In short
Many people believe the house they were given in life is separate, and that they also get their full legítima. Article 1789 says the opposite, in three movements. First: the computable liberalities, inter vivos or by cause of death, made to the legitimarios are imputed to the legítima. That is, what you already received is deducted from your own reserved share. Second: when they exceed the legítima, they are imputed to the free-disposition share. If what you received is more than what was due to you, the surplus moves to the free half and starts competing with what the decedent wanted to leave others. Third: if they are inoficiosas, they are reduced as provided in this chapter. Article 1790 treats the stranger differently: the computable liberalities made to a stranger are imputed to the free-disposition share, but insofar as they are inoficiosas, they are reduced. There is the asymmetry worth understanding. A gift to a forced heir starts against their own legítima and only overflows into the free half; a gift to a stranger touches only the free half from the start. Now the uncomfortable part. Both articles make the outcome depend on the liberality being inoficiosa, and this Code nowhere defines what makes a liberality inoficiosa. The word appears in Article 1171, when it says condonation is governed by the precepts governing inoficiosas donations, and appears again in these articles and in 1791, always without a definition. This guide invents none. Nor does it define who is a stranger: the article uses the word and does not explain it.
What is it?
They are Articles 1789 and 1790 of the Civil Code of 2020: against which part of the inheritance what a forced heir already received is charged, and against which what a stranger received.
Who can do it?
Any forced heir who received something from the decedent in life or by will, and anyone disputing a gift made to a third party.
Requirements
- The computable liberalities, inter vivos or by cause of death, made to the forced heirs are imputed to the legítima.Verified against the official source
- When they exceed the legítima, they are imputed to the free-disposition share.Verified against the official source
- The computable liberalities made to a stranger are imputed to the free-disposition share.Verified against the official source
- In both cases, if they are inoficiosas they are reduced as provided in Chapter III.Verified against the official source
Documents you need
Cost
Step by step
Step 1: First check whether it is computable
Both articles speak of computable liberalities. What enters and what does not is fixed by Articles 1787 and 1788.
Step 2: If the recipient is a forced heir
Article 1789: it is imputed to the legítima. It comes out of their own reserved share, inter vivos or by cause of death.
Step 3: If it exceeds their legítima
The same article: the excess is imputed to the free-disposition share.
Step 4: If the recipient is a stranger
Article 1790: it is imputed to the free-disposition share. It never starts against anyone’s legítima.
Step 5: And if it turns out inoficiosa
Both articles refer to the reduction in the same chapter, which has its own guide on this site.
Step 6: What the Code does not define
What makes a liberality inoficiosa. The word is used in Articles 1171, 1789, 1790 and 1791, and none defines it.
Step 7: And who is a stranger
Article 1790 uses the word and does not explain it. That gap is not filled here.
Where to do it
The imputation happens inside the partition, before no agency. Articles 1789 and 1790 do not say who performs it, at what moment, or with what document it is evidenced, so you will not find that here.
How long it takes
What to do if something goes wrong
If a sibling received a house in life and now also claims their whole legítima, Article 1789 answers: that house is imputed to their legítima. It is not added, it is deducted. And if the house is worth more than their legítima, the excess does not vanish: it is imputed to the free-disposition share, where it starts competing with what the decedent left others. If the recipient is not a forced heir, Article 1790 sends it straight to the free half and there it stays, unless it is inoficiosa. That is the word where this guide stops. Neither this chapter nor any other article of the Code says what makes a liberality inoficiosa; the word appears in Article 1171 on condonation and in Articles 1789, 1790 and 1791, always undefined. Any definition you read elsewhere does not come from the Code’s text. Nor does it say who counts as a stranger. If what you need is to ask that a gift be reduced, that mechanism is in Articles 1791 to 1795 and has its own guide. MiPRFácil does not represent anyone in court and gives no legal advice.
Common mistakes
- Believing the gift received is added to the legítima: Article 1789 imputes it to it, that is, deducts it.
- Thinking only lifetime gifts are imputed: the article says inter vivos or by cause of death.
- Assuming the excess over the legítima is lost: it is imputed to the free-disposition share.
- Treating a gift to a forced heir and one to a stranger alike: Article 1790 sends the stranger’s only to the free half.
- Imputing a liberality that is not computable: Articles 1787 and 1788 decide that first.
- Taking the word inoficiosa as defined: the Code uses it four times and defines it in none.
- Assuming stranger means someone who is not a relative: Article 1790 does not say so.
- Expecting these articles to say who performs the imputation or when: they do not.
Frequently asked questions
Is the house I was gifted deducted from my inheritance?
If you are a forced heir and the liberality is computable, Article 1789 imputes it to your legítima.
What if what I received is worth more than my legítima?
Article 1789 imputes the excess to the free-disposition share, and if it is inoficiosa it is reduced.
And if the gift went to someone outside the family?
Article 1790 imputes liberalities made to a stranger to the free-disposition share, and reduces them insofar as they are inoficiosas.
What does it mean for a liberality to be inoficiosa?
The 2020 Code does not define it. It uses the word in Articles 1171, 1789, 1790 and 1791 without explaining it, and this guide invents no definition.
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?
What was left is valued today; what was given away, at the price back then
Article 1787 of the Civil Code of 2020 uses two different valuation dates in one calculation, and 1788 removes gifts older than ten years.
If you have forced heirs, you may freely dispose of only half your goods
Article 1623 of the Civil Code of 2020 says so. And 1622 names the forced heirs: descendants, surviving spouse and, failing these, ascendants.
How to gift property during your lifetime (and when it can be revoked)
Gifting real property requires a public deed under penalty of radical nullity, the recipient must accept while both are alive, and only six causes allow revocation.
Conditions placed on your forced share are held as not placed
Article 1626 of the Civil Code of 2020 calls an encumbrance any charge, condition, term, mode, usufruct, obligation, prohibition or limitation.
Leaving a child out of the will does not void it: it re-divides the forced share
Article 1629 of the Civil Code of 2020 says preterition does not annul the institution of heir and entails dividing the legítima among all the forced heirs.
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.