Facts
This case involved an inheritance dispute between the shareholders Y. and Z. of the X. Group and the members [R.], [S.], T., U. and V. of the estate community W. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants, with the exception of [S.], had already unconditionally accepted the inheritance by interfering in the affairs of the inheritance before the expiry of the renunciation period. In particular, it was discussed whether the obtaining of a certificate of inheritance by the widow of the testator, [R.], as the executor, constitutes such interference. The DFC concluded that the obtaining of a certificate of inheritance by the executor alone does not constitute interference in the inheritance, but is to be regarded as an administrative act. Since the defendants had accepted the inheritance under public inventory, they could no longer renounce it.Considerations
In its reasoning, the DFC stated that according to Art. 580 para. 3 CC, the request for the preparation of a public inventory made by an heir applies to all heirs. It is disputed whether the request for an inventory also benefits the one who has already unconditionally accepted the inheritance. The DFC left this question open, as the conduct of the defendants did not allow the conclusion that they had already unconditionally accepted the…