
Volume 13 Numbe 2 2020
___________________________________________________________________________
ARTICLES
 In e p e ing he Condi ions o Imp é ision:
The Goals o he Re o m P ojec s as a Decisi e Tool o F ench and Belgian Cou s
Luigi Mon e usco
 The Bi h Mo he ’s Assen o Adop ion and he Limi a ion o Au onomy o Women’s Will in
Spanish Law: A P oposal de lege e enda
Ma ía Vic o ia Mayo del Hoyo
CIVIL LAW TRANSLATIONS
 Bilingual English-Spanish Louisiana Ci il Code,
Book I, Ti les IV-X
Ma iano Vi e a
 T ilingual Louisiana Ci il Code, Book IV:
Con lic o Laws in English, F ench, and Spanish
Oli ie Mo é eau & Ma iano Vi e a
CIVIL LAW IN THE WORLD
 A gen ina
Julie a Ma o a & Agus ín Pa ise
BOOK REVIEWS
 Ha y Dondo p, Da id Ibbe son, and El jo J. H. Sch age (eds.),
Limi a ion and P esc ip ion: A Compa a i e Legal His o y
Benjamin Wes Janke
 Jan Jakob Bo nheim, P ope y Righ s and Biju alism
James Go dley
Also in his issue:
REDISCOVERED TREASURES OF LOUISIANA LAW; CIVIL LAW IN LOUISIANA
JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES
Edi o -in-Chie
Oli ie Mo é eau
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Associa e Edi o -in-Chie
Agus ín Pa ise
Facul y o Law, Maas ich Uni e si y, The Ne he lands
Execu i e Managing Edi o
Ch is abelle Le eb e
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Managing Edi o
Ma iano Vi e a
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Book-Re iew Edi o
Se h S. B os o
Uni e si y o Alabama School o Law, USA
Hono a y Membe s o he Ad iso y Boa d
Robe A. Pascal†
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Rodol o Sacco
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y o Tu in, I aly
Jacques P. Vande linden†
Facul y o Law,
F ee Uni e si y o B ussels, Belgium
Uni e si y o Monc on, Canada
Ad iso y Boa d
S a his Banakas
No wich Law School, Uni e si y o Eas Anglia, Uni ed Kingdom
Paul R. Baie
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
And ea Beauchamp Ca oll
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Elizabe h R. Ca e
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Seán P. Donlan
Facul y o Law, Thompson Ri e s Uni e si y, Canada
F ançois du Toi
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y o he Wes e n Cape, Sou h A ica
Mu iel Fab e-Magnan
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y Pan héon-So bonne, Pa is 1, F ance
F édé ique Fe and
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y Jean Moulin, Lyon 3, F ance
Sil ia Fe e i
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y o Tu in, I aly
James R. Go dley
Tulane Uni e si y Law School, USA
Michele G aziadei
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y o Tu in, I aly
Da id W. G uning
College o Law, Loyola Uni e si y New O leans, USA
A ila Ha ma hy
Facul y o Law, Eö ös Lo ánd Uni e si y, Budapes , Hunga y
Rosalie Jukie
McGill Uni e si y Facul y o Law, Canada
Nicholas Kasi e
Jus ice, Sup eme Cou o Canada, Canada
Pnina Laha
Bos on Uni e si y School o Law, USA
Alain A. Le asseu
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Melissa T. Loneg ass
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Hec o MacQueen
Uni e si y o Edinbu gh School o Law, Uni ed Kingdom
Ul ich Magnus
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y o Hambu g, Ge many
Blandine Malle -B icou
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y Jean Moulin, Lyon 3, F ance
Juana Ma co Molina
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y o Ba celona, Spain
Michael McAuley
Ad oca e, Mon eal, Canada
Nadia Nedzel
Sou he n Uni e si y Law Cen e , USA
Ba ba a Pozzo
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y o Insub ia, Como, I aly
Ch is a Rau enbach
Facul y o Law, No h-Wes Uni e si y, Sou h A ica
F ancisco Reyes Villamiza
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y o he Andes, Colombia
Cla e Ryan
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Michel Séjean
Facul y o Law, Uni e si y B e agne Sud, F ance
Lionel Smi h
McGill Uni e si y Facul y o Law, Canada
Jan M. Smi s
Facul y o Law, Maas ich Uni e si y, The Ne he lands
Fe nando Tolle
Facul y o Law, Aus al Uni e si y, A gen ina
John Randall T ahan
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
Lécia Vicen e
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
S e an Vogenaue
Max Planck Ins i u e o Eu opean Legal His o y, Ge many
Michael L. Wells
Uni e si y o Geo gia School o Law, USA
Pie e Widme †
Swiss Ins i u e o Compa a i e Law, Lausanne-Do igny, Swi ze land
Na ional Co esponden s
Ca los Felipe Amuná egui Pe elló, Chile
Ewa Bagińska, Poland
Lucas Ab eu Ba oso, B azil
Claudia Ma ía Cas o Valle, Cen al Ame ica
Roland Djieu ack, OHADA Coun ies
Lau a F anciosi, I aly
Thomas Kadne -G aziano, Swi ze land
Saskia Le maie , Ge many
Juana Ma co Molina, Spain
Julie a Ma o a, A gen ina
Mohamed Ma a , A ab Coun ies
Mus apha Mekki, F ance
Luis Muñiz A güelles, Pue o Rico
Asya Os oukh, Russia
Alexand a Popo ici, Québec
Vincen Sagae , Belgium
Jo ge A. Sánchez Co de o, Mexico
Bing Shui, China
F ançois du Toi , Sou h A ica
Lécia Vicen e, Po ugal
La s an Vlie , The Ne he lands
Senio G adua e Edi o s
Jessica D. B ewe
Adam L. Lalibe e
Pea son A. Wolk

Junio G adua e Edi o s
Jacque P. Biggs
Cai lin R. B inson
Wins on M. Faulk
Kelsi Flo es
Ka ie Fox
A hu H. Pea cy
Michael Sande s
Me edi h W. Smi h
Macy P. Spence
Ri e s S ephens
Technical Suppo
Kayla Reed
Louisiana S a e Uni e si y Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , USA
JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES (ISSN 1944-3749)
Published by he Cen e o Ci il Law S udies, Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e , Louisiana S a e Uni e si y.
