There are many arguments in doctrine and case-law concerning the issue of the admissibility of a revocation of a donation made to the joint marital property if only one of them shows gross ingratitude  towards the donor. Many of the opinions discussed in the article go beyond the topic of the admissibility of the revocation of a donation in favour of the return of an object after the revocation of the donation. The admissibility of the revocation of the donation should be considered regardless of the problem of returning the item, which occurs only after the effective revocation of the donation. The issue of the admissibility or inadmissibility of a revocation of a donation cannot be determined by the existence of potential obstacles in the future return of the object after the revocation of the donation. The position allowing for partial revocation of a donation should be supported, as the arguments in favour of this view take into account the principles of social coexistence and appear to be the most equitable solution  from the point of view of the interests of both the donor and the beneficiaries. If one of the spouses shows grossly reprehensible behaviour, the donor should retain its right to revoke the donation in any case, as this right results from the provisions of the Civil Code. However, it is essential that the possibility to revoke a donation should apply only to the person who has presented gross ingratitude, in the absence of a legal basis for extending liability to the other spouse. Consequently, the stance  on  the partial admissibility of revocation of a donation should be regarded as the most appropriate.