Short answer. Only if you consent to it. Article 1238 provides that payment by a third person who does not intend to be reimbursed is deemed a donation, which requires the debtor's consent. Without that consent it is not a donation, though the payment remains valid as to the creditor who accepted it.

What the law says

Payment made by a third person who does not intend to be reimbursed by the debtor is deemed to be a donation, which requires the debtor's consent. But the payment is in any case valid as to the creditor who has accepted it.

Civil Code, Article 1238 — Payment Intended as a Donation. Read the full provision →

Two relationships, kept apart

Article 1238 is short: Payment made by a third person who does not intend to be reimbursed by the debtor is deemed to be a donation, which requires the debtor's consent. But the payment is in any case valid as to the creditor who has accepted it. Notice what is being separated. So far as the card issuer is concerned the matter closed the moment it took the money; it has no interest in who paid or why, and the balance does not revive. What remains open is the relationship between you and your relative, and that is where the word donation does its work.

Why your consent is needed at all

A donation is a contract rather than a unilateral act. It needs an offer and an acceptance, and nobody can be made the object of another person's generosity without agreeing to it. There are perfectly ordinary reasons to decline: the obligations a large gift creates inside a family, its consequences for tax and for the eventual settlement of the giver's estate, or simply the wish not to be beholden. A relative who pays and announces that no repayment is expected has made an offer; your acceptance is what completes it. A nod across a family dinner is a thin foundation for a position you may have to defend years later.

If it is not a donation, it is a debt

Declining to treat the payment as a gift does not leave it in limbo. It falls back on the ordinary rule in Article 1236, under which whoever pays for another may demand from the debtor what he has paid — reduced, where the payment was made without the debtor's knowledge or against his will, to the extent the payment benefited the debtor. That is precisely the argument your relative, or his heirs, would advance if relations later cooled or the estate needed to be gathered in. The label attached at the time therefore decides whether the money was a gift or a loan.

Write it down while everyone is cheerful

The practical step is unglamorous and effective. A short signed statement that the payment was intended as a donation and is accepted as such settles a question that a demand letter years later would otherwise reopen. Keep the issuer's statement showing the balance cleared and proof of who actually transmitted the funds. Where the sum is substantial, the formal requirements the Civil Code imposes on donations, and the tax treatment of gifts, are far easier to satisfy before the payment is made than reconstructed afterwards.

Cases citing this provision

These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.