Usufruct For Baby

[offset]

Can you have a usufruct put in the name of a baby 3 years old

Edited September 16, 2012 by offset

[ballbreaker]

I think not but you can read section from civil code and decide for yourself.

Section 21. For the doing of a juristic act, a minor must obtain the consent of his legal

representative. All acts done by him without such consent are voidable unless otherwise

provided.

[offset]

I think not but you can read section from civil code and decide for yourself.

Section 21. For the doing of a juristic act, a minor must obtain the consent of his legal

representative. All acts done by him without such consent are voidable unless otherwise

provided.

Do i read it correctly if his legal representative gives consent it should be ok which i guess would be his Mother who owns the land

So why do you think he cannot have it in his name

Edited September 16, 2012 by offset

[InterestedObserver]

Minor children are able to have land transferred to them and a Chanote issued in their name. Sections 21 and 1574 of the Civil and Commercial Code cover the details. Court approval is required.

[jbrain]

Minor children are able to have land transferred to them and a Chanote issued in their name. Sections 21 and 1574 of the Civil and Commercial Code cover the details. Court approval is required.

But I think the mother can stiil make any decisions thereafter untill the child has legal age.

[InterestedObserver]

Minor children are able to have land transferred to them and a Chanote issued in their name. Sections 21 and 1574 of the Civil and Commercial Code cover the details. Court approval is required.

But I think the mother can stiil make any decisions thereafter untill the child has legal age.

Once the minor child has the Chanote issued to him/her by the land office, the Court has jurisdiction under Section 1574. The mother cannot unilaterally compel action against the Courts order, which is in favor of the child.

[jbrain]

Minor children are able to have land transferred to them and a Chanote issued in their name. Sections 21 and 1574 of the Civil and Commercial Code cover the details. Court approval is required.

But I think the mother can stiil make any decisions thereafter untill the child has legal age.

Once the minor child has the Chanote issued to him/her by the land office, the Court has jurisdiction under Section 1574. The mother cannot unilaterally compel action against the Courts order, which is in favor of the child.

How would this be in case a child inherit a property?

[offset]

Thank you for the replies so far but i asked if a baby could have a Usufruct in there name not a Chanote

[InterestedObserver]

Thank you for the replies so far but i asked if a baby could have a Usufruct in there name not a Chanote

Read Section 1574(3) of the Civil and Commercial Code.

[offset]

Thank you for the replies so far but i asked if a baby could have a Usufruct in there name not a Chanote

Read Section 1574(3) of the Civil and Commercial Code.

Thank you but would it be possible to post a link to the section you mentioned

[InterestedObserver]

Thank you for the replies so far but i asked if a baby could have a Usufruct in there name not a Chanote

Read Section 1574(3) of the Civil and Commercial Code.

Thank you but would it be possible to post a link to the section you mentioned

Section 1574. A person exercising parental power cannot enter into any of the following juristic acts with regard to the property of the minor except with permission of the Court;

1. selling, exchanging, sale with right of redemption, letting out property on hire-purchase, mortgaging, releasing mortgage to mortgagor or transferring the right of mortgage on immovable property or on mortgageable movable property;
   
2. extinguishing the whole or a part of real right of the minor on immovable property;
   
3. creating servitude, right of inhabitation, right of superficies, usufruct or any charge on immovable property;
   
4. disposing of the whole or a part of the claim the purpose of which is to create real right on immovable property or on mortgageable property, or the claim the purpose of which is to have a real right on such property of the minor relieved;
   
5. letting immovable property for more than three years;
   
6. creating any commitments the purpose of which is to achieve the objective as provided in (1), (2) and (3);
   
7. making a loan of money;
   
8. making a gift, except out of the income of the minor on the minor’s behalf for charitable, social or moral purposes, and suitable to the minor’s condition in life;
   
9. accepting a gift subject to any condition or charge, or refusing a gift;
   
10. giving guarantee by any means whatsoever which may cause the minor to be compelled to perform an obligation or to enter into other juristic act, as requiring the minor to perform an obligation to other person or on behalf of other person;
    
11. making benefit out of the property other than those provided in Section 1598/4 (1), (2) or (3)
    
12. making a compromise;
    
13. submitting a dispute to arbitration.
    

Edited September 17, 2012 by InterestedObserver

[ThaidDown]

I read the original post as if the owner of the land (not the minor child) could grant a usufruct to the minor child as a gift.

If that is the case then I think the the answer is yes, as a usufruct does not subject the minor child to any condition or charge. If my understanding of the original post is wrong then please ignore.

[offset]

I read the original post as if the owner of the land (not the minor child) could grant a usufruct to the minor child as a gift.

If that is the case then I think the the answer is yes, as a usufruct does not subject the minor child to any condition or charge. If my understanding of the original post is wrong then please ignore.

Yes you are correct that is exactly what i want to do thank you for clarifying my original post

[ballbreaker]

I seem to recall having to sign the usufruct that wife granted me and this fact alone would prevent minor from entering into such an agreement without approval of his legal representative.

Remember a usufruct is a legal binding contract.

[ThaidDown]

Yes agreed, but parent / guardian could sign on the childs behalf as it is not committing the minor child to any condition or charge. It is just accepting a gift with no strings.

[offset]

I seem to recall having to sign the usufruct that wife granted me and this fact alone would prevent minor from entering into such an agreement without approval of his legal representative.

Remember a usufruct is a legal binding contract.

The same problem for a baby signing a Chanote

But a finger print will be ok i think they use them for people that can't write

Edited September 17, 2012 by offset

[mrbojangles]

I seem to recall having to sign the usufruct that wife granted me

I'm no specialist in this area but I thought a wife granting a usufruct is useless, as it can be revoked. Or was this prior to your marriage?

[ballbreaker]

OP why don't you read through reply #11. A parent cannot act as legal representative of minor for propose you propose without court approval.

Edited September 17, 2012 by ballbreaker

[InterestedObserver]

I read the original post as if the owner of the land (not the minor child) could grant a usufruct to the minor child as a gift.

If that is the case then I think the the answer is yes, as a usufruct does not subject the minor child to any condition or charge. If my understanding of the original post is wrong then please ignore.

Yes you are correct that is exactly what i want to do thank you for clarifying my original post

"Section 1577. A person may transfer by legacy or gift a property to a minor, subject to its being managed, up to the time of majority, by a person other than the person exercising parental power."

The giving of a gift to a minor child, such as a usufruct, would entail land office and Court approval. Back to Section 1574.

Edited September 17, 2012 by InterestedObserver

[ThaidDown]

I understand Section 1577, but in this case, as I understand it, the op does not want to transfer the property to the minor child, but only grant the usufruct to enable said child to use the land and benefit from it.

So section 1577 does not seem to apply in this case, of course some other clause may apply.