© Ma ch 2021, Cen e o Ci il Law S udies
The JCLS welcomes submissions o A icles, No es, Commen s, Essays, Book Re iews, and Gene al
In o ma ion. Unless o he wise ag eed, con ibu ions should ha e been nei he published no submi ed
o publica ion elsewhe e. All con ibu ions will be subjec o a c i ical e iew by he Edi o s, and will
be subjec ed o pee - e iew.
Edi o ial comunica ion and books o e iew should be add essed o he edi o -in-chie and sen o ou
edi o ial o ices.
Edi o ial o ices:
Cen e o Ci il Law S udies
LSU Paul M. Hebe Law Cen e
Sui e W326, 1 Eas Campus D i e
Ba on Rouge, LA 70803
[email protected]
www.law.lsu.edu/jcls
JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES
_________________________________________________________________________________
VOLUME 13 NUMBER 2 2020
_________________________________________________________________________________
ARTICLES
In e p e ing he Condi ions o Imp é ision: The Goals o he Re o m P ojec s
as a Decisi e Tool o F ench and Belgian Cou s
Luigi Mon e usco 193
The Bi h Mo he ’s Assen o Adop ion and he Limi a ion o Au onomy o
Women’s Will in Spanish Law: A P oposal de lege e enda
Ma ía Vic o ia Mayo del Hoyo 249
CIVIL LAW TRANSLATIONS
Bilingual English-Spanish Louisiana Ci il Code, Book I, Ti les IV-X
Ma iano Vi e a 277
T ilingual Louisiana Ci il Code, Book IV: Con lic o Laws in English, F ench,
and Spanish
Oli ie Mo é eau & Ma iano Vi e a 351
CIVIL LAW IN THE WORLD
A gen ina
Public and P i a e In e mingled: Changes in he Family and P ope y Laws o
A gen ina
Julie a Ma o a & Agus ín Pa ise 383
BOOK REVIEWS
Ha y Dondo p, Da id Ibbe son, and El jo J. H. Sch age (eds.),
Limi a ion and P esc ip ion: A Compa a i e Legal His o y
Benjamin Wes Janke 417
Jan Jakob Bo nheim, P ope y Righ s and Biju alism
James Go dley 425
REDISCOVERED TREASURES OF LOUISIANA LAW
In oduc ion o Robe A. Pascal’s Memo andum: The Code as a Tex book and a
Rule Book
Oli ie Mo é eau 435
A Memo andum on he O ganiza ion o he Ci il Code and Explana o y
Ma e ial
Robe A. Pascal 440
CIVIL LAW IN LOUISIANA
Lege . Lege
Jessica B ewe 447
Boo he . DOTD
Jacque P. Biggs 459
2020] ASSENT TO ADOPTION IN SPANISH LAW 255
I belie e, howe e , ha he assen o he pa en s mus anscend
pa en al au ho i y and be based on he ju idical ela ionship be ween
pa en and child. Adop ion does indeed pu an end o pa en al au-
ho i y, bu i only does so because he ilia ion bond is ex inguished.
Wha is essen ial is no ha pa en al au ho i y ends, bu ha ilia ion
disappea s. Pa en al au ho i y is me ely an ins i u ion o he p o ec-
ion o mino s ha he law links o pa en hood. The pa en al ela-
ionship has legal con en and a signi icance in he li es o hose
who o m a pa o i ha is much mo e impo an in in ensi y and
ex ension han he me e a ibu ion o his empo a y unc ion-du y.
Th ough he egula ion o ilia ion, he law a ibu es legal suppo
o a ela ionship ha is gi en by na u e i sel . The legal bond es ab-
lished acco ding o he ules o de e mining pa en age can only be
des oyed i i is demons a ed in a judicial p oceeding ha he pa-
e ni y o ma e ni y is no au hen ic. I hey a e alid, he bond e-
mains. No wi hs anding he abo e, by egula ing adop ion, he legal
sys em has p o ided o he c ea ion o a pa en -child ela ionship
no based on biology. Since he cons i u ion o his new bond neces-
sa ily en ails he disappea ance o he o iginal bond, he biological
pa en s, as pa ies di ec ly in ol ed, mus ake pa : he ela ionship
ha he law c ea ed o ecognize hei na u al bond will cease o ex-
is . Tha is he basis o hei assen o adop ion.
Tha said, i he pa en s do no comply wi h hei pa en al du ies
and place hei child in a si ua ion o need, hen he abo e men ioned
does no p e en ha p io i y be gi en o he child’s bes in e es s
o e ha o hei pa en s. This makes i easie o he S a e o ein-
eg a e he child in o ano he amily h ough adop ion, wi hou he
need o he assen o he biological pa en s, hus dep i ing hem o
he possibili y o deciding on he con inui y o he pa en -child ela-
ionship.
