Lis pendens: Article 17
This part concerns Article 17[1]
Where proceedings involving the same succession are brought in two different courts, the court that is seised second shall of its own motion stay its proceedings until such time as the jurisdiction of the court first seised is established. If the first establishes its jurisdiction, the second shall decline jurisdiction in its favour.
The date on which the courts were seised is determined by Article 14[2].
Example :
Françoise, a Belgian national, has resided in Greece since she retired in 1990. She has three children: two daughters from a first marriage, who reside in Belgium, and one son from a second marriage, who lives with her in Greece.
On 1st November 2015, knowing that she was very ill, Françoise established a will specifying Belgian law to govern her succession. She died soon afterwards, on 27 November 2015.
For several years, the children of Françoise have not been getting on with each other.
On 15 December 2015, her eldest daughter seised the Belgian Succession Court, invoking its jurisdiction on account of the choice made by her mother.
On 17 December 2015, her son seised a Greek succession court claiming that the last residence of Françoise was in that country and that all her assets were located there.
The Greek court that is seised second must stay its proceedings until the Belgian court has ruled on its jurisdiction.
The Belgian court could decline jurisdiction in favour of the Greek court, considering that that was the last place of habitual residence of the deceased (Article 4[3]) and that the Greek court is therefore better placed to rule on the succession (residence of an heir, all assets located in Greece).
Advice :
A ruling should be issued promptly on jurisdiction to ensure that the dispute is referred to the competent court.