A new dramatic precedent from the Israeli supreme court has changed the way mutual wills are perceived as well as the outcome due to a rightful heir renunciation of their portion in the inheritance.
In appeal case 130\24 which was deliberated in front of the esteem supreme court justices Yael Willner, Khaled Kabub and Yechiel Kasher unanimously ruled that if a surviving endower in a mutual will decides to renounce their portion in the passing endower heirloom and the testament does not include an “heir instead of an heir” arrangement then the renouncer shall be regarded as if he\she have never inherited anything from the beginning causing the estate to be distributed with accordance to the inheritance law rules and not according to the last will and testament.
The case:
In 2007 a couple prepared and signed a mutual will whereby upon the death of one of them the survivor shall inherit the entire estate and upon the death of the remainder the estate shall be distributed between the couples’ three children in the following manner; the son shall receive 80% while the remaining 2 daughters shall each get 20% to be distributed equally.
The husband has passed away prior to the wife which in turn decided to renounce her right in the estate (100%).
The case was brought in front of the district court in Tel Aviv Jaffa which ruled as eventually accepted by the supreme court that the renunciation of the mother left the will as if it was cancelled and thereby the estate should be distributed with accordance to the inheritance law – 1965 meaning equally among the rightful heirs and it was to that ruling the appellant filed his appeal to the supreme court.
As above stated, the supreme court accepted the ruling of the district court and ruled that renouncing the heirloom triggered article 6b to the inheritance law causing the mother to be regarded as if she never inherited the estate in the first place, causing the estate to be distributed with accordance to the Israeli Inheritance law – 1965 i.e. 1/3 to each child.
Conclusion:
There is no doubt that this verdict will change the way mutual wills are treated considering the fact that prior to this ruling the death of one endower made it almost impossible to change the will of the surviving endower, it will allow for a more flexible solution in cases where an endower feels the need for a more just distribution among the future heirs.