Wha would exclude he ju idical ela ionship be ween pa en
and child as a basis o pa en al assen o adop ion is he possibili y
ha an emancipa ed child could be adop ed wi hou he assen o he
pa en s. This adop ion would be a unila e al b eak o he pa en -

256 JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Vol. 13
child bond wi hou he child ha ing a eal need o be p o ec ed o
wi hou he pa en s ha ing ailed in hei du ies; and his ac would
lea e hem de enseless. Na u ally, p ecau ions should be aken o
a oid he p e en ion o a ai adop ion due o a malicious e usal o
he pa en s.
I should no be o go en ha he ela ionship be ween a pa en
and a child is he s onges o exis . I he law is no indi e en o
he mo e—admi edly—banal o colla e al in e es s o o he sub-
jec s, such as hose o he adop e ’s spouse o pa ne , i should no
dis ega d he in e es s ha de i e om his essen ial bond. These
a e, in ac , in e es s ha a e aken in o accoun by in e na ional con-
en ions: he Con en ion on he Righ s o he Child s a es in a icle
9 ha “S a es Pa ies shall ensu e ha a child shall no be sepa a ed
om his o he pa en s agains hei will” and in a icle 21, i speci-
ies, conce ning adop ion, ha hose pe sons in ol ed, including he
pa en s, mus gi e hei “in o med consen .” The Eu opean Con en-
ion on Adop ion18 also equi es he assen o he pa en s and ha
he pa en s a e duly in o med: “o he e ec s o hei consen , in
pa icula whe he o no an adop ion will esul in he e mina ion
o he legal ela ionship be ween he child and his o he amily o
o igin.” And he Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s has s a ed ha
adop ion wi hou he assen o he mo he may be con a y o he
igh o amily li e p oclaimed by a icle 8 o he Eu opean Con en-
ion on Human Righ s.19
IV. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BIRTH MOTHER’S ASSENT
The assen o he biological mo he , jus as—when applicable—
ha o he a he , is p esen ed as a necessa y bu non-binding mani-
es a ion o he will o he pe son who is no a pa y o he adop i e
bond bu is a ec ed by i .
18. Eu opean Con en ion on he Adop ion o Child en, a . 5(1)(a).
19. See Omo e e c. Espagne, No. 69339/16, June 23, 2020.
2020] ASSENT TO ADOPTION IN SPANISH LAW 257
He a o able will is a condi ion sine qua non o he alid con-
s i u ion o he adop ion. Wi h ha mani es a ion o he will, he
bi h mo he , no a pa y o he bond bu a ec ed by i , does no as-
sume he con en o he ju idical ela ionship o he adop ion, wi h
he igh s and du ies ha compose i , bu au ho izes he p oduc ion
o hose e ec s.20 This au ho iza ion, is necessa y, bu —jus as wi h
consen —no binding o he judge. The judge is no obliga ed o
g an he adop ion, bu once he necessa y equi emen s ha e been
me , he o she can decide eely in he bes in e es s o he child.
The me e exis ence o he biological mo he , and in some cases
o he legally iden i ied biological a he , does no make he assen
o he adop ion manda o y, bu he concu ence o ce ain ci cum-
s ances p o ided by law is necessa y. As al eady men ioned, he
adop ee mus no be emancipa ed, and he biological pa en mus no
be dep i ed o his o he pa en al au ho i y by a inal judgemen , no
ha e legal g ounds o such dep i a ion, no ha e his o he pa en al
au ho i y suspended wi hin he pe iod o wo yea s a e he no i i-
ca ion o he decla a ion o abandonmen wi hou opposi ion o wi h
opposi ion dismissed.21
Howe e , he Ci il Code admi s he possibili y ha , when assen
is equi ed due o he ci cums ances indica ed, i can be dispensed
wi h i he mo he who is obliged o p o ide i is unable o do so.
Reasons o his may include, o example, ha he capaci y o ac
has changed, ha she has been decla ed judicially absen , ha he
whe eabou s a e unknown so ha i is impossible o summon he , o
ha i , ha ing been summoned, she does no appea .22
20. This unc ion o au ho iza ion o legal e ec s has al eady been e e ed
o by VARGAS sup a no e 8, a 227. See PÉREZ, sup a no e 3, a 191, he obse es
ha assen is no a diminished o a enua ed consen bu is a quali ied consen -
au ho iza ion o he ac ions o hose who a e no subjec o he ela ionship ha
is o be cons i u ed by judicial decision. See also Miguel Ángel Pé ez Ál a ez,
Comen a io al a . 177 del Código ci il, in CÓDIGO CIVIL COMENTADO 937 (2d
ed., Ped o de Pablo Con e as e al. eds., Ci i as 2016).
21. A . 177.2.2 CC.
22. See a . 177.2 CC; see also a . 38.3, Law 15/2015, o July 2, 2015, Law
on Volun a y Ju isdic ion Law [he eina e LVJ].
