Proposition 53K2388

Projet de loi modifiant le Code civil, le Code pénal et le Code judiciaire en ce qui concerne l'indignité successorale, la révocation des donations, la déchéance des avantages matrimoniaux et la substitution.

General information ¶

Submitted by

The Senate

Submission date

Dec. 1, 2010

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

maintenance obligation civil law inheritance law of succession gift

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA MR 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.

Discussion ¶

Nov. 28, 2012 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Minister, dear colleagues, I think that a small report is necessary because the text that is submitted to us is of importance and will have consequences on how to organize the successions or in any case some modalities of them.

First of all, I must tell you that this text comes from the Senate but our commission considered it necessary to correct it on certain points (technical and linguistic corrections on which the Senate agreed on 9 November 2012).

What is it about? In this text, where we speak of inheritance indignity, we aim to adapt the traditional rules of inheritance law to more appropriately regulate three points: the cases in which inheritance indignity must be recognized and the consequences of this inheritance, the effects of the renunciation of inheritance for the descendants of the renunciant and finally, some other rules of inheritance law that derive from these two points.

In the case of inheritance indignity, the first cause is the automatic consequence of a conviction for facts which will now be listed in a new article 727, § 1er, of the Civil Code, which takes on the current situation where "it is unworthy to succeed the one who would be condemned for having given or attempted to give death to the deceased". Add a series of other convictions such as parricide, infanticide, murder, all the punishable acts that resulted in death.

The second cause of indignity is that which strikes the heir who has committed the same acts or attempted to commit them but who could not be subject to any criminal conviction because he died before instruction and information could have resulted.

The third cause concerns the perpetrator who is found guilty of domestic violence even if these violence did not result in the death of his victim.

As for the consequences of indignity when it is found, today you know that children cannot replace the heir declared indigne. The bill that is being examined, on the other hand, will allow such representation. In reality, we are no longer talking about representation but replacement. This is a terminology that needs to be adapted.

Finally, succession rules are adapted in this bill.

This is the hypothesis where a person is not worthy to inherit: he obviously does not inherit but he will not be able to demand from other heirs an alimentary pension as a replacement.

The same person unworthy to inherit also loses the benefits arising from the marriage contract with the spouse who is the victim of this indignity.

Finally, a person may also be obliged to return a donation received because of ingratitude towards the donor.

The existing rules have been adapted; it is also adapted by providing how received donations are accounted for if the donor renounces the inheritance and his children inherit in his place.

The general discussion was relatively quick.

Ms. Becq wondered whether this discussion should not have been used to consider the possibility of a succession sharing between generations. It was considered that the problem was ⁇ interesting, but that it had to be solved in a more general way, therefore differently.

The committee was also interested in the tax aspects related to this indignity and, above all, what could result from the replacement of the children of the heir considered unworthy.

The Committee unanimously adopted the text as corrected.

Mr Brotcorne, you have the word on behalf of your group.

Mr. Speaker, as regards my personal intervention, I simply wanted to add that, given the importance of the texts that are proposed to us and the seriousness with which they are drawn up, as well as the necessity that they represent in the current state of our society, the CDH will provide its full support to this project.

I would like to agree with the words of my colleague. This is an important text, in line with what is expected today with regard to inheritance. However, this is only a small part of the reform of the inheritance law and we will need to discuss this matter further in depth.

Most of this has already been said by the speaker. Indeed, it includes a number of changes to the inheritance law in relation to the unworthiness and the substitution. He who is unworthy to inherit from his husband will also be unworthy to receive the benefits of a marriage contract. Those who are not worthy to inherit cannot claim maintenance from the heirs.

Indeed, there has been a strong legislative work. A necessary question and an adjustment in the inheritance law is carried out with this bill.