Višje sodišče v Celju; 2019-09-20; Cp 358/2019
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:SI:VSCE:2019:CP.358.2019
Date: 2019-09-20
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Slovenia

82019SI0920(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case, examined by the Višje sodišče v Celju (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’), concerned the legal effects of a renunciation of inheritance and the treatment of a subsequently discovered estate.
In 2018, the Court of First Instance issued a final succession decision concerning the deceased’s property in Slovenia. The deceased’s daughter (hereinafter ‘plaintiff 1’) expressly renounced the inheritance at the hearing, while the deceased’s son (hereinafter ‘plaintiff 2’) accepted the estate in its entirety. The court’s jurisdiction covered the whole estate pursuant to Article 4, in conjunction with Article 83, of the Succession Regulation (1).
In February 2019, the plaintiffs informed the court that additional real property belonging to the deceased, located in Croatia and previously unknown to the court, was to be included in the estate. Applying Article 221 of the ZD (2), the Court of First Instance held that no new succession hearing is to be held when property is discovered after the succession decision has become final; instead, such property is distributed by means of a supplementary decision, based on the original inheritance order. As plaintiff 1 had renounced the inheritance and plaintiff 2 had accepted the estate as a whole, the newly discovered property was accordingly attributed to plaintiff 2.
The plaintiffs appealed, arguing that they had concluded an agreement in 2018 to divide the estate, under which property in Slovenia was intended for plaintiff 2 and property in Croatia for plaintiff 1. They submitted that plaintiff 1 renounced the inheritance only because they erroneously assumed that the Slovenian succession proceedings concerned only Slovenian property, and claimed that their renunciation was given in error.
The Court of Appeal upheld the first-instance decision. It confirmed that the renunciation of inheritance is a mandatory, indivisible and irrevocable declaration: it cannot be partial or conditional, and a person who renounces is deemed not to have become an heir at all, including with respect to property discovered later. Plaintiff 2, having accepted the inheritance in its entirety, became the universal successor to the deceased, acquiring all estate assets, not only those favourable to him.
Although the Court of First Instance inaccurately referred to the case law as ‘uniform’ (it is prevailing, but not entirely uniform), it had correctly applied the substantive law. The alleged mistake invoked by the plaintiffs could not be examined in the succession proceedings, and any challenge to a renunciation on grounds of mistake must be brought by way of a separate civil action under Article 138(2) of the ZD. The court was not authorised to revisit or revise valid inheritance declarations that formed part of the final succession decision.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal as unfounded and upheld the supplementary decision of the Court of First Instance.
(1) Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession.
(2) Zakon o dedovanju (Inheritance Act).