258 JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Vol. 13
The basis and impo ance o he mo he ’s assen ha e al eady
been poin ed ou . Howe e , some imes, si ua ions o impossibili y
o neglec o du ies may a ise in connec ion wi h he mani es a ion
o his will, which may e en block he adop ion. In such cases whe e
he judge canno coun on he mo he ’s assen , i he o she belie es
ha adop ion is he bes op ion and ha i s ands a good chance o
being a success ul one, p e en ing he judge om es ablishing he
adop ion would cause signi ican damage o he mino , who would
be dep i ed o he p o ec ion ha his measu e o amily in eg a ion
o e s him. Fo his eason, he legisla o —balancing hese ci cum-
s ances and he in e es s o he child and he mo he —is inclined o
a o he bene i o he child. Thus, he legisla o egula es he pos-
sibili y ha , in hese cases, he adop ion can be alidly cons i u ed
e en wi hou he manda o y assen , sac i icing, i necessa y, he pos-
sible in e es o he mo he , who is s ill a hi d pa y in he adop ion.
In sho , i seeks o a oid a si ua ion in which a ailu e o comply
wi h a p esupposi ion—in ended o gua an ee he in e es s o a hi d
pa y—caused ei he by impossibili y o by he abandonmen o ob-
liga ions o he holde o such in e es s, migh p e en an unp o-
ec ed mino access o a amily-in eg a ion measu e. I should no be
o go en ha adop ion is a measu e o he p o ec ion o mino s.
No wi hs anding he o egoing, he law p o ides o he possi-
bili y ha a mo he who has been unable o gi e he assen h ough
no aul o he own may, i ce ain ci cums ances a ise, eques he
e mina ion o he adop ion unde he e ms o a icle 180.2 CC.23
As o he pa icula o abs ac na u e o he mo he ’s au ho iza-
ion o e ec s, a icle 177.2 in ine exp essly excludes he possibili y
ha in adop ions equi ing a p io p oposal om he public body,
he assen o he pa en s may be gi en o speci ic adop e s. The p o-
ision, which had been con ained in he Law on Ci il P ocedu e o
1881 in a . 1830 (since 1987), has been eloca ed o he Ci il Code
23. See An onio Vela Sánchez, I e ocabilidad, nulidad y ex inción de la
adopción, 70 ANUARIO DE DERECHO CIVIL 1230 e seq. (2017) o a wo k on he
ex inc ion o adop ion.
2020] ASSENT TO ADOPTION IN SPANISH LAW 259
by Law 26/2015. In o de o a oid i egula ac ions and child a -
icking, he law excludes biological pa en s om decisions ela ed
o he selec ion o adop e s, which is he esponsibili y o he admin-
is a ion. To admi assen wi h espec o speci ic adop e s would
imply in e e ence in he selec ion wo k o he public en i y, which
would hen be seen as subjec o he con ol and app o al o he pa -
en s. P ecisely o his eason, he p ecep e e s o cases in which a
p e ious p oposal is equi ed: when he e is no p oposal om he
public body, which is he excep ion, he adop e s a e de e mined by
he legally o eseen ci cums ances and— heo e ically— hey a e no
chosen.24 On he o he hand, in such cases, in eali y, ei he he p o-
hibi ion is illogical (when he adop e is he spouse o pa ne o he
pa en 25) o i is simply no possible o necessa y o ob ain hei as-
sen (when he pa en s ha e died and an uncle is going o adop he
o phan,26 when he child is emancipa ed27 o when a gua dian is go-
ing o adop he child al eady unde hei ca e28). In iew o he
abo e, i can be said ha , in gene al, he e ec au ho ized by he
biological mo he , and in some cases he a he , is he up u e o
24. A . 176 CC s a es ha :
[N]o p oposal shall be equi ed i he p ospec i e adop ee mee s any o
he ollowing ci cums ances:
1. Being an o phan and a ela i e o he adop e in he hi d deg ee by
consanguini y o a ini y.
2. Being a child o he spouse o pe son pa ne ed wi h he adop e in an
emo ional ela ionship akin o ma iage.
3. Ha ing been in legal os e ca e o mo e han a yea unde a measu e
o a p e-adop i e os e ca e, o ha ing been unde he adop e ’s gua di-
anship o he same ime.
4. Being o legal age o an emancipa ed mino .
25. See a . 176.2.2 CC.
26. See a . 176.2.1 CC.
27. See a . 176.2.4 CC.
28. See a . 176.2.3 CC: The p ohibi ion would make sense only in he case
o adop ion—wi hou p oposal—by he p e-adop i e gua dian o mo e han one
yea , as he e would ha e been a p io selec ion by he public en i y and he e
could be in e e ence.
260 JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Vol. 13
hei legal pa en al bonds and he cons i u ion o new ones,29 wi h
indi e ence as o who hese bonds a e o med wi h.30
Finally, he decla a ion o he mo he ’s will is o a s ic ly pe -
sonal na u e, as i will be shown below. This excludes he possibili y
o ep esen a ion. P oo o his is ha , as has been men ioned, a icle
177.2 CC es ablishes ha assen can be dispensed wi h when he
pe son who mus gi e i is unable o do so.31
V. FORM OF THE BIRTH MOTHER’S ASSENT
Law 26/2015 has in oduced a new pa ag aph in a icle 177 CC,
which e e s join ly o he o m o issuance o consen s and assen s:
“ hey shall be eely g an ed, wi h he equi ed legal o m and in
w i ing, a e in o ma ion abou he consequences he eo has been
p o ided.” Since i e e s o he “ equi ed legal o m,” i is necessa y
o e e o he speci ic p o isions o he law in his ega d: in pa ic-
ula o a icle 177.2 o he Ci il Code and, especially, a icles 35.2
and 37.1 o Law 15/2015, o July 2, 2015, on Volun a y Ju isdic ion
(LVJ)—which eplaces he p o isions o he Ci il P ocedu e Law
(LCP).32
29. I should be no ed ha excep in he case o an open adop ion, he possi-
bili y o he bi h pa en s ha ing knowledge o he speci ic adop e s p oposed is,
o should be, limi ed. A . 39.2 LVJ es ablishes ha he p oceedings will be ca -
ied ou wi h app op ia e ese a ion, a oiding in pa icula ha he amily o
o igin has knowledge o he adop i e one. So i would no be easy o bi h pa en s
o gi e hei assen o he adop e s. This possibili y was exp essly excluded by
lawmake s in o de o ein o ce hei policy o comba ing hese i egula p ac ices.
