Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant 1 ([A.] ): Represented by Attorney Prof. Dr. Paul Eitel
  • Respondent ([B.] ): Represented by Attorney Dr. Stefan Mattmann
  • Appellant 2 ([B.] ): Represented by Attorney Dr. Stefan Mattmann
  • Respondent ([A.] ): Represented by Attorney Prof. Dr. Paul Eitel

Facts:

  • Marriage contract between [C.] and [D.] (1961) with the regime of external general community of property.
  • Last will of [C.] (1992) for the distribution of the estate.
  • Death of [C.] (1998) and [D.] (2009).
  • Estate division agreement (2001) with transfer of the entire estate to [D.] and compensation of the children.
  • Claim of [A.] against [B.] (2015) for the division of the estate of the testator.
  • Partial judgment of the District Court of Kriens (2022) and appellate decision of the Canton Court of Lucerne (2023).
  • Appeals to the Federal Supreme Court (2023) against the decision of the Canton Court.

Main points of contention:

  • Compensation obligation of [A.]
  • Allocation of the properties [F.] and [G.]
  • Determination of the inheritance shares
  • Claim for compensation of [B.]
  • Order for the formation and drawing of lots

Considerations

The appeals concern the same decision of the Canton Court of Lucerne, which does not conclude the estate division proceedings. The Federal Supreme Court examines whether these are appealable partial decisions.

A partial decision exists when one or some of several legal claims are finally decided and these claims can be assessed independently of the others. In the present case, however, the contested aspects are substantive legal preliminary questions that are relevant for the estate division still to be carried out. The assessment of these aspects is therefore not independent of the estate…