罗马尼亚“不配继承人”统治的基础

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW European Review of Private Law Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.54648/erpl2021047
Mircea Dan Bob-Bocșan, Anthony D. Murphy
{"title":"罗马尼亚“不配继承人”统治的基础","authors":"Mircea Dan Bob-Bocșan, Anthony D. Murphy","doi":"10.54648/erpl2021047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Within the Civilian legal tradition, the unworthy heir rule has been established on both objective and subjective grounds. In France, the Code Napoleon enshrined said rule as a creation of law, without the deceased having any say in its operation. The Napoleonic model was later borrowed into the civil codes of Italy and Romania, thus expanding the doctrine of an objective unworthiness to their legal systems. Nevertheless, the Romanian Civil Code of 2009 empowered the deceased to remove said penalty through an explicit pardon. Since this new prerogative is a distinctive feature of the subjective foundation, the reform has rather significant implications for Romanian succession law. Essentially, the authors argue that the unworthy heir rule has always been founded upon a mixture of public policy and private interest, with the only variable being the dominating factor. Within the broader field of succession law, the legislator aims to achieve balance between the imperative nature of public policy and freedom of testation on the one hand, and between the private interests of the deceased and his family on the other. Whilst the Civil Code of 2009 does restore the Roman notion of an unworthiness subordinated to the deceased’s intention, it also preserves the public policy foundation. Its real merit consists of acknowledging that the very concept of inheritance is based upon the presumed intention of the deceased: an unworthy heir forfeits his right to inherit the deceased as a result of breaching the bond of affection which is presumed to exist between them, yet only the latter can have the final say in this matter. In contrast, the Civil Code of 1864 failed to achieve such a balance since it transplanted an ideologized public policy, residue of the French Revolution.","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Foundations of the Unworthy Heir Rule in Romania\",\"authors\":\"Mircea Dan Bob-Bocșan, Anthony D. Murphy\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/erpl2021047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Within the Civilian legal tradition, the unworthy heir rule has been established on both objective and subjective grounds. In France, the Code Napoleon enshrined said rule as a creation of law, without the deceased having any say in its operation. The Napoleonic model was later borrowed into the civil codes of Italy and Romania, thus expanding the doctrine of an objective unworthiness to their legal systems. Nevertheless, the Romanian Civil Code of 2009 empowered the deceased to remove said penalty through an explicit pardon. Since this new prerogative is a distinctive feature of the subjective foundation, the reform has rather significant implications for Romanian succession law. Essentially, the authors argue that the unworthy heir rule has always been founded upon a mixture of public policy and private interest, with the only variable being the dominating factor. Within the broader field of succession law, the legislator aims to achieve balance between the imperative nature of public policy and freedom of testation on the one hand, and between the private interests of the deceased and his family on the other. Whilst the Civil Code of 2009 does restore the Roman notion of an unworthiness subordinated to the deceased’s intention, it also preserves the public policy foundation. Its real merit consists of acknowledging that the very concept of inheritance is based upon the presumed intention of the deceased: an unworthy heir forfeits his right to inherit the deceased as a result of breaching the bond of affection which is presumed to exist between them, yet only the latter can have the final say in this matter. In contrast, the Civil Code of 1864 failed to achieve such a balance since it transplanted an ideologized public policy, residue of the French Revolution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43736,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Review of Private Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Review of Private Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2021047\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Review of Private Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2021047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在民事法律传统中,不肖继承人规则既有客观依据,也有主观依据。在法国,拿破仑法典将上述规则视为法律的创造,死者对其运作没有任何发言权。拿破仑模式后来被借用到意大利和罗马尼亚的民法典中,从而将客观无价值的学说扩展到了他们的法律体系中。尽管如此,2009年的《罗马尼亚民法典》授权死者通过明确赦免免除上述刑罚。由于这一新的特权是主观基础的一个显著特征,改革对罗马尼亚继承法具有相当重要的意义。从本质上讲,作者认为,不值得继承人规则一直建立在公共政策和私人利益的混合基础上,唯一的变量是主导因素。在更广泛的继承法领域内,立法者的目标是在公共政策的强制性和立遗嘱自由之间,以及在死者及其家人的私人利益之间实现平衡。虽然2009年的《民法典》确实恢复了罗马关于不值得的观念,从属于死者的意图,但它也保留了公共政策的基础。它的真正优点在于承认继承的概念本身是基于死者的假定意图:一个不值得继承的继承人由于违反了他们之间假定存在的情感纽带而丧失了继承死者的权利,但只有后者才能在这件事上拥有最终发言权。相比之下,1864年的《民法典》未能实现这种平衡,因为它移植了一种意识形态化的公共政策,即法国大革命的残余。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Foundations of the Unworthy Heir Rule in Romania
Within the Civilian legal tradition, the unworthy heir rule has been established on both objective and subjective grounds. In France, the Code Napoleon enshrined said rule as a creation of law, without the deceased having any say in its operation. The Napoleonic model was later borrowed into the civil codes of Italy and Romania, thus expanding the doctrine of an objective unworthiness to their legal systems. Nevertheless, the Romanian Civil Code of 2009 empowered the deceased to remove said penalty through an explicit pardon. Since this new prerogative is a distinctive feature of the subjective foundation, the reform has rather significant implications for Romanian succession law. Essentially, the authors argue that the unworthy heir rule has always been founded upon a mixture of public policy and private interest, with the only variable being the dominating factor. Within the broader field of succession law, the legislator aims to achieve balance between the imperative nature of public policy and freedom of testation on the one hand, and between the private interests of the deceased and his family on the other. Whilst the Civil Code of 2009 does restore the Roman notion of an unworthiness subordinated to the deceased’s intention, it also preserves the public policy foundation. Its real merit consists of acknowledging that the very concept of inheritance is based upon the presumed intention of the deceased: an unworthy heir forfeits his right to inherit the deceased as a result of breaching the bond of affection which is presumed to exist between them, yet only the latter can have the final say in this matter. In contrast, the Civil Code of 1864 failed to achieve such a balance since it transplanted an ideologized public policy, residue of the French Revolution.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
33.30%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Scope of Application of the Unfair Contract Terms Directive: Is It Time for a New Compromise? Remedies for Unfair Terms in Light of the General Principles of EU Law The Unfairness Test: From Sleeping Beauty to Little Mermaid The Objectives of Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Contract Terms: An Overview after 30 Years of Case Law Lost in information - The Transparency Dogma of the Unfair Contract Terms Directive
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1