June 2026: Government clarifies

2026: government clarifies rules

Important information was published by the European Commission and French government in June 2026.

It means that testators who chose the law of England and Wales to apply to their estate are exempt from the 2021 rules.

This is because France considers that English law is protective of children.

It is also expected to apply to Scottish law. The laws of most American states, however, are not thought likely to qualify for exemption as they have great testamentary freedom and nothing comparable to either French or UK law protections (see more below about US laws). 

For the 'history' of the first steps in the complaints to the commission, see the previous page. 

To recap, after receiving multiple complaints about the 2021 law, the European Commission wrote to the French government in December 2023 inviting it to supply extra information about its law. It then started an informal exchange of letters, in which it raised concerns over the law, and invited France to make changes. 

In November 2024, the justice ministry told The Connexion it considered the 2021 to be fair as it aimed at stopping testators discriminating against their children. 

In December 2024, the commission published an update referring to a ‘possible breach’ by France, and referring to ongoing dialogue.

In August 2025, it then published a note about “a possible violation of EU inheritance rules”, saying that it had written to the French government proposing “a certain number of solutions aimed at remedying the problem”.

It gave the French authorities ten weeks to respond. The French reply in October 2025 was not published.

In spring 2026, sources told The Connexion it was possible that the French government was considering easing the situation by confirming that English law ‘family provisions’ provided exemption from the 2021 law.

‘Family provisions’ are a rule that states that where a testator did not make ‘reasonable financial provision’ for their children, bearing in mind his or her responsibilities towards the latter and the children’s financial situation and needs, as well as any disabilities they have, the children may apply to a court for part of the estate.

June 2026

In June 2026 the European Commission published a ‘pre-closure letter’ confirming this information to be correct.

In the letter, the commission said that it had received a “large number of complaints”.

It said that in its letter of July 2025 to the French government, it had told the government that its explanations to date had failed adequately to clarify the 2021 law as enshrined in article 913, paragraph 3 of the Code civil. The rules in that article therefore “created legal uncertainty for citizens and legal practitioners”, it said.

The commission had therefore asked the French authorities to adopt measures to remove the legal uncertainty created and had proposed alternative measures to achieve this.

The commission said that the letter received from France in October 2025 had given further explanations of the article 913 rule, but did not choose any of the commission’s proposed solutions.

So as to speed matters up, the commission suggested to France that the commission publish the relevant new explanations provided, so as to remove the legal uncertainty - and the French government agreed.

The commission therefore did so and the government also promised to publish the clarifications in the monthly public letter of the Direction des affaires civiles et du sceau, which is circulated by the government to give legal information to notaires and other regulated professions.

The justice ministry said this would be published at the end of June at this link. 

It also stated that it would update information pages on disinheriting children on information website Service-Public and at its website justice.gouv.fr

The European Commission said it would update the France section on its e-Justice portal. 

The commission said that it therefore intends to close the complaint case, as it considers that the explanations and their publication are sufficient to resolve the legal uncertainty. 

It gave the complainants four weeks from publication of the notice to give any new information they consider relevant – until July 2, 2026.

After this date, the commission said the case may be closed.

Campaigners Ronnie Bennett and Trish Miller, who have coordinated information to many complainants, told The Connexion they did not intend to take the matter further, as they, and many of their campaign members, are satisfied.

What does the French government now say?

The clarifications mean that where the law of England and Wales will cover an estate, notaires do not have to apply the 2021 rules which instruct them to contact the children of the deceased and offer a compensatory levy out of any French-situated estate up to the level of the French réserve héréditaire.

This is because France says English law protects children.

It clarified that the article 913 paragraph 3 rule should only apply where a foreign law governing the estate contains nothing at all protective of children. The foreign law does not have to have a fixed heir’s portion system the same as France’s.

This likely convinced the European Commission that the 2021 rules will apply infrequently and that the 2021 rules do not aim at always imposing French-law rules where a foreign law was chosen to apply to the estate(or where such a law will apply due to the EU regulation default law on place of last residence).

The notice about this is in French but the commission provides an English translation on its website here.

The explanation shows that France has now relied on article 35 of the EU inheritance regulation, which says that EU states may only disapply parts of the regulation if the effect of applying them will be “manifestly incompatible with the public policy” of the member state.

This means that certain rules may be set aside (notably, by a court, in the case of an inheritance dispute) if they clash with fundamental, deeply-held, values of the state, including in international matters. The notes to the regulation say it was intended that this should apply in exceptional circumstances.

The implication is that protecting children is very important to France. 

When the EU regulation came into force in 2015 this proviso was known, and there was initial speculation as to whether French courts might seek to argue in cases of inheritance disputes, that the ‘hereditary reserve’ was French ‘public policy’. 

