Višje sodišče v Ljubljani; 2022-12-19; I Cp 1910/2022
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:SI:VSLJ:2022:I.CP.1910.2022
Date: 2022-12-19
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Slovenia

82022SI1219(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case, examined by the Višje sodišče v Ljubljani, concerned the international jurisdiction of the Slovenian courts in succession proceedings.
In earlier proceedings, the Okrajno sodišče v Ljubljani (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) declared, under Article 15 of the Succession Regulation (1), that it had no jurisdiction because the competent Swedish authority (the Skatteverket) had already conducted the succession proceedings. In those earlier proceedings, the Court of Appeal upheld that conclusion.
In a subsequent hearing before the Court of First Instance, the deceased’s will was opened and read pursuant to Article 194(5) of the ZD (2). Under this provision, a Slovenian court must open and read a will submitted to it even if the succession proceedings fall under the jurisdiction of another domestic or foreign authority, and this act does not constitute an assumption of jurisdiction. The Court of First Instance therefore refused to commence succession proceedings or to execute the will, as the earlier decision on its lack of jurisdiction—already confirmed on appeal—was binding.
The heirs (hereinafter ‘the plaintiffs’) appealed, arguing that the deceased’s connections with Slovenia, the location of his property and the reading of the will in Slovenia should justify Slovenian jurisdiction. They also claimed that the Swedish authority was not a ‘court’ within the meaning of the Succession Regulation, but merely a tax agency, and that succession proceedings in Sweden had not been properly conducted.
The Court of Appeal rejected these arguments. It held that the jurisdictional issue had already been correctly resolved in earlier proceedings and that nothing in the plaintiffs’ renewed submissions justified reopening it. The Court of Appeal further recalled that Article 3(2) of the Succession Regulation defines ‘court’ broadly, to include authorities exercising judicial functions in succession matters. Sweden has notified the Skatteverket as such authority. Therefore, the conclusion of the succession proceedings in Sweden had to be taken into account.
The Court of Appeal further confirmed that the opening and reading of the will in Slovenia, carried out in accordance with Article 194(5) of the ZD, does not amount to the commencement of succession proceedings and does not establish the international jurisdiction of Slovenian courts. The plaintiffs’ arguments concerning the deceased’s ties to Slovenia or the place where the will was drafted were therefore irrelevant at this stage, as the competent authority in Sweden had already completed the succession procedure. Once the competent authority of another Member State has concluded the succession proceedings, Slovenian courts must, under Article 15 of the Succession Regulation, declare of their own motion that they have no jurisdiction.
The Court of Appeal also emphasised that the fact that the succession proceedings would not be conducted in Slovenia in no way infringes the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights, as the Succession Regulation clearly determines the competent authority and the procedural framework. The mere fact that the proceedings take place abroad does not impair the plaintiffs’ right to effective judicial protection.
The Court of Appeal therefore dismissed the appeal as unfounded and upheld the 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).