Second, in most modern legal systems of intestate succession we find a ‘representation’ doctrine.62 It is derived from theius commune and is intended to reconcile the general idea that a deceased would want the persons most closely related to him as his heirs with the equally universally accepted notion of a succession per stirpes, meaning by family branches.63 If, for example, the deceased had two sons, Aand B, and Bhad predeceased him leaving two daughters, family succession per stirpes would mean that son A inherited together with B’s two daughters. However, this entails a person more closely related to the deceased inheriting together with less closely related relatives, A being a relative in the first degree, B’s children relatives of the second degree.64 This was explained, based on a literalist interpretation of the Roman sources, by alleging that the grandchildren, in this case the two daughters, inherit in the place of and thus as representatives of their predeceased parent: they are treated as if they were relatives of the first degree.65 In this perspective, several doctrinal consequences suggested themselves. The most important one was that the representative’s succession siatical jurisdiction from 597 to the 1640s (Oxford:OUP, 2004), 440–1; Birke Häcker, ‘Testamentsformen in England:Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung ihrer historischen Entwicklung’, in Mathias Schmoeckel &Gerhard Otte (eds.), Europäische Testamentsformen(BadenBaden: Nomos, 2011), 105–135 at 114. 62 See, for example, Code civil Art. 729–735 (1804); Code civil Art. 751–755 (2001/2006); Code civil Art. 729–735 (1865); Codice civile Art. 467–469 (1942); Código civil Art. 924– 929 (Spain); Código civil Art. 1980–1984 (Portugal) (1867); Código civil Art. 2039 f (Portugal) (1966). 63 For ius commune see, for example, Petrus Gudelinus, Commentarii de Iure Novissimo (Antwerp, 1644) libII, capXIII, 19; Grotius 1939, libII, capVII, VI; Johannes Voet, Commentarius ad Pandectas (Paris, 1829) Appendix to libXXXVII, tit XVII, IV; Christian Friedrich Glück, Hermeneutisch-systematische Erörertung der Lehre von der Intestaterbfolge nach den Grundlagen des ältern und neuern Römischen Rechts (Erlangen: Palm, 1803) § 22. For heirs, see, for example, Johannes Hellfeld, Iurisprudentia forensis secundum pandectarum ordinem(2nd edn, Jena, 1766) §1643. For successionper stirpes, see, for example, Novel 118, 1; Glück1803, §§ 94–111. 64 Proximity is calculated by the number of births intervening between the deceased and their respective relative: Gai D38, 10; Inst 3, 6; Glück 1803, § 16. 65 In Novel 118, 1 and 3, the expressions (in Latin translation) ‘in locum succedere’ and ‘in parentum iura succedunt’ are used. Grotius 1939, libII, capVII, VI; Voet 1829 Appendix to libXXXVII, tit XVII, IV; and the discussion in Josef Kohler, ‘Zwei Studien über das sog: Repräsentationsrecht’ (Puchelts) Zeitschrift für Französisches Zivilrecht 7 (1876), 113–180 at 114–120. part v • comparative legal history • reinhard zimmermann 248
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=