However, up to now France's top Cour de Cassation appeal court has not judged this to be the case as concerns matters of an international or cross-border nature, and the EU regulation had been allowed to have its normal expected effect.

The English translation of the commission’s letter states (formatting including bold and italic sections as in original):

“Even if the terms ‘international public policy’ are not used in the third paragraph of Article 913 of the Civil Code, the legislature’s [editor's note: ie. French parliament’s] objective is indeed that courts consider reserve mechanisms to be a rule of international public policy in order to allow the application of Article 35 of the Succession Regulation. (...) 

“However, the mechanism of the hereditary reserve [reserved share] as provided for in French law is intended to apply only if the foreign law normally applicable to the settlement of the succession ‘does not allow any reserve mechanism protective of children’.

“In order to limit the application of the third paragraph of Article 913 to that situation alone, the French legislature thus chose not to use the expression ‘hereditary reserve’ but to refer more broadly to the ‘reserve mechanism protective of children’.

“Thus, the French legislature intended precisely to target mechanisms different from the French hereditary reserve such as the Family Provisions of Anglo-Saxon law, and to limit the right to compensation to cases where the foreign law does not allow any mechanism for the protection of children.”

“(...) [T]he Family Provisions provided for in Anglo-Saxon law are a ‘functional equivalent’ of the hereditary reserve. Thus, if English law is applicable to the settlement of the succession, the court should not apply the right to compensation as there is in English law a ‘reserve mechanism protective of children’, namely the Family Provisions.”

“In conclusion, the objective of the third paragraph of Article 913 of the Civil Code is to enable Article 35 of the Succession Regulation to be implemented. Moreover, the wording of that provision excludes the right to compensation in the presence of an alternative reserve mechanism protective of children (…), and does not have the effect of imposing the hereditary reserve mechanism provided for by French law.”

What can we deduce about other countries’ laws?

 Scots law was already considered to exempt from the 2021 rules because it has a form of ‘hereditary reserve’ for children.

We asked the justice ministry about this, pointing out that it includes a hereditary reserve over moveable property, though not real estate.

The ministry replied: “The French Justice Ministry does not have precise information on Scots law, but we are nonetheless able to indicate that if the foreign law provides for example, a hereditary reserve limited to moveable property, it is a mechanism that protects children which prevents the application of the levy.”

Northern Ireland has a kind of ‘family provisions’, arising from the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) (Northern Ireland) Order 1979.

The news should also help people relying on similar common-law systems such as those of Australia and New Zealand, which have their own versions.

Canadian provinces based on common law typically contain comparable ‘dependent’s relief’ provisions. In Ireland, section 117 of the Succession Act allows children to claim against a parent's estate where they failed in their ‘moral duty’ to provide.

A question mark remains notably over the laws of US states, widely seen as allowing broad testamentary freedom without an obvious equivalent mechanism. 

An exception is Louisiana law, which contains a reserve for children under 24 or who are disabled and unable to provide for themselves.

Information on US states

English-speaking notaire Jérôme Poltorak from Toulouse, who has followed the developments with keen interest, provided us with research relating to the inheritance laws of the US, which vary state by state.

The notes provided state: “The US is a federal state comprising several territorial units, each with its own legal system; it is therefore impossible to provide an exhaustive overview of all the legislation in force.

“That said, we would like to remind you, for the sake of completeness, that only the State of Louisiana appears to have a réserve héréditaire equivalent to that under French law (it is directly inspired by it: see Article 1495 of the Louisiana Civil Code), understood as a fixed share of the estate to which all children are entitled, regardless of their financial need.

“According to our research, and subject to our correct understanding of US law, there does not appear to be any general mechanism that is entirely analogous to the ‘Family Provisions’ under English law, enabling a child of the deceased to claim, through the courts, financial support drawn from the estate based on their state of need or dependence on the deceased.

“However, it appears that certain jurisdictions have a form of support mechanism enabling the deceased’s relatives to receive, on a temporary basis (solely during the administration of the estate), a ‘family allowance’ via legal proceedings which, in principle, may be brought by any person with an interest in the matter to meet their immediate needs while the estate is being settled.

“For example, Section 732.403 of the Florida Statutes provides for the payment of a sum enabling the surviving spouse and lineal heirs (minors or dependent children) for whom the deceased was responsible to receive a form of ‘family allowance’ drawn from the estate to ensure their maintenance for the duration of the administration of the estate provided that it does not exceed the sum of 18,000 dollars.

“A similar ‘family allowance’ also appears to exist in the State of Arizona. This would also appear to be the case in the States of California, Nebraska and Texas.

“As we are not specialists in US law, it is essential – where applicable – to consult a legal professional whose jurisdiction the law would actually apply to.”

We note that the French authorities have not so far given any clarifications specific to US laws, however the above points may be relevant to Americans and their lawyers.