Supreme Court Judgement of March 18, 2011.
FOUR. The interpretation of testamentary provision.
The seventh clause of the will of the deceased D. Celestino contains a trust if sine Liberis decesserit, interaction between the testator's grandchildren who are both trustees and beneficiaries. This conclusion differs from that held in the contested decision, but she can be reached by interpreting the will in accordance with the provisions of art. 675 CC, which is claimed to be infringing on the appeal.
The real intention of the testator must be inferred from the literal meaning of words used, which does not exclude the possibility, according to art. 675 CC, which clearly proved that it was another. Hence, the jurisprudence of this Court has said that if the words are clear, are to be interpreted literally, unless it clearly appears that it was the testator's another, "without lawful search the interpreter of other evidence beyond the literal "(SSTS of June 18, 1979, March 24 and June 8, 1982, March 26, 1983). The sentence of 22 November 2010 once again raises the problem of interpretation of the testamentary provisions and notes that "The declaration of intention of the testator is the object of interpretation and to be always expressed in words, required to determine if the apparent meaning real matches and while the interpreter can not replace the will and testament, which can and must do is clear, objective criteria, which appears dark in an arrangement. But this should be done after examining the arrangements discussed and gauge whether the clause or the provision at issue are truly dark. " Also, Judgement of 2 November 2010, declaring the preference of the will of the deceased on the literal interpretation of the terms used.
More » 
0 comments:
Post a Comment