Constitutional Court rejects heir’s claim to one‑third of family estate; €4,000 awarded

What was meant to be a family distribution according to the parents’ wishes ended in a decades-long legal battle. One of the heirs sued his sister seeking what he claimed was his rightful share: one third of the family estate. He argued that the real estate assets exceeded €6 million, but the courts ultimately recognised only €4,000.

The claimant relied on a 1954 inheritance deed in which the parents stated that he was to receive a third of the estate. Judges did not interpret that document as creating a legally binding obligation to divide the assets proportionally. They characterised it as a general expression of will rather than a firm mandate.

The court also noted that the sum in the deed was conditional on personal events: it would only take effect if the heir reached adulthood or married. With that restrictive reading, the tribunal rejected both the valuation presented by the claimant and any possibility of updating the amounts to current values.

Years later the claimant sought to reopen the case, alleging bias in previous rulings and undisclosed interests. That request was declared inadmissible for lack of evidence and because it had been filed out of time. The Constitutional Court has now confirmed the lower courts’ decisions and definitively rejected the claimant’s appeal for protection.

The petitioner argued that his right to a forced heirship share had been ignored and that the courts had failed to uphold his parents’ final wishes. The Constitutional Court found no legal basis or objective elements sufficient to justify reviewing the earlier judgments.

The dispute closes with a symbolic award that the affected heir considers a personal, family and institutional injury. The case has also prompted questions about how far formal legal requirements and procedural strictness can go in protecting — or preventing enforcement of — the expressed wishes of deceased relatives.