies. In theory. The “S” siblings did not stick together: when their father, HS, died on April 25, 2007, four of his children found nothing other than to blame the fifth, W ., to have received from dad a gift of several tens of thousands of euroswhich they now wish to see shared between them all. A Ferrari? No, the child W. was housed in the father’s apartment at a price lower than the average market rent, from November 1, 2003 to October 31, 2015. A financial advantage that his four brothers and sisters quantified very precisely at 182,939.64 euros over this dozen years. They wanted to see this advantage integrated into their father’s estate, in order to obtain their share of this sum. But should this be considered as a gift made by Mr. S. to his son W. and, as such, integrated into the estate with a view to being shared with the four other offspring?

Yes, according to a judgment rendered on May 22, 2022 by the Versailles Court of Appeal, seized by W’s four brothers and sisters. The court considered that the occupation of the father’s property by his son, in exchange for a rent below the market price, constituted a indirect donation. Indeed, if the father had not housed his son cheaply in this apartment, he could have rented it to someone else at the market rate and, thus, enriched himself. By refraining from putting this property on the rental market, the father acted “with the desire to gratify his son, thus characterizing a liberal intention”estimates the Versailles Court of Appeal. However, considered as an advance on the inheritance, the indirect donation must be taken into account in it in order to be shared with the other descendants of the deceased.

Housing your child cheaply, a gift, really?

Stunned at having to contribute more than 180,000 euros as part of his father’s estate in order to share this sum with his brothers and sisters, the son W. provided himself with cassation. It was a good thing for him: in a decision of June 12, 2024, the Court of Cassation overturned and annulled the judgment of the Versailles Court of Appeal. For the highest court of the judiciary, two conditions must be met for this sum to be duly claimed by the successors: that it is a “gift” made by one of the parents to their children and that this gesture has “impoverished” the donor.

In the case of Mr. S., the second condition is well met. There is indeed impoverishment since he rented his property to his son at a price lower than the market rent. But is it really a gift? By housing his son with meager income under attractive financial conditions, didn’t his father simply provide him with essential help ? In the absence of proof, there is no gift and nothing can be claimed from W., ruled the Court of Cassation. W.’s four brothers and sisters must therefore give up the approximately 180,000 euros in question.