In short
You may make a will in favour of a group without naming anyone in particular — “for the students of my town”, “for charitable works” — and entrust someone else with choosing. Article 1672 allows it in two cases. The first: the choice of the persons, as well as the distribution of the amounts, that the testator leaves in general to determined classes formed by an unlimited number of individuals. The second: the choice of the charitable acts or of the public or private establishments to which the goods must be adjudicated. And it brings a fallback almost nobody expects: when the testator does not designate the person to carry out the entrustment, it falls to the albacea and, failing that, to the contador partidor. That is, you may leave money for a purpose and name nobody to choose: the Code supplies who. Both figures have their own guide on this site. Now the limit, and it is a hard one. Article 1673 says the testator cannot leave to a third party’s discretion the subsistence of the institution nor the amount of the share of the inheritance destined for the previous article’s purposes. Read the two articles together and the line is clear: someone else may decide who gets it and how it is spread among them, but not whether the disposition exists nor how large it is. You fix the amount; the delegate only distributes it. A will saying “let my albacea decide whether it is worth giving the school something, and how much” is asking for what Article 1673 forbids.
What is it?
They are Articles 1672 and 1673 of the Civil Code of 2020: what the testator may entrust to another person about dividing the inheritance, who takes over if nobody is designated, and what may never be left to a third party’s discretion.
Who can do it?
Anyone wanting to make a will in favour of a group or charitable purposes without naming specific beneficiaries, and the albacea or contador partidor the entrustment falls to.
Requirements
- The testator may entrust a person with choosing the beneficiaries and distributing the amounts within classes formed by an unlimited number of individuals.Verified against the official source
- They may also entrust the choice of charitable acts or of the public or private establishments to which the goods are adjudicated.Verified against the official source
- If the testator designates nobody, the entrustment falls to the albacea and, failing that, to the contador partidor.Verified against the official source
- The testator cannot leave the institution’s subsistence to a third party’s discretion.Verified against the official source
- Nor may they leave them the amount of the share of the inheritance destined for those purposes.Verified against the official source
Documents you need
Cost
Step by step
Step 1: The choice may be entrusted
Article 1672(a): the choice of the persons and the distribution of the amounts within classes formed by an unlimited number of individuals.
Step 2: Also the choice of the charitable purpose
Article 1672(b): the charitable acts or the public or private establishments to which the goods must be adjudicated.
Step 3: If you name nobody, the Code names
The same article: the entrustment falls to the albacea and, failing that, to the contador partidor.
Step 4: What cannot be delegated
Article 1673: the institution’s subsistence. Nobody decides for you whether the disposition exists.
Step 5: Nor the size
The same article: nor the amount of the share of the inheritance destined for those purposes.
Step 6: The line, put shortly
Someone else chooses who and how it is spread among them. You fix whether it is given and how much.
Where to do it
The entrustment is written into the will; there is no procedure before any agency. These two articles set no deadline for the delegate to choose, do not say who supervises that choice, do not say whether the delegate may choose themselves, and do not say what happens if there is neither albacea nor contador partidor. None of those four gaps is filled here.
How long it takes
What to do if something goes wrong
If you want to leave money for a purpose and do not know to whom exactly, Article 1672 lets you entrust it to another person: they may choose the beneficiaries within the class you describe and spread the amounts among them, or choose the charitable acts or the public or private establishments the goods go to. If you name nobody to choose, nothing breaks: the same article gives it to the albacea and, failing that, to the contador partidor. What you cannot do is delegate the two substantive decisions. Article 1673 forbids leaving to a third party’s discretion the institution’s subsistence and the amount of the share. Translated: do not write “let my albacea see whether to give the school something, and how much”. Write how much, and leave them the who. If you are on the other side — the entrustment fell to you — the Code does not tell you how long you have to choose, nor who reviews your choice, nor whether you may choose yourself. This guide invents none of those rules. Nor does it define a class formed by an unlimited number of individuals, nor what counts as a charitable act. MiPRFácil does not represent anyone in court and gives no legal advice.
Common mistakes
- Believing each beneficiary must be named: Article 1672 allows leaving it to classes of unlimited number and entrusting the choice.
- Thinking the disposition falls without a designated delegate: it goes to the albacea and, failing that, the contador partidor.
- Letting the albacea decide whether to give at all: Article 1673 forbids delegating the institution’s subsistence.
- Letting them decide how much: the same article forbids delegating the amount of the share.
- Confusing distributing with fixing: Article 1672 delegates distributing the amounts, not their total.
- Assuming the delegate has a deadline to choose: these articles set none.
- Taking for granted someone reviews the choice: these articles do not say so.
- Expecting them to define a charitable act or a class of unlimited number: they do not.
Frequently asked questions
May I let someone else choose who inherits?
Article 1672 allows entrusting the choice of the persons and the distribution of the amounts within classes formed by an unlimited number of individuals.
And if I name nobody to choose?
The same article says the entrustment falls to the albacea and, failing that, to the contador partidor.
May I let someone else decide how much is given?
No. Article 1673 forbids leaving to a third party’s discretion the amount of the share of the inheritance destined for those purposes.
May the delegate decide that nothing is given after all?
No. Article 1673 forbids leaving the institution’s subsistence to a third party’s discretion.
Official sources
These are the government pages this guide is based on.
- Poder Judicial de Puerto Rico
Poder Judicial
bvirtualogp.pr.gov
Last verified
September 11, 2026
MiPRFácil is an independent informational website and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the Government of Puerto Rico or any government agency.
MiPRFácil does not submit applications on your behalf.
Was this guide helpful?
Did you find out-of-date information?
A will that names no heirs is still valid
Article 1660 of the Civil Code of 2020 says so in one sentence, and 1663 splits in equal parts when no shares were set.
An albacea may not sell estate goods unless the testator authorised it
Article 1741 of the Civil Code of 2020 leaves two routes without that authorisation: the heirs’ unanimous consent or judicial authorisation.
The albacea or administrator must request a contador partidor once debts are covered
Article 1749 of the Civil Code of 2020 uses “must”, not “may”, and conditions that duty on the debts and administration expenses having been satisfied.
How to make a will in Puerto Rico
The 2020 Civil Code’s kinds of will, who may execute one, and the rule that changed: with forced heirs you may freely dispose of half.
If several executors are named without saying how they act, joint action is presumed
Article 1735 of the Civil Code of 2020 sets that presumption, and 1729 bars the person declared unworthy and the disinherited from the office.
If the will contradicts itself, the dividing clause wins; in a separate act, it loses
Article 1778 of the Civil Code of 2020 reverses the rule depending on where the partition was written: inside the will or in a separate act.