Short answer. The donee spouse's own exclusive property bears the charges, even though the conjugal partnership advanced the money for them. The partnership does not permanently absorb that cost — it is meant to be repaid from the receiving spouse's separate property rather than shared between both spouses.
What the law says
If the donations are onerous, the amount of the charges shall be borne by the exclusive property of the donee spouse, whenever they have been advanced by the conjugal partnership of gains.
Family Code, Article 114 — Charges on Onerous Donations. Read the full provision →
Onerous donations carry charges the donee must ultimately answer for
Article 114 deals specifically with onerous donations — gifts, such as wedding gifts, that come with some burden or charge attached rather than being given outright and free. Where such a gift is made to one spouse and carries charges, the article does not let those charges simply be absorbed as an ordinary conjugal expense borne equally by both spouses regardless of who received the gift.
The exclusive property of the donee spouse is where the cost lands
If the conjugal partnership advanced the money to cover those charges, Article 114 puts the ultimate burden on the exclusive property of the donee spouse — the spouse who actually received the gift. The partnership's advance is treated as something to be recovered from that spouse's separate assets, not a cost the partnership permanently bears on the couple's behalf, even though it may have fronted the money at the time the charges were due.
Why the distinction between advancing and bearing matters
The article separates two different things: who pays out the money at the time the charges fall due, and who is ultimately responsible for that amount. The conjugal partnership can be the one that advances the funds in the moment, but Article 114 makes clear that responsibility for the amount rests with the donee spouse's own exclusive property, to be accounted for accordingly rather than left as a shared conjugal loss.
Why this rule sits apart from ordinary conjugal expenses
Most costs the conjugal partnership pays are absorbed as part of running the household or growing the couple's shared wealth, without any expectation of reimbursement from one spouse alone. Article 114 treats charges on an onerous gift differently precisely because the gift itself, and whatever burden comes attached to it, belongs to one spouse individually — so the cost of satisfying that burden should ultimately trace back to that same spouse's separate property, not the partnership as a whole.
What Article 114 does not reach
The rule is limited to onerous donations specifically — a wedding gift given simply and gratuitously, with no charge attached, is not what this article addresses, and its cost of acceptance, if any, is not governed by this reimbursement rule. The article also does not spell out when or how the donee spouse's exclusive property must actually reimburse the partnership, whether immediately or only when the partnership is later liquidated; it fixes who ultimately bears the charges, not the mechanics of settling the account between spouse and partnership.