Facts
V. passed away on January 10, 2000, leaving as her legal heirs her two daughters [W.] and X., as well as her granddaughter [Z.], in place of the predeceased daughter Y. On January 19, 2000, the President of the Kulm District Court opened the succession contract concluded on February 27, 1969 by the deceased with her husband, as well as her holographic will dated July 10, 1998, by which V. bequeathed her estate to her two daughters.
On March 20, 2000, [Z.] filed an opposition to the will pursuant to Art. 559 para. 1 CC, asserting as a precaution its invalidity and an infringement of her compulsory portion. The President of the Kulm District Court took note of this opposition and indicated that no certificate of inheritance would be issued and that the succession would not yet be handed over.
At their request, the President of the Kulm District Court issued a certificate of inheritance to [W.] and X. on May 28, 2001, stating that no action for nullity or reduction had been brought within the one-year time limit, so that Z.'s rights were time-barred. The Cantonal Court of Aargau dismissed Z.'s appeal against this decision.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considers that the contested decision, which follows the opinion of the authors mentioned in consid. 2.1.2, does not violate the prohibition of arbitrariness guaranteed by Art. 9 Cst.
The opposition based on Art. 559 para. 1 CC has the effect of preventing the issuance of a certificate of inheritance to the entitled heirs. However, this decision made in the context of non-contentious jurisdiction does not have the authority…