An heir shall not be liable for more than his inheritance.

📌 in civil cases, in case the heir owes anyone, and then the heir dies for any cause, the creditor usually comes to collect the debt with the heir's children, his wife, his parents, his relatives, his siblings, and sign any documents to be liable for the heir instead. Let's update our knowledge of how we can deny it.

📖 according to the 1601 Code of Commerce, "the heir shall not be liable for more than his inheritance." This means that in the case of the heir to death, the heir of the heir includes all kinds of property, including rights, duties, and liability, immediately devolved to the heir of the will or the heir of the will.

📍 devolved to the Taya (Section 1600) 📍

1️⃣). All property, property (land and land) and property (not land), including money.

2️⃣). Rights and duties that are not exclusive to you have inheritance, such as leases, guarantees, loan creditors.

3️⃣). Liability such as liabilities, liability in infringement.

These three are immediately devolved to all heirs as joint ownership (property case) and have equal rights, duties and liability to all.

❌ However, what everyone wants is all kinds of property, right? And what everyone doesn't want is liability. Considering the 1601 provision, it can be seen that the law requires that only those who receive property in the inheritance are responsible for the inheritance (not exceeding the inheritance). As for those who do not receive property in the inheritance, the law also recommends that the heir be entitled to deny that liability.

👉 in practice, when a creditor demands that the heir's heir be held liable for various debts, whether by a lawsuit before the court or by any other means, that the heir is unaware of this right, he accidentally pays the liabilities or agrees to accept the heir's liabilities in ignorance of the law.

📌, therefore, invite you to come to know this law and how to deny liability.

💬 for example, in one case that came up with the Tayat did not fight the case unfortunately, because the defendant in the case was a Tayat of a car tenant or a Tayat of a guarantor. When the Tayat released Joy did not fight the case, there was no point in the court to limit the Tayat's liability (because Section 1601 was not a court order to judge, but only the Tayat's right to fight the case), the court sentenced the Tayat to be liable as a debtor himself and forced by unnecessary seizure of property or claim (salary, bank deposit).

💭 if the case changes (which has also been found), the Tayat files a deposition against the claim that he is only a Tayat, the debtor's legate (heir), and the debtor has no property devolved to the Tayat, so he is not liable for the debt devolved to the Tayat. The court sentenced the Tayat to liability for the debt.♪ But this cannot exceed the amount of debt they receiveThis completely changed the outcome of the case, making it impossible for the creditor to take from the property or salary or deposit account of the Taya unless the creditor can prove in the enforcement class that the Taya has received the inheritance of the debtor and that the enforcement does not exceed the inheritance received by the Taya.

✅ So if the debtor has no property to the heir, the heir is not liable.

👨‍🏫 [Contact Channel] ✅

Inbox; /

Line; som98192615

tiktok; tiktok.com / @ atty.top