Paris court case challenges France's controversial 2021 inheritance law
A legal battle before the Paris tribunal judiciaire may settle a long-running controversy over France's 2021 inheritance law, which critics say undermines EU rules designed to give testators greater freedom in choosing how their estates are distributed.
At the heart of the dispute is a French man who died in the Bahamas in 2022, leaving a Bahamian will made in 2019 that bequeathed his entire estate to his surviving spouse. One of his two sons is now contesting the will, seeking either its annulment or a compensatory levy from French-situated assets.
The case raises fundamental questions about the compatibility of French law with EU Succession Regulation 650/2012, which came into force on 17 August 2015 and applies to deaths in all EU member states except Denmark and Ireland. Under this regulation, the inheritance law of a person's last habitual residence applies by default, or alternatively the law of their nationality if chosen in their will.
The 2021 law and its critics
France introduced Article 913 paragraph 3 of the Civil Code in 2021, allowing children to claim from French-situated assets up to the reserved portion they would have received under French law when a foreign law applies that lacks comparable protections. Under French forced heirship rules, children receive between 50% and 75% of an estate as reserved heirs: one child receives 50%, two children receive two-thirds, and three or more children receive three-quarters.
The law requires notaires to contact children where the testator or one of their children was an EU resident or citizen, offering them the right to claim this levy. Many legal experts believe the provision contradicts the EU regulation's principle of applying a single law to the succession. Professor Louis Perreau-Saussine from Université Paris-Dauphine has stated that the majority of lawyers take the view that Article 913 is contrary to EU regulations.
The European Commission received dozens of complaints about the 2021 law, with a multiple complaint filed in February 2023. Many complaints came from affected readers of The Connexion who launched a campaign against the measure. However, the Commission closed its investigation in June 2025 after accepting French government explanations that English law's family provision protections are sufficient to exempt English-law wills from the compensatory levy requirement.
The Bahamian will case
In the current case, the deceased's older son from a previous marriage, who lives in France and holds French nationality, is challenging his father's Bahamian will. The Bahamas has no forced heirship laws, giving testators full freedom to distribute their estates by will without mandatory portions for children. However, dependants including children under 18, those under 23 in study or training, or disabled children can apply to court for reasonable financial provision if they can demonstrate the deceased failed to make adequate provision for them.
Aurore Cressent, the lawyer representing the younger son and surviving spouse, said her clients are seeking to have the Bahamian will followed in its entirety.
We consider that the only law that should apply here is Bahamian law, and that French law – and in particular the reserved portion – should not have any bearing on the case.
She explained:
So, we intend to have the application of article 913 paragraph 3 of the civil code set aside. The ground put forward is that the application of French law providing a compensatory deduction violates the principle of the primacy of EU law, given that the Succession Regulation provides for a single applicable law.
Push for European ruling
The legal team requested that the court refer a question to the Court of Justice of the European Union at a preliminary hearing earlier this year. A preliminary ruling procedure allows national courts to refer questions of EU law interpretation to the CJEU, which issues binding interpretations that the national court must then apply to the case before it.
The request was rejected as the case-management judge said it was a matter for the court hearing the substance of the dispute. However, the judge invited the parties to make submissions on a possible referral to the CJEU – or alternatively a request for an opinion from the Cour de cassation, France's highest court – when the merits are considered.
So, we asked a little early, but at least the question is out there. I think the judge will be particularly careful about this matter.
She found it surprising that the Commission had declined to open an infringement case against France, instead accepting the government's explanations that English law's family provisions are a functional equivalent to France's hereditary reserve. Had the Commission found France in breach of EU law and France failed to rectify it, the infringement process could ultimately have led to court action resulting in lump sum fines or continuing fines against the country.
Ms Cressent hopes to have a decision regarding the referral in 2027. A definitive ruling from either the CJEU or the Cour de cassation could provide much-needed clarity on the application of France's 2021 law and its compatibility with EU succession rules, potentially resolving uncertainties that have troubled foreign couples and their advisers since the measure was introduced.
