The donation with a reversionary clause allows transferring an asset today, including a property, providing that it reverts to the donor if the donee dies before them under the conditions established by law and by the deed. It is a clause that can help manage a specific risk, but it does not equate to a free reconsideration nor does it resolve every family or succession issue.

I want to clarify what actually happens to the asset, what difference exists between a clause referring solely to the donee and one extended to their descendants, and why usufruct, future sale, and the rights of legal heirs require separate reasoning. The decisive point is understanding which event you want to regulate: the predecease of the recipient of the asset, your ability to continue using it, or the future distribution of the estate.

PART ONE

The donation produces an inter vivos transfer. The donor attributes the asset to the donee already with the deed, not only upon their death. The reversionary clause adds the provision of a possible return of the asset to the donor if the expected predecease occurs. Therefore, it is not a will and does not leave the asset suspended until succession: the donee becomes the holder of the received right, with the risk that it may return if the indicated event occurs.

Article 791 of the Italian Civil Code limits the clause to two hypotheses. Reversion can be provided for in the event that only the donee dies first, or in the event that the donee and their descendants die first. The choice determines who keeps the asset if the donee passes away before the donor. The regulatory reference is in the Italian Civil Code, specifically in Articles 769, 782, 791, and 792.

The return is provided in favor of the donor. The clause does not serve to pass the property directly to another family member chosen by the donor, such as a sibling of the donee or a grandchild. If the goal is to attribute the asset to a different person after the donor's death, other instruments come into play and, above all, the rules of succession. Reversion instead answers the question: what happens if the person who receives it dies before the person who donates?

The predecease must be real with respect to the donor. If the donee survives the donor, the event that justifies the return does not occur. The asset therefore remains in the donee's estate and, upon their subsequent death, will follow its succession rules. This consequence must be kept distinct from the fate of the donor's estate: they are two different successions and may involve different subjects.

PART TWO

When the clause concerns only the donee

The asset can return to the donor even if the donee leaves children. If the clause is structured on the predecease of the donee alone, the presence of children or other descendants of the donee does not, in itself, prevent the return of the asset. The donor thus retains broader protection against the transfer of the property into the donee's succession should the latter die prematurely.

This choice affects the family line that will receive the asset. A parent who donates to a child may desire the property to return to them if the child dies prematurely, or may prefer it to remain with the grandchildren. These are not equivalent formulas. In the first case, the return to the donor prevails; in the second, it is necessary to choose a clause that also considers the survival of the donee's descendants.

When the clause also considers descendants

The presence of a surviving descendant changes the result. If reversion is provided for the predecease of the donee and their descendants, the early death of the donee alone is not enough to make the asset return. The asset does not revert to the donor if, at the relevant moment, a descendant of the donee remains alive under the conditions provided by the clause.

It is not enough to rely on a generic formula. Saying that the asset is "destined for the family" does not clarify whether it should return to the donor or remain within the donee's lineage. The deed must make it understandable which of the two hypotheses has been chosen. This precision is important even many years after the donation, when family relationships and housing needs may have changed.

PART THREE

Reversion does not preserve the daily use of the property. If you want to continue living in the donated house or collect its rent, the reversionary clause is not enough. This need concerns a right of enjoyment, such as usufruct, which allows using the asset or drawing its fruits within established limits. Reversion instead intervenes only if the contemplated predecease occurs.

Bare ownership and usufruct can coexist with the clause. For example, the donor can transfer bare ownership and reserve usufruct. In such an arrangement, the donee receives bare ownership, while the donor maintains the right to use the asset or derive income from it. Any reversionary clause adds a further effect: if the donee dies first, the transferred right can re-enter according to what is established in the deed.

The clause does not make the donation freely revocable. The donor cannot obtain the return of the asset simply because they change their mind, personal relations worsen, or a different financial need arises. Reversion is linked to the predecease of the donee, not to a general power to dissolve the donation. Confusing these levels can lead to choosing a clause that does not respond to the concrete necessity.

The will responds to another need. The will serves to dispose of assets that remain in the testator's estate at the time of their death. The donation with reversion instead transfers an asset during life, while providing for its possible return in a defined circumstance. When planning housing, support for a child, and future distribution of the estate together, the effects of these instruments must be read without overlapping them.

PART FOUR

The donee is the owner of the asset, but the clause does not become irrelevant. The fact that the property has been donated does not abstractly prevent the donee from intending to sell it or use it as collateral. However, the presence of a reversionary clause can affect the security of the operation and the evaluation of whoever buys or finances, because the asset is exposed to the possible return provided by law.

