Food contract

A daughter sues (after her father's death) to have declared null a food contract that her father had signed with the other daughter (her sister). In that contract, the father transferred to her full ownership of some urban properties in exchange for the daughter's commitment to provide him with sustenance, housing, clothing, and medical assistance, "according to his social position," and also to have him in her home and in her company. The contract was signed when the father was already elderly, widowed, and had suffered a stroke .

The plaintiff argues that this contract does not have a real "cause" because, according to her, what the supporting daughter promised was already an obligation imposed by law among relatives. That is why she interprets that, fundamentally, there would be a simulation , a donation would have been "disguised" (a kind of remunerative donation) to remove those assets from the inheritance and harm her . Also, as an alternative argument, she says that even the food provisions were not fulfilled, because during the seven years of cohabitation, the father would have paid the expenses with his own money.

The court ruled in his favor, understanding that the father had enough assets and that, in practice, the defendant would have only provided companionship . But the Provincial Court overturned the decision, as it did not see enough evidence of simulation , stated that it was a genuine aliment contract, and reminded that the legal obligation does not prevent a different and independent contract from being agreed upon, with a key component of personal care and assistance.

Finally, the Supreme Court (SC) dismisses the appeal, explains that legal aliments and those agreed upon by contract are not the same, and can coexist . The law allows legal aliments to be fulfilled by paying a pension or hosting the family member at home, but the contract can specify and reinforce personal care and cohabitation, and is governed by what was agreed upon. In this case, the father wanted to be cared for, with companionship and affection, without going to a nursing home, and it was proven that the daughter took care of him for almost seven years until his passing, so there is no simulation or breach of contract.