Top court in Spain rules that man who beat his sister to death with hammers as sole beneficiary of her life insurance policy

The Supreme Court in Spain has ruled that a man who killed his sister by hitting her with two hammers should not be excluded as a beneficiary of the deceased's life insurance policy. The reason behind the judges' decision is that the defendant was exonerated from the murder charges after it was determined that he suffers from a serious mental disorder that prevented him from understanding the unlawfulness of his actions.

According to the law, the death of the insured caused maliciously by the beneficiary deprives the latter of the right to the benefit. However, the court ruled that in order for a death to be "maliciously caused" the murderer should be conscious of the act. In this case, it was established that the facts constituted a crime of murder, but the defendant was acquitted on the grounds of complete unaccountability due to his mental state. Instead, he was ordered a 20-year stay at a psychiatric detention centre.

Prior to her death, the defendant's sister had named him as the sole beneficiary of her life insurance policy with Ibercaja, worth 23,600 euros. Every day, the woman would go to her brother's house to help him with the chores and take care of his grandson. She died as a result of blows to the head, which he caused by hitting her with two hammers during one of her visits.

Following the criminal trial, a second civil proceeding declared the defendant incapacitated and appointed his daughter as guardian. She sued Ibercaja to claim the payment of 23,600 euros, plus interest. Initially, the court of Logroño and the provincial court dismissed her claim, citing the abovementioned law.

The Supreme Court, however, upheld her claim, declaring it proven that the accused suffers from "a cognitive impairment compatible with a demented syndrome", which, at the time of the crime, "severely" affected his understanding of reality and what he was doing. As a result, the court ruled that the provision contained in the law could not be applied, which implies that the insurance contract maintains the accused as the sole beneficiary.