RBC
"We will not go our separate ways": why Trump is suing social networks
There are categories of heirs who may lose their right to inheritance. Lawyers told who cannot claim inheritance and why
After hearing the plaintiff and considering the evidence, the Prikubanskiy District Court refused the plaintif
1. A very useful clarification was made by the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the dispute about who can be considered a worthy heir and who cannot.

He clearly demonstrated the analysis by the Supreme Court of an almost "standard" inheritance dispute, when the testator's children considered his new wife an unworthy heiress.

This story happened in Krasnodar. There, a citizen applied to the district court with a request to recognize her father's wife as an unworthy heiress. In court, the woman said that the father did not leave a will, and after his death, his children from a previous marriage and his current wife, or rather a widow, turned to inheritance according to the law. But, according to the children, on whose behalf one of the daughters spoke, the widow is an unworthy heir. The plaintiff assured the court that this woman did not take any part in caring for her seriously ill husband, did not live with him, did not run a common household, did not provide material assistance to the patient, although he needed it. And later, when the person died, she did not participate in the funeral expenses.

In support of her words, the plaintiff demonstrated in court the decision of the same district court to recover a large sum from his wife in favor of her husband. And the plaintiff also included a police certificate in the case, where the husband complains about his wife that she stole his dog and five thousand rubles.

After hearing the plaintiff and considering the evidence, the Prikubanskiy District Court refused the plaintiff. She complained to the regional court. By the appellate ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Krasnodar Regional Court, the district refusal was canceled and a new decision was made in the case - to recognize the widow as an unworthy heiress and to exclude her from the list of heirs.

Now a widow has turned to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, disagreeing with such a verdict. The Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation studied her arguments and considered them fair.

Here is a high court analysis of the case. The citizen got married. And three years later he sent the magistrate a request for the dissolution of this marriage. The plaintiff did not live to see the trial - he died two months later. The deceased did not leave a will, so three of his children and a widow applied to the notary to accept the inheritance by law. The district court, denying the daughter's recognition of the widow as an unworthy heiress, noted that her evidence "does not indicate the existence of legal grounds for recognizing the defendant as an unworthy heir." Let us remind you that an unworthy heir is mentioned in Article 1117 of the Civil Code. The regional court, when overturning this decision of the district colleagues, on the contrary, considered the plaintiff's evidence sufficient to remove the defendant from inheritance "in view of her willful evasion from fulfilling her obligations to maintain the testator." The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation did not agree with this decision.

According to article 1117 of the Civil Code, citizens who "by their deliberate unlawful actions directed against the testator or his heirs" tried to recognize them as heirs, or to receive more than they should, will never become heirs either by law or by will. But these actions must be confirmed by a court decision. In confirmation of its words, the high court also cited a special plenum of the Supreme Court (dated May 29, 2012 N 9), which dealt with controversial issues of inheritance cases. They also talked about unworthy heirs. And it was emphasized: unlawful actions against the testator, or one of the heirs, or "against the implementation of the testator's last will, expressed in the will" - all these are grounds for the loss of inheritance rights. But if these actions are deliberate. Moreover, the motives or goals of these actions do not matter. The court will remove the heir for the reason that he does not contain the testator only upon proof of the fact that the person maliciously evaded his duties, and this must be confirmed by a court decision on the appointment of alimony, a certificate from the bailiffs that there is a debt, and other similar evidence. Also, proof of "malicious evasion" will be that the alimony payer hid his real earnings in order to pay less, changed his job or place of residence for this.

In the case described above, the regional court, disagreeing with the decision of the district colleagues, established the following circumstances. The Magistrate's Court considered the lawsuit of the deceased for divorce. It was in December. The wife asked for a time limit for reconciliation, which the judge did, postponing the case for a month. But two weeks later, the spouse (now deceased) was hospitalized in intensive care. The children's witnesses said that his wife did not visit him there. From this, the appeal concluded that the term for reconciliation was asked by the spouse to play for time and become an heiress.

