Short answer. No. Article 599 of the Civil Code requires a usufructuary who has not given sufficient security to obtain the owner's authorization — or court authorization if the owner is unavailable — before collecting matured credits that form part of the usufruct.
What the law says
If he has been excused from giving security or has not been able to give it, or if that given is not sufficient, he shall need the authorization of the owner, or of the court in default thereof, to collect such credits.
Civil Code, Article 599 — Collecting Credits That Form Part of the Usufruct. Read the full provision →
The security requirement and its connection to collecting credits
Article 599 of the Civil Code ties the right to collect matured credits directly to the security requirement. A usufructuary who has given or gives adequate security may claim matured credits that form part of the usufruct on their own. But where security has not been given, was excused, could not be given, or is insufficient, the right to collect those credits is not absolute — it requires prior authorization. This rule protects the owner: if there is no security to fall back on, the usufructuary should not be able to collect capital amounts without someone checking that the collection is appropriate.
Authorization from the owner or the court
When the usufructuary lacks adequate security, Article 599 requires the authorization of the owner, or of the court in default thereof. The preferred route is the owner's permission — a direct agreement between the parties. If the owner is unavailable, refuses to act, or the parties cannot agree, the usufructuary may seek court authorization instead. This two-track approach ensures that collection does not stall indefinitely just because the owner is unreachable or uncooperative, while still requiring some external check before the usufructuary handles the capital.
Different rules for how collected capital is used
What happens after collection also depends on whether security was given. A usufructuary who gave proper security may use collected capital in any manner they choose — the security is the protection. A usufructuary without security faces a more restricted path: the collected capital must be invested at interest, and the investment terms must be agreed with the owner. If there is no agreement, judicial authorization is needed. Either way, the investment must be backed by security sufficient to preserve the integrity of the capital in usufruct — the principal must remain intact even as the interest flows to the usufructuary.
Why this structure matters for owners and usufructuaries
If you are an owner whose property subject to a usufruct includes credits — debts owed to the property, financial instruments, or similar claims — the security requirement in Article 599 is a protection you should verify is in place. If security was never given and the usufructuary has been collecting credits unilaterally, there may be an issue worth addressing. If you are a usufructuary who has not given security and needs to collect a maturing credit, approach the owner early to get consent in writing. Going directly to the court should be a last resort, but it is available if the owner will not cooperate without reason.