Cour de cassation 1ère Chambre civile; 2022-04-13; 1re Civ., 13 avril 2022, pourvoi n° 20-23.530
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:FR:CCASS:2022:C100333
Date: 2022-04-13
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: France

82022FR0413(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
In this case, the Cour de Cassation (hereinafter ‘the Supreme Court’) examined if the cour d’appel de Paris (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’) made a correct application of the law when it held that the European Certificate of Succession made facultative the formalities prescribed by French law.
The plaintiff’s wife died. A will established in Germany designated him as heir, and a European Certificate of Succession was delivered for his benefit, on the basis of Article 67 of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 (hereinafter ‘the Succession Regulation’) (1).
On the basis of this certificate, the plaintiff demanded from the French company BNP Paribas (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) the payment of the liquidities of the estate, which the defendant refused because, regarding assets located in France, Article 1000 of the Code civil provides that the execution of a will established in a foreign country can only take place if it is proven that that will was registered with the French tax authorities.
The plaintiff sued the defendant for payment of those liquidities and for damages. The Court of Appeal held that, although the European Certificate of Succession was indeed evidence, it did not make optional the formalities prescribed by Article 1000 of the Code civil.
The plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court. He claimed that the purpose of the European Certificate of Succession was to ‘put an end to special national formalities and procedures pertaining to European wills’. He claimed that the registration prescribed by Article 1000 of the Code civil was intended as evidence. He also argued that the Court of Appeal sanctioned a modality of execution of the European Certificate of Succession that was specific to France, infringing the Succession Regulation, which provides that this certificate should produce the same effects in all Member States.
The plaintiff also claimed that the Succession Regulation ‘obliges banking institutions to spontaneously make a payment or hand an asset of the estate on the simple production of European Certificates of Succession that are apparently valid’, and the defendant could not ‘demand compliance with a formality pertaining to national law’.
The Supreme Court took up the reasoning of the Court of Appeal. It stated that the Court of Appeal had noted that the Succession Regulation did not apply to revenue matters or administrative matters, and that, pursuant to its recital 71, the European Certificate of Succession had an evidentiary effect but was not an enforceable title.
Additionally, the Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal rightly considered that the defendant complied with the Succession Regulation and with French law, and as a result of which, it could not be held liable.
For those reasons, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.
(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.