Simonov and Romanov took an equal share of the inheritance, consisting of paintings. Romanova filed a lawsuit against the division of the inheritance. At the hearing, the parties entered into a settlement agreement, according to which Romanova received 140 paintings, and Simonova - 65. Soon, Simonova died. Her son, who entered into inheritance rights, did not recognize the settlement agreement, demanded that he be allowed to participate in the case as the legal successor to the deceased and an art history expert should be appointed. In his statement, sent to the court that examined the case, he indicated that the court was not entitled to approve the settlement agreement, since it violates the rights of one of the parties. Not opposing the sharing of the inheritance in equal shares, he emphasized that the proportional division of the inheritance between the parties depends on a detailed classification of the paintings, taking into account their artistic value, which can only be determined as a result of an art history examination.
Questions:
1. What is the basis of the legal succession in this case.
2. Evaluate the legitimacy of the claim of the son of the deceased Simonova from the point of view of the procedural rights and obligations of the assignee.
3. What are the similarities and differences in procedural succession and replacement of inappropriate defendant?
After payment you will be available a link to the solution of this problem in the file of MS Word. It should be noted that the problem solutions put up for sale were successfully handed over in the period 2004-2019 and could be outdated. However, the general algorithm will always remain true.
No feedback yet