Proposition 51K2615

Projet de loi modifiant certaines dispositions du Code judiciaire relatives à l'absence et à la déclaration judiciaire de décès.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP MR Open Vld Vooruit Purple Ⅰ

Submission date

July 6, 2006

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

civil law

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA MR FN VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

⚠️ Possible data error ⚠️

This proposition could possibly include unrelated discussions due to a heuristic extraction bug in propositions prior to 2007. As soon as I've got time to fix it, these will be removed when they're not supposed to be here.

Discussion ¶

July 6, 2006 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Prime Minister, Mrs. Deputy Prime Minister, colleagues, be confident: I will not speak long. However, I think it is useful to say something about this bill. It does not happen every day that in this hemisphere a piece of the Civil Code that still dates from 1804 is modified. I think it is useful to do two things. On the one hand, I would like to thank those who have contributed to this, and on the other hand, to make clear what is now changing. Their

The Code of 1804 had included a system to organize the rights of missing persons. At that time it was primarily meant for soldiers who were sent out and disappeared as a result of all kinds of Napoleonic wars, not necessarily because they had died, but because they wanted to escape the difficult conditions of war. Therefore, the legislator at the time adopted a regulation that sought to protect the interests of the absent in the rural society that existed at the time. If he ever returned, even if it was twenty or thirty years later, that person could still take his retreat on the farm he was entitled to. Their

That legislation, meanwhile, is enormously outdated, because the situations of missing persons today are, of course, completely different. On the one hand, there are people who spontaneously disappear because they want to build a new life. On the other hand, there are also situations where people disappear in very precarious, difficult circumstances and whose relatives are absolutely unaware of whether the person concerned is still alive or not, but are faced with a very difficult legal arrangement which leads them to face the legal consequences of the disappearance for thirty to thirty-five years. Their

Today we discuss the text of a bill that was once drafted in the light of the work of the Federation of Notaries. It has been submitted several times in this Parliament, sometimes by at least three or four political groups in the last twenty years. Last time I submitted the proposal with colleagues Marinower and Taelman. At the beginning of this legislature, the Justice Committee said that it was finally time to resolve this issue. Then the tsunami came and at some point there was a bill to settle that matter. However, it was quickly realized that, since there were no concrete cases, it was pointless to make another separate law, as was the case at the time with the mine disaster in Marcinelle. Instead, the government has chosen to support the parliamentary path. Their

What is changing now? Essentially two things. On the one hand, for situations where it is certain that the person concerned has died without his body being found, it will be possible to go to the court through a procedure regulated by law in order to produce a judicial declaration of death which immediately has all the legal consequences of a death. Their

On the other hand, in situations where there is uncertainty as to whether the person concerned is still alive, an arrangement is provided that a temporary manager of the goods can be appointed first. Five years later, one can reach a definitive declaration of absence which, at least on a legal level, has the same consequences as death. If no measures have been taken to regulate the management of the goods, it is possible, anyway, to proceed to the declaration of absence seven years after the last news of the person concerned has been heard. This can actually solve most of the legal problems for the parties concerned.

That is in a notepad. I must also express a word of gratitude to all those who contributed to the draft law, first of all to the people of the Federation of Notaries, who once again, in dialogue with my associates, initiated a discussion on what could still be improved. The text was subsequently forwarded to the State Council, where a number of useful improvements were also cited.

Honesty also commands me to say that we have also been able to count on the services of the Minister and the Administration of Justice; on the one hand, on the basis of the prepared work that we had done and on the other hand, on the opinion of the State Council, to come to a text that may have a broad support and which may not have to be in the code for 200 years, but, as has already happened in our neighboring countries, brings our legislation all the way to a modern level. For those who are faced with this difficult problem, it ensures that the legal problems are minimized.

I am grateful to all who have contributed to this. Until then my brief explanation.

It is an old affair.

It reminds me of Guillaume the Taciturne: "Point does not need to hope to undertake, nor to succeed to persevere."

As noted by Mr. President. Borginon, the collaboration was excellent between Parliament, government and trade associations. This is how we have finally been able to lead to an absence regulation that fits the reality better than the previous regulation. I am pleased with the result.