The Ministry of Justice has unveiled the largest legislative reform in Inheritance Law in the past 80 years, introducing a new framework that promises greater legal security, flexibility in family and property relationships, and protection of citizens from “traps” in the current system.
The new bill, the product of work by a law-drafting committee under academic Apostolos Georgiadis, provides for 13 categories of major changes, with institutions being introduced to Greek law for the first time, such as inheritance contracts causa mortis, contracts waiving inheritance rights, joint wills, monetary forced heirship, as well as a completely new mechanism for the heir’s relationship with inheritance debts.
During the presentation, Justice Minister George Floridis characterized the reform as “an excellent scientific work that will serve society and the economy for decades to come,” while Deputy Minister Ioannis Bougas emphasized that “the new provisions respond to modern family and property realities and strengthen citizens’ sense of security.”
Inheritance Law: Do I inherit the house and the debts too? This changes definitively
The most dramatic change in the reform concerns the heir’s liability for inheritance debts. Until now, anyone who did not renounce the inheritance in time risked even seizure of their personal property if the deceased had debts. Under the new regulation, the heir will not be liable with their individual property for inheritance debts, unless through their own actions they caused a reduction in the value of the inheritance property or proceeded to dispose of it.
Indicative examples:
– K died without having drafted a will, having his son A as his closest relative. At the time of K’s death, K had only debts. However, A failed to renounce K’s inheritance in time. Is his individual property at risk from K’s creditors?
Under current law: Yes, the heir who accepted the inheritance is liable for its obligations with their individual property as well, which is security for inheritance creditors (Civil Code 1901).
Under the proposed draft: No. The heir’s liability for inheritance debts is reformed. The heir will no longer be liable with their individual property for inheritance debts. This will not be security for the deceased’s creditors (new Civil Code 1892).
– K died without drafting a will, having his son A as his closest relative. At the time of K’s death, K had an apartment worth 100,000 euros and a tax debt of 100,000 euros. If A accepts K’s inheritance, can the tax authority impose seizure on his own apartment?
Under current law: Yes, since the heir is liable for inheritance obligations with their individual property as well (Civil Code 1901), the tax authority can impose seizure on both the inherited apartment and the apartment belonging to heir A’s individual property.
Under the proposed draft: The heir is liable to inheritance creditors only with the inheritance, without their individual property being security for their satisfaction (new Civil Code 1892). Therefore, the tax authority can impose seizure only on the apartment that A inherited from K and not on the apartment belonging to A’s individual property.
Forced heirship converts from “right over real estate” to monetary claim
The current system often led to involuntary co-ownership, causing confusion and financial deadlocks when an heir received a “share” in real estate instead of a monetary amount. Under the new framework, the entitled party is secured through obligatory – monetary claim, while having the option of registering a mortgage on real estate to secure their claim.
For example, K left her entire estate to her daughter A through her will. What rights does B, K’s son, have?
Under current law: B, as K’s legal heir, can invoke the nullity of K’s will to the extent that it excludes him from his forced share, which corresponds to 1/4 of the inheritance. To this percentage, B is an heir (Civil Code 1825) and is entitled to file an action against A for recognition of his inheritance right and return of inheritance assets, as well as any benefits A received.
Under the proposed draft: B, as K’s legal heir, cannot invoke nullity of the will. Instead, he has an obligatory claim against A to pay him in money 1/4 of the inheritance value. To secure this claim, B can register a mortgage on all inheritance real estate. In any case, the court may, upon request of either B or A, and after weighing all special circumstances, order the actual return of a percentage or property element of the inheritance corresponding to the forced share.
Inheritance contracts causa mortis – Major new tool for families and businesses
For the first time in Greece, the institution that applies in other European countries is allowed: a binding agreement for the future of property after death, while the disposer remains 100% owner of their property while alive.