30. See PÉREZ, sup a no e 3, a 184: Pé ez Ál a ez has obse ed ha wha
he law p ohibi s is ha he assen o he pa en s e e o “speci ic adop e s,” ha
is o say, he pe sonalized de e mina ion o he adop e , bu no he ci cums ances
ha mus be p esen in i . He he e o e conside s ha “no hing p ecludes he pos-
sibili y o pa en s o condi ion hei assen o he ac ha he adop i e pa en s
mee ce ain ci cums ances (mo ali y, li elihood, o concu ence o ce ain amily
budge s. . . .).” He adds ha “i his is admi ed, i would appea ha wha is ex-
cluded is subjec i ely-condi ioned assen , bu no assen ha would ha e been
objec i ely condi ioned.” In he same sense, Ma ía Angeles Pa a Lucán, Au ono-
mía de la olun ad y de echo de amilia, in 1 AUTONOMÍA DE LA VOLUNTAD EN
EL DERECHO PRIVADO: ESTUDIOS EN CONMEMORACIÓN DEL 150 ANIVERSARIO DE
LA LEY DEL NOTARIADO 421-422 (Wol e s Kluwe 2012).
31. See sec ion VI.
32. Be o e he LVJ, he ma e had been egula ed, since 1987, by he Ci il
P ocedu e Ac o 1881 unde a s. 1829.1(c), 1830. The new law has e ained he

2020] ASSENT TO ADOPTION IN SPANISH LAW 261
In iew o hese p ecep s, he issuance o he biological mo he ’s
assen is no obliga o y be o e he judge, unlike he consen o hose
who a e pa o he adop ion. The law es ablishes wo di e en mo-
men s o he p o ision o assen —be o e o a e he opening o a
ile o a speci ic adop ion and h ee ways o issuing i : in a public
documen , be o e he public en i y, o be o e he judge, which links
he di e en phases o momen s:
(i) Issuance o assen be o e he ile is opened: he law allows
assen o be gi en be o e he adop ion ile is opened, ei he be o e
he public body o in a public documen , a he choice o he issue .
This p io assen mus be s a ed in he p oposal o he public en i y,
so ha he cou cle k does no summon he mo he and ha he
judge is awa e o he ul ilmen o he equi emen .33
The assen hus gi en has an expi y pe iod o six mon hs om
i s issuance.34 Al hough he Volun a y Ju isdic ion Law does no ex-
p essly say so, i seems ha he ime a which i mus be checked
whe he he assen has expi ed is when he adop ion p oposal is sub-
mi ed. This was s a ed in he p e ious a icle 1830.2 LCP. This p e-
cep also indica ed ha , once his pe iod had passed, i was neces-
sa y o he assen o be enewed be o e he judge. The new a icle
37.1 LVJ does no exp essly men ion he necessa y enewal be o e
he judge ei he , bu i can be deduced, wi hou a doub , om he
p o ision o summoning he subjec s in ques ion be o e he judge.
On he o he hand, inasmuch as he law does no es ablish he
i e ocabili y o he assen hus gi en, he e does no seem o be any
incon enience in he possibili y ha , so long as a ile is no ini ia ed,
a e ac ion o assen may be issued in he same o m in which i was
gi en. In such a case, he mo he obliga ed o gi e he assen mus
be summoned unde he e ms o a icle 37.1 LVJ in o de o issue
i be o e he judge, i necessa y.
essence o he p e ious egula ion, al hough wi h some a ia ion in he wo ding
o he ules en ailing ce ain subs an i e changes.
33. See a s. 35.2-35.4 LVJ; see also a . 37.2 LVJ.
34. A . 37.1.2 LVJ.
262 JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Vol. 13
(ii) Issuance o he assen once he ile has been opened: once
he ile has been opened, he mo he who, acco ding o a icle
177.2 CC, mus assen and has no ye done so—ei he in a public
documen o be o e he public en i y—o who, ha ing gi en he as-
sen mo e han six mon hs ago such ha i has expi ed, will be sum-
moned o do so be o e he judge.35
In ega d o he possibili y ha , ha ing gi en assen be o e he
judge, i could be e oked be o e a decision is made, i is no easily
de ensible, jus as i happens in he case o consen . Jus as con-
sen —o adop e s and, i applicable, he adop ed—is con igu ed by
he law as an essen ial elemen in he cons i u ion o he adop ion,
so ha i is no possible o imagine an adop ion wi hou he a o able
will o hose who a e a pa y o i , he same is no ue o assen ,
since—as has al eady been explained— he law has no p oblem in
decla ing an adop ion wi hou i . I mus be also added ha a g ea
deal o damage could be caused o he child by desis ing a he las
minu e—a e he ime and ene gy in es ed in he p ocedu e—by a
pe son whose will is no conside ed essen ial by he law.36 Fo all
hese easons, e oca ion is no easily jus i iable. No wi hs anding
he abo e, he ac ha i does no seem de ensible ha he mo he ’s
epen ance au oma ically p e en s he cons i u ion o he adop ion
does no mean ha he judge should dis ega d i : i he o she is awa e
o his ci cums ance, i should be conside ed in making he inal de-
cision.37 I should no be o go en ha he judge in he adop ion
esolu ion mus decide in acco dance wi h he bes in e es s o he
child.38
35. A . 37.1 LVJ.
36. In his sense, you ha e o coun on i . Acco ding o O ganic Law 8/2015,
o July 22, 2015, a . 2.3(c), he i e e sible e ec o he passage o ime on he
de elopmen o he child is an elemen o be aken in o accoun in de e mining he
in e es o he child.