Article 792 links reversion to subsequent acts concerning the asset. The rule regulates the return of the asset and the effects on alienations, burdens, and mortgages established by the donee. The protection of third parties also depends on real estate advertising formalities and the concrete sequence of acts. For this reason, there is no reliable answer based solely on the phrase "the donor agrees": the text of the donation, transcriptions, and acts already intervened count.

A future sale must be considered before the donation deed. If the property could be sold, divided among family members, or given as collateral, it is useful that the clause is also consistent with this perspective. Reversion may be appropriate for an asset destined to remain in the family, but it can make its circulation more delicate. The problem is not only whether the sale is possible, but what effects and precautions it entails for all people involved.

PART FIVE

The clause does not eliminate the protection of reserved shares. The spouse, children, and, in the absence of children, ascendants are the legal heirs: the law reserves a portion of the deceased's estate for them. Donations made during the donor's life may be relevant, after their death, in the calculation necessary to understand whether that quota has been infringed. The reference regulation is contained in Articles 536 and following of the Italian Civil Code on legal heirs and the reduction of donations.

Reversion and reduction are distinct issues. The former depends on the early death of the donee compared to the donor and on the wording of the clause. The latter concerns the possible infringement of the reserved quota when the donor's succession opens. If the donee survives the donor, the reversion does not operate; this does not exclude that the donation may be relevant in the subsequent comparison with the rights of legal heirs.

The circulation of donated assets has specific transitional rules today. Article 44 of Law No. 182 of December 2, 2025, modified the effects of the reduction of the donation towards successors in title from the donee and provided for a different discipline based on the date of opening of the succession, with transitional rules for prior successions. This reform concerns the infringement of the reserved share and does not modify the reversionary clause of Articles 791 and 792. The text can be consulted in the Official Gazette of December 3, 2025, Law No. 182, Article 44.

The date of the donor's death can therefore have significance. When the problem concerns an already donated property, a future sale, and possible claims by legal heirs, it is necessary to separate the reversionary clause from the reduction of the donation. The first verification concerns who died and in what order; the second requires identifying the succession concerned, the allocations made during life, and the applicable regime to the position of third parties.

PART SIX

The first question concerns the destination of the asset. You must understand if you want the property to return to the donor upon the premature death of the donee even when the latter leaves children, or if you desire it to remain within their lineage. This is the choice that guides the formulation of the clause and that cannot be left to generic expressions.

The second question concerns current availability. If the donor must continue to live in the property, use it personally, or collect rent, the right of usufruct or a different right of enjoyment must be addressed expressly. It is not prudent to assume that reversion also attributes these powers, because it operates only in the event of the contemplated predecease.

Few data are needed, but truly decisive ones. For an initial comparison, the property's deed of origin, the existence of usufructs, mortgages, or other encumbrances, the donor's previous donations, and relevant family relationships are useful. These elements help distinguish a choice aimed at protecting the donor from a choice intended to favor the continuity of the asset in the donee's family.

Frequently asked questions

Can I include the reversionary clause in a property donation?

Yes, the clause can accompany a property donation. The donation requires a public deed under penalty of nullity, according to Article 782 of the Italian Civil Code. The deed must clearly state whether the return is provided for the predecease of the donee alone or also of their descendants. For properties, advertising formalities in real estate registries also assume importance.

Does the asset return to the donor if the donee dies after them?

No, reversion presupposes that the donee dies before the donor. If the donee survives, the prerequisite of the clause is not met, and the asset remains in their estate. Upon the subsequent death of the donee, the property will follow their succession, barring other validly constituted rights on the asset.

Can I continue to live in the house I donate?

Yes, but an adequate right of enjoyment must be provided. The reservation of usufruct is one of the tools that can allow the donor to use the property or collect its fruits. The reversionary clause does not attribute this right, because it regulates only the possible return of the asset in case of the donee's predecease.

Does the reversionary clause always prevent selling the property?

No, it does not automatically make the sale impossible. However, the sale cannot be treated as if the clause did not exist. The effects of reversion on subsequent alienations and the protection of third parties depend on Article 792, advertising formalities, and the content of the deed. Before making commitments, it is necessary to distinguish the clause from mere donation origin.

Does the clause protect the donee from the donor's other heirs?

No, it does not eliminate the rights of legal heirs. If the donation affects the quota reserved for the spouse, children, or, in the absence of children, ascendants, an issue of reduction can arise after the donor's death. Reversion regulates an event linked to predecease; reserved shares instead concern the successional protection reserved by law.

A useful criterion for deciding

The clause is useful only if it responds to the risk of predecease. Before including it in a donation, it is important to distinguish the return of the asset from the use of the property, its future sale, and the protection of legal heirs. If you want to compare this clause with your family and patrimonial situation, you can contact me.