A characteristic example:
K owns a hotel unit operating as an individual business. K has two children, A from his marriage to S1, and B from his second wife S2. A has been very interested in the business from a young age and decides to pursue studies that will help him develop it, while B has a different professional career. K wants to manage the business while he lives and for this reason doesn’t transfer it to A. Besides, he fears such a transfer might displease S2, who also works in the business. At the same time, A hesitates to invest in his father’s business because he’s not sure if it will eventually come to him. What can K do to ensure that after his death, A will continue his business?
Under current law: Since K doesn’t wish to transfer the business to A while he lives, he could leave the business to A by will. However, a will is freely revocable and for this reason, A cannot have any assurance that the business will eventually come to him. Any agreement between A and K that K commits to leaving A the business by will would be void under Civil Code 368. Furthermore, if at the time of K’s death there are no other significant property elements in the inheritance, B and S will acquire as forced heirs (Civil Code 1825) a share in the business. Any prior agreement with K that B and S waive their forced share would be void (Civil Code 368). Thus, the business will pass to several persons and any disputes between them, which are not unlikely in similar cases, can lead even to dissolution of the business. The possibility under Civil Procedure Code 483 of awarding the business to one heir presupposes their liquidity, since they must return to the others the value of their share, which is not always given.
It’s noted that due to the insecurity entailed by the will, K may eventually be forced to proceed with transferring his business while he still lives, possibly retaining usufruct or under condition of his death. However, similar solutions, beyond ultimately binding K more than he would wish, make property exploitation more difficult.
Under the proposed draft: K can conclude with A an inheritance contract causa mortis (new Civil Code 1798 ff.), by which he leaves him the business. This arrangement is binding, meaning K cannot revoke it unilaterally later, except under exceptional conditions. K, while he lives, is not prevented from exploiting the business as he wishes. Simultaneously, or later when K has liquidity, K can, according to new Civil Code 1838 ff., conclude a contract with B and S as well, by which each of them waives in advance their claim to forced heirship, in exchange for consideration (e.g., K transfers an apartment to S and K gives B a significant monetary amount needed for starting his professional career). In any case, K can by will leave additional property elements to B and S if he wishes. It’s noted that waiving forced heirship is practically significant even after converting forced heirship under the proposed draft to an obligatory claim, since satisfying it presupposes the heir’s liquidity, which is not always given.
The practical significance of the above inheritance contracts especially in business succession has been highlighted in continental European countries (Germany, Switzerland), where such contracts are traditionally recognized. The justifying reasons for which their prohibition had been preferred in Greece do not satisfy the modern era.
Changes in intestate succession – Strengthening the spouse and recognizing free unions
Under the new provisions, the spouse gains a leading role, as their percentage increases when inheriting with children, they are called as sole heir before more distant relatives and receive the right of residence in the family home and specific inheritance privileges.
A characteristic example:
– K died without having drafted a will. At the time of his death, his wife S lives and his first cousins A and B, children of his father’s predeceased brother, with whom he had no contact for the last 20 years. How is K inherited?
Under current law: (Civil Code 1816, 1820) S will inherit K in 1/2 of his property and the remaining 1/2 will pass equally to A (1/4) and B (1/4), who fall in the third order. S will also receive the household goods etc.
Under the proposed draft: S will receive the entirety of K’s property (new Civil Code 1811).
At the same time, for the first time the possibility of inheritance rights for a partner in free union is established, when no other relative exists, after judicial determination of the union’s genuineness. For example:
– K, unmarried and childless, who lived with A for 10 years, dies suddenly in a car accident without having drafted a will. At the time of his death, none of the relatives who would be called by law to his inheritance succession live (descendants, parents, siblings, nephews, great-nephews, grandparents, uncles/aunts and first cousins). How is K inherited?
Under current law: K’s inheritance passes to the State (Civil Code 1824).
Under the proposed draft: A can, within 4 months of learning of K’s death and that there are no relatives called to his inheritance succession, submit an application to the court to receive the inheritance (new Civil Code 1817 par. 3, 1818). If the court is convinced that A indeed lived with K in free union for over 3 years before his death, it accepts the application and A becomes K’s sole heir retroactively (from the time of K’s death). If A’s application is rejected, the inheritance passes to the State.