37. See a . 176.1 CC.
38. See a . 176.1 CC and a . 39.1 LVJ.
2020] ASSENT TO ADOPTION IN SPANISH LAW 263
VI. BIRTH MOTHER’S CAPACITY TO ASSENT
The Ci il Code does no con ain any special p o isions ega d-
ing he capaci y o gi e assen o adop ion. This may pose p oblems
in cases whe e he biological mo he lacks he gene al capaci y o
ac because she has no eached he age o majo i y39 o because an
o de dep i ing he o capaci y o ac has been issued.40
In such cases, someone could a gue ha ha he assen o he
adop ion o he child should be gi en by he mo he ’s ep esen a-
i es. Howe e , assen is a s ic ly pe sonal ac , which excludes ep-
esen a ion. P oo o his is ha he law admi s ha assen is dis-
pensed wi h when he one who mus gi e i is unable o do so.41 I
should be emembe ed ha s ic ly pe sonal ac s a e hose ha , due
o hei impo ance o cen ali y, can only be pe o med by he pe -
son he sel . Fo hese ac s, he na u al capaci y o gi e alid consen
is su icien , and ep esen a ion is excluded. Inso a as he mo he ’s
assen implies he elimina ion o he legal mo he -child ela ionship
and he consequen modi ica ion o he “ci il s a us,”42 i alls wi hin
he ca ego y o a pe sonal ac . Because o his, no one can supplan
he in his decision. The e o e, he na u al capaci y should be su i-
cien o issue he assen .
39. See a . 322 CC.
40. See a . 199 CC. See also a . 322 CC. In Spanish law “A pe son who is
o legal age (18 yea s old) has capaci y o all ac s o ci il li e. . . .” Bu when he
pe son o legal age does no ha e he na u al capaci y o go e n himsel , he o she
may be dep i ed o he capaci y o ac in law by means o a judicial decision. A .
199 CC. s a es: “No one may be decla ed incapable sa e pu suan o a cou judge-
men due o he causes se o h in he law.” And a . 200 CC s a es: “Pe sis en
physical o men al illnesses o de iciencies which p e en a pe son om go e n-
ing himsel shall be causes o incapaci a ion.” A legally incapaci a ed pe son has
a gua dian who akes ca e o his o he pe son and p ope y and who can ep esen
him o he .
41. See a . 177.2 CC.
42. In Spanish law, “ci il s a us” includes pe sonal si ua ions, endowed wi h
a ce ain s abili y and pe manence, which in luence he pe son’s capaci y o ac
o de e mine he a ibu ion o speci ic igh s o du ies, and which he legal sys em
conside s undamen al o he o ganiza ion o socie y, he eby g an ing hem he
same o mal egime which basically a ec s he alloca ion o ce ain sha es and
he peculia i ies o hei e idence.
264 JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Vol. 13
Conce ning he na u al capaci y o pe o m s ic ly pe sonal ac s,
he law some imes es ablishes a gene al p esump ion o ap i ude o
speci ic ac s when he pe son eaches a ce ain age, hus a oiding
he need o examine capaci y in each speci ic case. Fo example, in
he case o a will—wi h he excep ion o a holog aphic will— he e
is a gene al p esump ion o na u al capaci y o c ea e a alid will
a e he age o ou een.43 In he case o a ma iage, he law indi-
ec ly p esumes ha om he age o six een onwa ds he pe son has
he capaci y o consen o he ma iage.44 When ecognizing chil-
d en, i is also indi ec ly p esumed ha he pe son has he ull na u al
capaci y o do so om he age o six een onwa ds, excluding he
need o judicial app o al.45
This does no hold in he speci ic case o assen o adop ion,
whe e he law does no es ablish a p esump ion o na u al capaci y
om a speci ic age. This p o ision does no seem o impede ha ing
he assen o a mino biological mo he as a necessa y equi emen
o he alid cons i u ion o he adop ion.46 This p esump ion is all
he mo e ue i one akes in o accoun he legisla o ’s choice o
make manda o y he will o he mino ega ding he adop ion: i e-
qui es he consen o he adop ee olde han wel e and allows dual
adop ion by a mino spouse (when he o he spouse has eached he
age o wen y- i e).47 On his ma e , he T ibunal Sup emo (Su-
p eme Cou ) conside ed an adop ion oid on he g ounds ha he
assen gi en by he mino biological mo he co esponded o a ic i-
ious adop ion.48
43. See a s. 663.1, 688 CC.
44. Compa e a . 46 CC wi h a s. 317, 320 CC.
45. Compa e a . 121 CC wi h a s. 46, 317, 320 CC.
46. Pé ez is inclined o conside he mo he ’ assen o be manda o y in cases
o mino i y s a us: see PÉREZ, sup a no e 3, a 188 n.229; And, in he same ein,
see VARGAS, sup a no e 8, a 233: in ela ion o pa en s, Va gas Cab e a obse es
ha “ he condi ion o a he o mo he and su icien disce nmen will su ice o
gi e he co esponding decla a ion o will.”