From the materials of the case it is clear that the husband wrote a complaint to the police against his wife and went to court with a claim under a loan agreement. This claim was upheld. The daughter of the deceased believes that the father's wife specifically asked him for a loan in order to reduce the hereditary mass. From this, the regional court concluded that the widow was an unworthy heir. But, according to the Supreme Court, the widow's actions do not fall under the article about an unworthy heir. The spouse's statement - to postpone the trial and give time for reconciliation - can in no way be evidence of "deliberate illegal action" in order to become an heiress. The complaint of the deceased to the police against his wife has no legal significance for this dispute at all, since in response the police refused to initiate a case. The district court's decision to pay off the debt under the loan agreement also does not prove the widow's "deliberate act" to make the inheritance smaller. After all, there is a court decision that has entered into force on the return of the debt, and according to the Civil Code (Articles 1110 and 1112), the demand for the return of the debt is inherited. Consequently, the amount of the inheritance has not changed.

Demanding to recognize the widow as an unworthy heiress, the daughter of the deceased referred to paragraph 2 of Article 1117 of the Civil Code. On this point, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation emphasized, it is possible to become unworthy only in case of malicious evasion from the fulfillment of the obligation to pay alimony established by the court. In a particular case, such a decision was not made at all.

As a result, the Supreme Court overturned the regional court's decision as incorrect and recognized the regional court's decision as correct and legal.

2. Parents do not inherit by law after children in respect of whom the parents were judicially deprived of parental rights and were not restored to these rights by the day the inheritance was opened.

Children whose parents were deprived of parental rights by a court decision can claim inheritance, in accordance with article 71, paragraph 4 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, which states:

Article 71. Consequences of deprivation of parental rights

"…4. A child in respect of whom the parents (one of them) are deprived of parental rights retains the right of ownership of the dwelling or the right to use the dwelling, and also retains property rights based on the fact of kinship with parents and other relatives, including the right to inherit ...

Deprivation or restriction of parental rights affects the scope of mutual rights and obligations of parents and children. So, when deprived of parental rights, parents lose inheritance rights, the right to receive alimony from children and other rights, but at the same time the child retains the right to maintenance and inheritance in the order of priority provided for by the current legislation .... "

The main evidence for recognizing an heir as unworthy is documents that contain information about a malicious and willful violation of the law by the heir.

And here other evidence may apply.

1. Testimony.

2. Photo and video materials.

3. Documentary base.



2. At the request of an interested person, the court shall remove from inheritance according to the law citizens who maliciously evaded the fulfillment of their obligations to maintain the testator by virtue of the law.

3. The court removes the heir from inheritance on the indicated grounds upon proof of the fact of his malicious evasion from the fulfillment of obligations to maintain the testator, which can be confirmed by a court verdict on conviction for malicious evasion of payment of funds for the maintenance of children or disabled parents, payment of alimony, a certificate from bailiffs-executors about the alimony debt, other evidence. Not only failure to provide maintenance without good reason, but also concealment by a person liable for alimony of the actual amount of his earnings and (or) income, change of his place of work or place of residence, and the commission of other actions for the same purposes can be recognized as malicious evasion from the fulfillment of these duties.

In other words, an unworthy heir can be recognized as a person who avoided obligations (alimony, care for a disabled person). However, to recognize such a person as an unworthy heir, evidence is needed (documents on non-payment of alimony, testimony of witnesses, etc.). So, if the widow did not visit her spouse in the hospital, did not provide proper care (the exception is reasons beyond the control of the person), then such an heir can be considered unworthy, but with all the necessary evidence. There is no complete list of actions / omissions indicating a person as an unworthy heir - in the Civil Code.

Article 71. Consequences of deprivation of parental rights
«…4. A child in respect of whom the parents (one of them) are deprived of parental rights retains the right of ownership of the dwelling or the right to use the dwelling, and also retains property rights based on the fact of kinship with parents and other relatives, including the right to inherit ...
Deprivation or restriction of parental rights affects the scope of mutual rights and obligations of parents and children. So, when deprived of parental rights, parents lose inheritance rights, the right to receive alimony from children and other rights, but at the same time the child retains the right to maintenance and inheritance in the order of priority provided for by the current legislation .... "

Unbecoming behavior of the heir is willful evasion from the fulfillment of obligations for the maintenance of the testator. Failure to pay alimony assigned in favor of the testator and lack of assistance to a partially capable or incapacitated testator on the part of the heir can be a similar evasion. A complete list of information that is evidence of the unworthy behavior of the heir is not established by law.