Joint will – Common last will
The prohibition that applied until now is abolished. Couples who wish common inheritance planning can now draft binding joint wills, which solves dozens of problems, especially in mixed families or second marriage cases.
A characteristic example:
– A and B are spouses and have a son, C. They wish that when one of them dies, the surviving spouse inherits them, and after the death of the last of them, the entire inheritance will pass to C. What can they do to implement their wish?
Under current law: The only possibility for A and B is for each to draft a separate will with the above content, since joint wills are prohibited under Civil Code 1717 and inheritance contracts under Civil Code 368. However, wills cannot satisfy A and B’s needs.
Specifically, the following problems arise:
a) Each of A and B’s wills is freely revocable at any time. Thus, even if each of A and B initially drafts a will according to their family plan, no assurance is provided that inheritance succession will actually be shaped this way. The spouse who dies second is in a particularly favorable position (also from inheritance law perspective), since they can decide differently at any time regarding disposing of their property (which will now include what they inherited from the first deceased spouse).
b) Having each spouse establish by will the other spouse as heir and the son as trust beneficiary violates the forced share of both the surviving spouse and the son and therefore, regarding the forced share, the trust won’t apply (Civil Code 1829). According to jurisprudence, cases where usufruct is left to the spouse and bare ownership to the child are treated similarly.
Under the proposed draft: A and B can conclude inheritance contracts causa mortis, by which one establishes the other as heir and provide that after the death of the last of them, the entire inheritance will pass to C (new 1798 ff.). This contract develops binding force and therefore each spouse cannot make different testamentary disposition of their property by will. They are not prevented, however, from disposing of their property inter vivos as they wish.
C will be the sole heir of the second deceased. From the first deceased’s inheritance, he will have a claim for forced heirship. However, this too can be regulated contractually, by concluding contracts of prior waiver of inheritance rights (Civil Code 1838 ff.), i.e., contracts with each of A and B by which C will waive his forced share in the contracting party’s inheritance.
Ingratitude as ground for disinheritance
The law modernizes grounds for disinheritance, introducing for the first time serious antisocial behavior and ingratitude as reasons for depriving forced heirship.
A characteristic example:
– K has two children, A and B. A hasn’t spoken to him for over a decade and shows no interest in him, while occasionally insulting him, despite receiving significant monetary gifts from him. Can K disinherit him in his will so he doesn’t receive even his forced share?
Under current law: Grounds for disinheritance in the strict sense, i.e., grounds justifying deprivation of forced share, are limitatively listed in law (Civil Code 1839). Long-term indifference or the child’s ingratitude toward their parent are not considered grounds for disinheritance. Therefore, K is not allowed to completely disinherit A, who is entitled to his forced share.
Under the proposed draft: Serious antisocial behavior manifesting ingratitude, contempt and indifference toward the deceased justifies disinheriting the child by the parent under new Civil Code 1833.
Inheritance incapacity – No tolerance for crimes against the testator
Another strict change: final conviction for a felony against the life, health or sexual freedom of the deceased results in automatic incapacity.
Characteristic example:
– A few months after K’s death, her husband S was sentenced to imprisonment after it was proven he raped her. Given that K died without leaving a will, is K entitled to a share from her inheritance?
Under current law: Yes, the grounds for declaring inheritance unworthiness limitatively listed in Civil Code 1860 do not include rape of the deceased by the heir.
Under the proposed draft: According to new Civil Code 1857, final criminal conviction of the heir for a felony against the life, health or sexual freedom of the deceased results in automatic inheritance incapacity, meaning the heir never acquired the inheritance.
The bill is expected to be put to public consultation and then to vote. The Ministry of Justice has already announced it will be accompanied by an implementation manual and informational actions for notaries, lawyers, judges and citizens. The inheritance law reform, as emphasized in the presentation, “is not a technocratic change, but an everyday reform affecting every Greek family.”
