In short
Article 1676 deletes impossible or illegal conditions. Articles 1677 and 1678 delete two more for what they say, and the first comes with a turn worth reading slowly. Article 1677 opens flatly: the condition of not contracting marriage is considered not written. A will saying “I leave the house to my daughter provided she does not marry” loses that clause and the house stays. But the same article continues: it is valid for the testator to leave a person the usufruct, the use, the right of habitation, or a pension or personal allowance for as long as they remain unmarried. Read them together. The practical pressure is the same in both cases, and yet one is deleted and the other stands. What changes is the drafting and what is given: forbidding marriage does not hold; giving a right of limited duration while someone remains unmarried does. That second paragraph is a closed list of four things — usufruct, use, habitation, and a pension or personal allowance — and it does not say “or any other right”, so none is added here. Article 1678 deletes the other one: the condition requiring the instituted person to establish in their own will some disposition in favour of the testator or of another person is considered not written. That is, one will cannot buy another will. If whoever leaves you something demands in exchange that you leave something in yours — to them or to whoever they name — that demand disappears and what they left you stays.
What is it?
They are Articles 1677 and 1678 of the Civil Code of 2020: the condition of not marrying, the exception the same article saves, and the condition of making a will in someone’s favour, which the Code deletes entirely.
Who can do it?
Any heir or legatee whose inheritance a will has conditioned on not marrying or on making a will a certain way, and anyone drafting such a clause.
Requirements
- The condition of not contracting marriage is considered not written.Verified against the official source
- It is valid to leave the usufruct, the use, the right of habitation, or a pension or personal allowance for as long as the person remains unmarried.Verified against the official source
- That list has four items and the article does not open it to any other right.Verified against the official source
- The condition requiring the instituted person to establish in their will a disposition in favour of the testator or another person is considered not written.Verified against the official source
Documents you need
Cost
Step by step
Step 1: Read the clause literally
Article 1677 treats forbidding marriage and limiting a right’s duration differently. The difference is in how it is written.
Step 2: If it forbids you to marry, it is deleted
Article 1677, first paragraph: the condition of not contracting marriage is considered not written.
Step 3: And what was left to you stays
What falls is the condition. The designation stands, just as with Article 1676.
Step 4: But look at the second paragraph
It is valid to leave the usufruct, the use, the right of habitation, or a pension or personal allowance for as long as the person remains unmarried.
Step 5: Four things and no more
The article lists those four rights and does not say “or any other”. None is added here.
Step 6: What the article does not say
What happens the day the person marries, who declares it, or whether the second paragraph may reach the legítima. None of that is there.
Step 7: The other deleted condition
Article 1678: requiring you to leave something in your will in favour of the testator or another person is considered not written.
Step 8: One will does not buy another
The demand disappears and what was left to you stays. The Code turns it into neither an obligation nor a debt.
Where to do it
These two articles describe no procedure before any agency: they say how a clause is read. The Code does not say here who declares a condition not written, before which forum, with what pleading, at what fee or within what deadline, and none of those gaps is filled here.
How long it takes
What to do if something goes wrong
If the will leaves you something “provided you do not marry”, Article 1677’s first paragraph deletes that condition and you keep what was left to you. There is no need to choose between marrying and inheriting. But before treating the fight as won, read how the clause is written, because the same article’s second paragraph saves a very similar way of achieving the same effect: leaving the usufruct, the use, the right of habitation, or a pension or personal allowance for as long as the person remains unmarried. If what you were left is one of those four, and it is drafted as a duration rather than a prohibition, the article holds it valid. What the Code does not say — and neither does this guide — is exactly what happens the day the person marries, who declares it, or whether that formula may be used to reach the legítima. Nor does it address a condition of not remarrying, which is a different sentence from the one the article deletes. If what was imposed on you is the other condition, that you must leave something to someone in your own will, Article 1678 deletes it without exception: one will cannot buy another will. MiPRFácil does not represent anyone in court and gives no legal advice.
Common mistakes
- Believing you must choose between marrying and inheriting: Article 1677 deletes the condition of not marrying.
- Believing the inheritance falls when the condition does: the clause falls and the designation stays.
- Treating any clause mentioning marriage as deleted: the second paragraph saves four specific rights.
- Adding rights to that list of four: the article does not say “or any other”.
- Reading the second paragraph as a prohibition: what it saves is a duration, not a veto.
- Looking in the article for what happens on the wedding day: it does not say.
- Applying the article to a condition of not remarrying: the Code does not address that sentence.
- Complying with a clause forcing you to make a will in someone’s favour: Article 1678 considers it not written.
Frequently asked questions
May a will forbid me to marry?
Article 1677 says the condition of not contracting marriage is considered not written.
So do I lose what was left to me?
No. What is deleted is the condition; the designation of heir or legatee stands.
I was left a pension for as long as I stay unmarried. Is that valid?
Article 1677’s second paragraph declares it valid for the usufruct, the use, the right of habitation and a pension or personal allowance.
May I be required to leave something in my own will?
Article 1678 considers that condition not written, whether in favour of the testator or another person.
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 12, 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?
An impossible or illegal condition is deleted and the inheritance stays
Article 1676 of the Civil Code of 2020 considers it not written: the condition falls, not the designation of heir or legatee.
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.
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.
Letting someone live in your house without giving them the house
The right of habitation is presumed lifelong, cannot be leased or sold, and the holder pays almost no expenses.
What a usufruct is and how it is created
If the title does not say how long it lasts, the usufruct is for life. In favour of a juridical person it cannot exceed thirty 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.