Short answer. Yes. Article 573 of the Civil Code provides that when usufruct property gradually deteriorates through normal wear and tear, the usufructuary need only return the items in their condition at the end of the usufruct. Liability arises only for deterioration caused by the usufructuary's own fraud or negligence — not from ordinary use.
What the law says
he shall be obliged to indemnify the owner for any deterioration they may have suffered by reason of his fraud or negligence.
Civil Code, Article 573 — Things That Deteriorate With Use. Read the full provision →
Things that wear out without being consumed
Article 573 of the Civil Code applies to a specific category: things included in a usufruct that deteriorate gradually with use but are not consumed in the process. Furniture, vehicles, machinery, and equipment are examples. These are distinct from consumable things that are used up entirely. When such wearable things are included in a usufruct, the usufructuary has the right to use them for their intended purpose, and the law accepts that normal use will diminish their condition over time. That ordinary decline is built into the nature of a usufruct over such items.
What the usufructuary must return
At the termination of the usufruct, Article 573 does not require the usufructuary to restore the items to their original condition. The usufructuary "shall not be obliged to return them at the termination of the usufruct except in their condition at that time." So if furniture was in good condition at the start and shows honest wear from years of normal household use, the usufructuary returns it as it is. The owner accepted that wear and tear as part of granting the usufruct. What the usufructuary cannot do is worsen the items beyond normal use.
When liability arises: fraud or negligence
Article 573 draws the line at fraud and negligence. If the deterioration goes beyond what ordinary use would cause — because the usufructuary misused the items, failed to maintain them reasonably, or damaged them through deliberate or careless conduct — the usufructuary must indemnify the owner for that excess deterioration. The standard is not absolute preservation of value; it is the avoidance of extra damage caused by the usufructuary's own conduct. A chair that breaks from daily sitting is different from a chair that breaks because it was used as a ladder.
Using the things in accordance with their purpose
Article 573 also prescribes how the usufructuary must use the property: in accordance with the purpose for which they are intended. This is important because it defines what counts as normal use. Using a vehicle as intended — for transport — will produce wear the owner must accept. Using it for purposes far outside its design, causing disproportionate damage, is a different matter. The purpose-of-use standard gives the owner a basis for challenging excessive deterioration beyond what the thing was meant to endure, while protecting the usufructuary's right to use it genuinely and freely within that purpose.