In short
Whoever administers or divides an estate may be paid for it, and the Code sets both who decides how much and a ceiling. Article 1761 says that if there is no testamentary disposition on the executor’s remuneration nor an agreement among the heirs, it will be fixed by the court, which will take into consideration the importance of the estate and the work they will perform. Another three-rung ladder: the will, the heirs’ agreement, and the court. The second paragraph brings the section’s only figure: the remuneration fixed by the testator or the court must not exceed ten per cent of the rents or of the net product of the inheritance. Note carefully what that ten per cent is measured on, because it is not the gross value of the estate: it is the rents or the net product. And note too whom the cap binds as the text writes it: it names the testator and the court, and does not repeat the heirs’ agreement that the first paragraph does mention as a way of fixing it. This guide reports that asymmetry and does not resolve it, because the Code does not. Article 1762 settles a frequent case: it is presumed that a legacy left to the executor is in payment of the charge, unless the testator makes it on another basis. It is a presumption, so it yields if the testator says otherwise. Article 1763 separates pay from expenses. The expenses of the executor’s management are charged to the inheritance, except the costs to which they may be personally condemned for deceit or bad faith: that exception is the only door through which the executor’s own pocket is exposed. And the second paragraph recognises their right to reimbursement of the necessary and useful expenses. What these three articles do not say is what counts as rent or net product, how the court is asked to fix the remuneration, what happens if the heirs’ agreement exceeds ten per cent, or when it is paid.
What is it?
They are Articles 1761, 1762 and 1763 of the Civil Code of 2020: who fixes an estate executor’s remuneration, the ten per cent cap, the legacy as payment of the charge and the reimbursement of expenses.
Who can do it?
Whoever acts as albacea, administrator or contador partidor of an estate, and the heirs who must pay for that work out of the estate.
Requirements
- If there is no testamentary disposition nor agreement among the heirs, the court fixes the remuneration, considering the importance of the estate and the work the executor will perform.Verified against the official source
- The remuneration fixed by the testator or the court must not exceed ten per cent of the rents or of the net product of the inheritance.Verified against the official source
- It is presumed a legacy left to the executor is in payment of the charge, unless the testator makes it on another basis.Verified against the official source
- The management expenses are charged to the inheritance, except the costs to which the executor is personally condemned for deceit or bad faith.Verified against the official source
Documents you need
Cost
Step by step
Step 1: First, the will
Article 1761: the testator fixes the remuneration if they disposed on it.
Step 2: Then, the heirs’ agreement
If the will is silent, the article looks to an agreement among the heirs before going anywhere else.
Step 3: And failing both, the court
It will be fixed by the court, considering the importance of the estate and the work the executor will perform.
Step 4: The cap: ten per cent
Second paragraph of 1761: the remuneration fixed by the testator or the court must not exceed ten per cent.
Step 5: Ten per cent of what?
Of the rents or of the net product of the inheritance. Not of the gross value of the estate. The Code defines neither term here.
Step 6: An asymmetry in the text
The second paragraph names the testator and the court, but does not repeat the heirs’ agreement the first one mentions. This guide reports that difference and does not resolve it.
Step 7: If you were left a legacy
Article 1762: it is presumed a legacy left to the executor is in payment of the charge, unless the testator makes it on another basis.
Step 8: It is a presumption, not a fixed rule
It yields if the testator said the legacy was left on another basis.
Step 9: The estate pays the expenses
Article 1763: the expenses of the executor’s management are charged to the inheritance.
Step 10: Except deceit or bad faith
The exception in the same paragraph: the costs to which they may be personally condemned for deceit or bad faith. It is the only door exposing their own pocket.
Step 11: And they have a right to reimbursement
Second paragraph: the executor has the right to reimbursement of the necessary and useful expenses. The Code does not distinguish them here.
Where to do it
Article 1761 places fixing the remuneration with the court when neither the will nor a heirs’ agreement fixed it. The Code does not say before which court it is requested, in what form, at what fee or how long it takes, and this guide does not assume it.
How long it takes
What to do if something goes wrong
If you are an heir and the pay the executor claims seems high, check two things. First, who fixed it: Article 1761 only reaches the court when there is no testamentary disposition nor agreement among the heirs. Second, the cap: what the testator or the court fixes must not exceed ten per cent of the rents or of the net product of the inheritance, not of the gross value of the estate. If you are the executor and were left a legacy, Article 1762 presumes it is in payment of the charge unless the testator left it on another basis: do not assume you collect both. And on expenses, Article 1763 charges them to the inheritance and recognises reimbursement of the necessary and useful ones, with an exception that does reach your pocket: the costs to which you are personally condemned for deceit or bad faith. What you will not find here is what counts as rent or net product, how the court is asked to fix the remuneration, or what happens if the heirs’ agreement exceeds ten per cent: the second paragraph of Article 1761 names the testator and the court, and does not repeat that agreement. MiPRFácil does not represent anyone in court and gives no legal advice.
Common mistakes
- Calculating the ten per cent on the gross value of the estate: Article 1761 measures it on the rents or the net product.
- Going to court before looking at the will and the heirs’ agreement: the court is the third rung.
- Believing the legacy to the executor adds to their pay: Article 1762 presumes it is in payment of the charge.
- Treating that presumption as a fixed rule: it yields if the testator left it on another basis.
- Assuming the executor pays management expenses out of pocket: they are charged to the inheritance.
- Forgetting the exception: costs for deceit or bad faith are paid by them personally.
- Expecting the Code to distinguish necessary from useful expenses: in this article it does not.
- Confusing this with the agent’s remuneration in the mandate contract, which has its own guide.
Frequently asked questions
How much may an albacea charge?
Article 1761 says the remuneration fixed by the testator or the court must not exceed ten per cent of the rents or of the net product of the inheritance.
Who decides how much they are paid?
Article 1761 says that if there is no testamentary disposition nor agreement among the heirs, it will be fixed by the court, considering the importance of the estate and the work they will perform.
I was left a legacy and I am the albacea. Do I collect both?
Article 1762 says it is presumed a legacy left to the executor is in payment of the charge, unless the testator makes it on another basis.
Who pays the management expenses?
Article 1763 says they are charged to the inheritance, except the costs to which the executor may be personally condemned for deceit or bad faith, and that they have a right to reimbursement of the necessary and useful expenses.
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?
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.
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 funeral, the inventory and the executor’s pay come out of the estate
Article 1589 of the Civil Code of 2020 lists six hereditary charges, and the sixth leaves the list open: the other expenses of an analogous nature.
A will cannot exempt an executor from accounting: the clause is held as not written
Article 1767 of the Civil Code of 2020 says so, and requires quarterly written accounts plus a final account three months after the charge ends.
A creditor with written title may request an administrator be named for the estate
Article 1744 of the Civil Code of 2020 allows it, alongside the albacea, the forced heirs and the heirs or legatees.
Agent’s commission: earned when the contract is perfected
Article 1430 fixes when the commission is earned and when the principal’s fifteen-day silence counts as acceptance of the order.