Facts
On February 19, 1946, Widow G. died in A. near Zurich. Her legal heirs are two sons and one daughter. The main estate consists of an agricultural business, which includes two residential buildings, two barns, a poultry house, a courtyard, meadows and arable land, litter, and forest. In 1949, one of the sons filed a lawsuit for the determination and division of the estate and the undivided assignment of all the properties to him under the provisions of the law of agricultural inheritance. The two other heirs disputed that it was an agricultural business within the meaning of Art. 620 of the Swiss Civil Code (ZGB).
The District Court of Horgen assigned the homestead undivided to the plaintiff son at the yield value, which was confirmed by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich. The daughter, Mrs. F., then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court states that the provisions of the law of agricultural inheritance in accordance with Art. 108 of the Federal Act on the Acquisition of Agricultural and Forestry Enterprises and Residential Properties in Rural Areas (LEG) are applicable to the present case, as the division of the estate was not yet completed at the time of the entry into force of the LEG on January 1, 1947.
The question of whether the disputed homestead constitutes an agricultural business within the meaning of Art. 620 ZGB is to be examined independently by the courts. In this respect, the classification of the homestead under the LEG has only a negative meaning - a homestead that does not meet the conditions of Art. 1 LEG cannot be considered an agricultural business.
The Federal Supreme Court affirms that the present homestead constitutes an agricultural business within the meaning of Art. 620 ZGB. Although the lower part is located in a zone for two-story buildings, the…