47. PÉREZ, sup a no e 3.
48. See Judgemen o he T ibunal Sup emo o Jan. 18, 2012.
2020] ASSENT TO ADOPTION IN SPANISH LAW 271
p o ec ed: hey mus be able o decide o hemsel es, and hey ha e
he igh o make mis akes.66
This end ha empowe s he au onomy o he will clashes wi h
he pa e nalism ha he law s ill main ains, in ma e s o adop ion,
wi h espec o p egnan women o women who ha e jus become
mo he s. The Code, inding i s jus i ica ion in he impo ance o he
decision, dep i es women in hese ci cums ances o any possibili y
o decide on he ma e , on he assump ion ha hey lack he capaci y
o do so. This is an i ebu able p esump ion, i.e., one which does
no admi e idence o he con a y. This p esump ion, in addi ion o
a ec ing he ee de elopmen o he woman’s pe sonali y, may
place he in a complica ed si ua ion, ex ending he su e ing and
psychological bu den ha may be in ol ed in ha ing a pending de-
cision ega ding he child and going h ough he issuance o assen .
Howe e , his lack o con idence in he decision-making capaci y o
he p egnan woman has been abandoned by he legisla o in o he
a eas: he law i sel , in O ganic Law 2/2010, o Ma ch 3, 2010, on
Sexual and Rep oduc i e Heal h and he Volun a y In e up ion o
P egnancy (in which no limi a ions o his ype a e in oduced), de-
ends he impo ance o he au onomy o he woman’s will in ma -
e s o ilia ion. I main ains ha he decision abou child en “con-
s i u es one o he mos in ima e and pe sonal ma e s ha people
ace h oughou hei li es, which in eg a es an essen ial a ea o in-
di idual sel -de e mina ion” and ha “ he p o ec ion o his a ea o
pe sonal au onomy has a singula signi icance o women.”67
I canno be igno ed ha , a imes, he emo ional ension—cha -
ac e is ic o human beings— ha su ounds he bi h o a child, as
well as he p essu e o ce ain pe sonal, economic, and social ci -
cums ances, can cons i u e a handicap in decision-making ega ding
he ela ionship o ilia ion. I is, he e o e, unde s andable ha he
66. See U.N. Commi ee on he Righ s o Pe sons wi h Disabili ies, Gene al
Commen No. 1, A icle 12: Equal Recogni ion Be o e he Law (2014),
h ps://pe ma.cc/U7TF-QMQ6.
67. See O ganic Law 2/2010, o Ma ch 3, 2010, on Sexual and Rep oduc i e
Heal h and he Volun a y In e up ion o P egnancy, Sec ion I o he P eamble.

272 JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Vol. 13
legal sys em should adop some cau ion ha akes his eali y in o
accoun o he bene i o all pa ies.
Howe e , he legisla o mus ind a balance be ween his cau ion
and he exe cise o he decision-making powe . I mus also ake in o
accoun all hose in ol ed. I is ue ha in he ension ha su ounds
bi h he e is an impo an physical componen ha (ob iously) only
a ec s women and ha can e en be complica ed by condi ions such
as pos pa um dep ession.68 Howe e , his ension does no ha e an
exclusi ely physical o igin, bu a he has ano he psychological
componen ha de i es na u ally om he a i al o a child in o he
wo ld and is p esen in bo h pa en s. The e o e, e en i i is no wha
is usually done, when ilia ion is de e mined wi h ega d o he a-
he , ( o example, because o he exis ence o ma iage69) hese
conside a ions should also be aken in o accoun wi h ega d o him.
In o de o ensu e his in eg a i e balance, he law could allow
pa en s o gi e hei assen o adop ion a any ime du ing p egnancy
and a any ime a e bi h, bu wi h he possibili y o eely e oking
i wi hin a pe iod o ime, which could be, o example, du ing he
wo o h ee mon hs immedia ely ollowing bi h.70 The de e mina-
ion o he pe iod o e ocabili y should ake in o accoun he child’s
68. On he subjec , see DANIELA WADIA JARUFE CONTRERAS, TRATAMIENTO
LEGAL DE LAS FILIACIONES NO BIOLÓGICAS EN EL ORDENAMIENTO JURÍDICO ESPA-
ÑOL: ADOPCIÓN VERSUS TÉCNICAS DE REPRODUCCIÓN HUMANA ASISTIDA 241-242
(Dykinson 2013).
69. See a . 116 CC.
70. This possibili y is no alien o he legisla o , who al eady aised i in he
d a ing o he 1987 Ac . Thus, he i s D a Law, o Ma . 10, 1986, p oposed
he ollowing wo ding o a . 176.3 CC: “The i e ocable assen o he mo he o
he adop ee shall no be accep ed un il i een days ha e elapsed since he bi h”
(emphasis added). In a o o i , see PÉREZ, sup a no e 3, a 187, n.228. In some
p e ious wo k I al eady de ended he p io p o ision o a e ocable assen : see
Ma ia Vic o ia Mayo del Hoyo, Más allá del acogimien o de meno es: incapa-
ci ados, e ce a edad y nasci u us, 734 REVISTA CRÍTICA DE DERECHO INMOBI-
LIARIO 3235-3236 (2012); MARIA VICTORIA MAYOR DEL HOYO, LA ADOPCIÓN EN
EL DERECHO COMÚN ESPAÑOL 243 e seq. (Ti an lo Blanch 2019). In he same
ein, see Pa a, sup a no e 30, a 422. also spoke in a o o a sys em simila o
his one, se ing he deadline o e oca ion wi hin wo mon hs a e childbi h:
see JARUFE, sup a no e 68, a 241 (p e iously, in he de ense o his doc o al dis-
se a ion, he al eady ad oca ed his possibili y).
