5780447524

24 Andrzej Mąeiymkt

thc conformity wiih thc Constitution of the fonncr version of those provi-sioni, which wcre still appiied in cases of inhcritancc from deocdcnts, who dicd, whcn those provisions were in force. The Constitutional Tribunal constdcred that thc provisions should be further appiied; thc posilion wat fully approvcd by ihc doctrine. The spcciflc prosisions on thc distribution of inhcritancc, which inelude* a farm, wcre not questioncd.

As far as thc provisions of succession law placcd outstde Boolt 4 of the Civil Codc arc concerned, it is worth to mention the changes in provisiom rcgulating thc efTccts of tenant’s dealh. According to those provisions. after thc death of a lenant of thc living prcmiscs. his closc persons, residing' together with thc tenant at thc moment of his death, enter tx lege in the rdalion of tcnancy of thc prcmiscs. The subsoqucnt changes in thc rcgulatioo ] wcrc aimcd at limiting thc circlc of those persons.

Some other provisions conccrning succession of living pranises in huil-; dings owncd by restdential communitics wcrc also abolished as a result of judgjncnts of the Constitutional Tribunal.

VI

The drafts of proposcd amendments in thc succession law arc pre by thc Codification Commission of Civil Law, operating by thc Minister of Justice sincc thc end of 1996. The amendment of thc statutory sucocssi by thc local community was drafted by the Commission. Since then, na further drafts werc put forward. The qucslion of reform of succession law' is not a malier of public debate in thc doctrine. Thcre arc sporadic proposab! conccrning e g. extcnsion of the statutory successon circlc by introducinj thc dccedcnfs grandparents thcTein; limitalion the share of the surviviog spousc inberiting as a statutory succcssor in concurrcncc with thc childrOj and cxteasion of the share whcn the spouse inherits in concurrcncc with tbt decedcnfs further rclativcs; limitation of thc persons cntitlcd to the legitimatt porlion; chaogc in thc rules of liability for inhcntance dcbts and adoptioa of the liability pro vtribus palrimtmii as a rulc) and linally cxtension of tht testator's freedom with regard to the distrihution of the inhcritancc, so thai the testator might dccide on thc destination of spcdfic objects bclonging ta thc inhcritancc.

VU

The collision norma of the intemational succession law arc gathered in tbc statutc of 12* Novembcr 1965 - Privatc inlemalional law (Prawo prywatne międzynarodowe p.p.m.), which entered im o force on I" July 1966. The main prindplc is thc application of tbc law of a country of citizcnship of thc dcccdcnl in ihc moment of his death (Art. 34 ppm.). At the same timc thc validity of legał acts mortis causa is to he estimated according to thc law of a country of dtizenship of thc dcccdcnt in ihc moment of performing thc rcspcctive act (Art. 35 p.pm.). The same regula-tion was envisagcd in thc former Polish statute on privatc International law of Y* August 1926. It could be therefore satd. that the mentioned rulea remain in force sińce almost 80 years and thc practicc of their application do not justify thc nccessity of their amendment. They are wideły acocptcd by the doctrine, however lately thcrc havc bccn opinions uttered that a possibility of limited cfaoice of law should be allowcd in succession matlcrs. Since 1969 Poland is a party to thc Convcntion of 5* Octobcr 1061 on thc Conflkt of Laws Relating to the Fontu of Testamentary Disposilions.

During the period whcn the provisions limiting succession of farms were in force. thc jurisprudcncc was of thc opinion that those provisions should be appiied with regard to all farms silualed in Poland. The view was supported by the majority of the doctrine. After the judgments of thc Constitutional Tribunal derogating the respcctive provi«ions. thc problem ceased to eaist.

To contplctc thc picture it should hc added that Art. 4 p pm. obliges to ttke into account the remittal or transmission madę in thc proviSions of law of nationality (lex patriae). Should therefore thc law of thc country of dtizenship of the dcccdcnt submit succession of a immovablc property to the law of the country, wherc the immosablc property is situated, and thc succession of the movabIe property - to thc law of thc country of residcncc of tbc dccedent, legaj provisions of those countrics would bc appltod by the Polish court (unlcss thc immovablc property is situated abroud. as Polish court has no jurisdiction with regard to such properlies due to Art. 1102 § 2 k.p c.)

Somc of thc bilatcral intemational convcntions, to which Poland is a party, inelude regulations different from those adopted in thc statutc. They envisagc that succession of an immovablc property is submilled to thc law of a party to thc convcnlion, on which territory the property is locatcd.

To sum up thc presented information regarding changes in Polish su-cccKwon law it should bc stated that the system changc. which resultcd in the incrcase of the materia! status of thc citieens (or at least a part of them),