The spouses made mutual wills in which they bequeathed all their property to each other. They also stipulated in the wills an “heir by heir” provision, according to which, upon the death of the surviving spouse, the children of the parties would inherit all of his property in unequal shares, in accordance with the division determined in the wills. However, after the death of one of the spouses, the other chose to withdraw from the first spouse’s estate in general.
The Supreme Court ruled that the estate will be divided according to law, since an heir after an heir is not an heir in lieu of an heir. In a mutual will, the testators are entitled to arrange the inheritance of their joint estate after the death of both, i.e., an ‘heirs after heir’ arrangement, and to determine an ‘heirs in lieu of heirs’, i.e., the identity of a residual heir would be and the other party would choose to withdraw from the mutual will after the death of the first spouse. Upon the general withdrawal of the spouse from the will and whenever an alternative heir is not determined through an ‘heirs in lieu of heirs’ arrangement – the provision of the will in favor of the withdrawing spouse is revoked, and in its place the rules of inheritance according to law will apply to the estate of the deceased spouse (minus the share of the spouse who withdrew). Here, we are talking about spouses who made mutual wills and bequeathed their estate to each other and even added and determined an ‘heirs in lieu of heirs’ arrangement after their deaths. However, since the will did not specify who would be the person who would inherit the place of the deceased, the estate of the first spouse must be divided according to the provisions of the law.
