Short answer. No, not by accretion. Article 1021 provides that if the part repudiated is the legitime, the other co-heirs succeed to it in their own right, not through the right of accretion. Accretion among compulsory heirs applies only to the free portion, when it is left to two or more of them or to one of them and a stranger.
What the law says
Among the compulsory heirs the right of accretion shall take place only when the free portion is left to two or more of them, or to any one of them and to a stranger.
Civil Code, Article 1021 — Accretion Among Compulsory Heirs. Read the full provision →
What the law says
Should the part repudiated be the legitime, the other co-heirs shall succeed to it in their own right, and not by the right of accretion.
Civil Code, Article 1021 — Accretion Among Compulsory Heirs. Read the full provision →
The legitime does not pass by accretion
Article 1021 draws a sharp distinction for compulsory heirs. It provides that should the part repudiated be the legitime, the other co-heirs shall succeed to it in their own right, and not by the right of accretion. When a compulsory heir repudiates the portion the law reserves specifically for compulsory heirs, the remaining co-heirs do not absorb that share through accretion at all. Instead, they succeed to it because of their own, independent right as compulsory heirs, which is a different legal mechanism entirely from accretion.
Accretion among compulsory heirs is limited to the free portion
The article opens by fencing off exactly where accretion does operate among compulsory heirs: Among the compulsory heirs the right of accretion shall take place only when the free portion is left to two or more of them, or to any one of them and to a stranger. Accretion has a role here, but only over the free portion, the part of the estate the testator was free to dispose of as they wished, and only when that free portion was left to more than one compulsory heir, or to a compulsory heir together with someone who is not an heir at all.
Why the legitime is treated differently
The legitime is not something the testator distributes by choice; it is reserved by law for compulsory heirs regardless of what the will says. Because entitlement to the legitime already flows directly from each compulsory heir's own status, there is no need for a mechanism like accretion to explain how the remaining heirs receive a repudiated share of it. Their right to that share exists independently, by virtue of being compulsory heirs themselves, not because someone else's rejected portion was reassigned to them.
What this means when a compulsory heir repudiates
If what was repudiated is legitime, look to the ordinary rules on how compulsory heirs succeed to that reserved portion, rather than to accretion, since the article is explicit that accretion does not govern this situation. If instead what was repudiated is part of the free portion, and that free portion had been left to two or more compulsory heirs, or to a compulsory heir along with someone else, accretion under this article may then come into play.