Judgments of the Supreme Court

Search Results

2018 (Ju) 1583

Date of the judgment (decision)

2019.08.27

Case Number

2018 (Ju) 1583

Reporter

Minshu Vol. 73, No. 3

Title

Judgment concerning the case regarding the value of inherited property which serves as a basis for the calculation of value that should be paid under Article 910 of the Civil Code in the case where a person who becomes an heir through affiliation after the commencement of inheritance intends to apply for a division of the inherited property but other joint heirs have already divided the inherited property

Case name

Case seeking payment of value after division of inherited property

Result

Judgment of the Third Petty Bench, dismissed

Court of the Prior Instance

Tokyo High Court, Judgment of May 24, 2018

Summary of the judgment (decision)

In the case where a person who becomes an heir through affiliation after the commencement of inheritance intends to apply for a division of the inherited property, if other joint heirs have already divided the inherited property, the value of the inherited property which serves as a basis for the calculation of value that should be paid under Article 910 of the Civil Code is the value of positive property subjected to the division.

References

Article 910 of the Civil Code

Civil Code
(Claim of Payment for Value of Person Affiliated after Commencement of Inheritance)
Article 910 In the case where a person who becomes an heir through affiliation after the commencement of inheritance intends to apply for a division of the inherited property, if other heirs have already divided the inherited property or made another disposition, he/she shall only have a claim of payment for value.

Main text of the judgment (decision)

The final appeal is dismissed.
The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the appellant of final appeal.

Reasons

Concerning the reasons for a petition for acceptance of final appeal stated by the counsels for final appeal, TOBITA Hidenari and OKUMURA Go

1. A judgment acknowledging the appellee as A's child became final and binding after B, who is the wife of deceased A, and the appellant, who is A's child, established an agreement for division with regard to A's inherited property. In this case, the appellee demands that the appellant pay value under Article 910 of the Civil Code.

2. The counsels argued as follows: In this case, where an agreement was made on the burden of inherited obligations before the aforementioned agreement for division of the inherited property and B performed part of the inherited obligations, the value of inherited property which serves as a basis for the calculation of value that should be paid to the appellee under Article 910 of the Civil Code should be the value obtained by deducting the value of negative property from the value of positive property out of A's inherited property; therefore, the determination of the court of prior instance to the effect that said value of inherited property is the value of the aforementioned positive property contains an erroneous interpretation and application of the same Article.

3. The provisions of Article 910 of the Civil Code are intended to adjust the interests that exist between a person who is affiliated after the commencement of inheritance and other joint heirs by permitting the affiliated person to claim payment of value while maintaining the effect of a division or another disposition in the case where the affiliated person intends to apply for a division of the inherited property but said other joint heirs have already divided the inherited property or made another disposition (2014 (Ju) No. 1312 and No. 1313, the judgment of the Second Petty Bench of the Supreme Court of February 26, 2016, Minshu Vol. 70, No. 2, at 195). In that case, it is reasonable from the perspective of equity between the parties to calculate the value that should be paid under the same Article on the basis of the value of inherited property subjected to the division or other disposition. A division of inherited property is conducted only on positive property out of the inherited property, and inherited obligations, which fall under negative property, are naturally assumed by joint heirs, including the affiliated person, and do not become subject to the division of the inherited property.

For the reasons described above, in the case where a person who becomes an heir through affiliation after the commencement of inheritance intends to apply for a division of the inherited property, if other joint heirs have already divided the inherited property, it is reasonable to consider that the value of the inherited property which serves as a basis for the calculation of value that should be paid under Article 910 of the Civil Code is the value of positive property subjected to the division. This does not change even in the case where inherited obligations have been performed by other joint heirs or where other joint heirs have made an agreement on the burden of inherited obligations.

4. The determination of the court of prior instance to the same effect is legitimate and can be accepted. The arguments made by the counsels are not acceptable.

Accordingly, the Court unanimously decides as set forth in the main text.

Presiding Judge

Justice YAMASAKI Toshimitsu

Justice TOKURA Saburo

Justice HAYASHI Keiichi

Justice MIYAZAKI Yuko

Justice UGA Katsuya

(This translation is provisional and subject to revision.)