1. Case Overview

The client agreed to inherit an apartment solely after her mother’s passing, but was subsequently sued by her brother’s creditor. The creditor claimed that this inheritance division agreement was a fraudulent act intended to evade her brother’s debts and demanded a return of the ownership shares.

2. Case Specifics

When a debtor waives their share of an inheritance, it is generally considered a fraudulent act, and the responsibility of the beneficiary—the client—is presumed. Therefore, this was a difficult situation where the client had to legally and perfectly prove "good faith"—meaning she had absolutely no knowledge of her brother’s debt—to win the case.

3. Legal Strategy

Law Firm Theo submitted factual statements and evidence proving that the brother had been effectively estranged from the family for a long period. Furthermore, we logically argued that the client had consistently resided in the property and that if there had been any fraudulent intent, they would have chosen a "renunciation of inheritance," which is legally more advantageous, rather than an agreement.

4. Outcome

The court accepted the defense that the client was unaware of her brother’s financial situation and dismissed all of the plaintiff's claims. As a result, the client was able to fully protect her ownership of the inherited property, and the plaintiff was ordered to cover all legal costs.

 ──────────────────────────