2020] ASSENT TO ADOPTION IN SPANISH LAW 273
in e es in no p olonging unce ain y in o de o a oid he i e e si-
ble e ec o he passage o ime on his o he de elopmen .71
In pa icula , a sys em could be se up o p o ide assen in he
o m o a public documen ha can be egis e ed ex o icio by he
no a y in a egis y c ea ed ad hoc. Once he assen has been issued
in hese e ms, he pa en s could, a any momen be o e he deadline
se by law, change hei mind in a new no a ized documen . Once
his pe iod o ime has elapsed wi hou exe cise o he powe o e -
oca ion, he assen gi en would au oma ically become i m and no
new mani es a ion o will—no e en a con i ma ion o he p e ious
one—would be necessa y. Wi h ha i mness, he mani es a ion o
will would acqui e—by i ue o he law— he ju idical condi ion o
alid assen o adop , ha is assen ad adop ionem, and would open
he doo o he possible cons i u ion o he adop ion. Mo eo e , his
assen would no expi e. The public body and he judge would only
need o consul he assen kep in he egis y.
This is my p oposal de lege e enda: his p oposal would allow
espec o he au onomy o he will o women who would no be
dep i ed o hei capaci y o decide because hey a e in a s a e o
ges a ion o ha e ecen ly gi en bi h, a o ing he ee de elopmen
o hei pe sonali y and acili a ing hings a a di icul ime o hem,
in a manne ha is cohe en wi h he es o he o de and he new
social eali y.
A he same ime, i would allow he in oduc ion o a p uden
cau ion ha , gi en he complexi y o he si ua ion, could be o help,
bo h by o e ing calm o hose making he decision and by acili a -
ing, i necessa y, con o ma ion wi h he pe spec i e o he will. I
could e en be said ha his op ion allows o g ea e pe spec i e,
gi en ha he p oposed sys em would allow he ex ension o he
e m gi en o conside he decision.
71. See O ganic Law 8/2015, o July 22, 2015, a . 2.3 c).
274 JOURNAL OF CIVIL LAW STUDIES [Vol. 13
The p oposal would no be de imen al o he child since he
limi o he powe o e oca ion would be de e mined by he child’s
in e es .
The p oposal would also enable bi h pa en s o be placed on an
equal oo ing wi h espec o each o he , by adap ing he sys em once
again o he new social sensibili ies.
The p oposal would sol e he p oblem, al eady denounced by
he Special Commi ee o he Sena e ha s udied he adop ion,72 ha
some imes causes he disappea ance o he mo he when she lea es
he hospi al, be o e he deadline o he o gi e he assen o he
adop ion has passed.
The sys em would in no way cons i u e an adop ion o he nas-
ci u us, inso a as he adop ion could only be cons i u ed om he
momen he assen became inal. And, mo eo e , he cu en adop-
ion p ocedu e is designed, as al eady s a ed, o i mly p e en any
i egula p ac ice ela ed o child a icking o o he ac ions p ohib-
i ed by law. I should be emembe ed, on he one hand, ha i is he
esponsibili y o he public en i y o decla e he sui abili y and se-
lec ion o he adop e s and ha , excep in he case o assessed cases,
o an adop ion ile o be opened i mus be p oposed by he public
en i y. And, on he o he hand, he adop ion is cons i u ed by judicial
esolu ion wi h he gua an ees ha his implies.
Finally, om a eleological poin o iew, he sys em would no
con lic wi h he Eu opean Con en ion on Adop ion, gi en ha he
mo he ’s assen would only be unde s ood o ha e been gi en, in he
s ic o echnical sense, once he p e iously exp essed wish had be-
come i m because he wo o h ee mon hs ollowing he bi h, ixed
by law, had elapsed wi hou e oca ion. Only a ha ime, and no
be o e (as i is subjec o e oca ion), would he will be said o ac-
qui e he legal s a us o assen and be alid. In any case, i would be
desi able ha in u u e e isions o he Eu opean Con en ion on
72. See In o me de la Comisión Especial de Es udio de la p oblemá ica de la
adopción nacional y o os emas a ines, BOCG, Senado, IX legisla u a, Se ies I,
No . 17, 2010, No. 545, a 9, 17, 20, 49, 53.
2020] ASSENT TO ADOPTION IN SPANISH LAW 275
Adop ion, he con en o a icle 5.5 be econside ed, in o de o adap
i o he new eali ies and o a oid inapp op ia e limi a ions on he
woman’s capaci y o decide.
Un il his e ision o he Eu opean Con en ion on Adop ion is
done, he p oposal may be ex apola ed, wi h he app op ia e adap-
a ions, o he o he Eu opean legal sys ems men ioned abo e ha
ha e a i ied he Con en ion and ha , ollowing he p o isions o
he Con en ion, limi he au onomy o he will o women by se ing
a minimum ime limi o gi ing assen o adop ion.