Words, as the saying goes, carry weight.
\nIn succession law, however, they carry even more weight. They are a person\u2019s final voice and become definitive.<\/p>\n
Among the most common words with which a will opens are these: A formality, for many. A ritual expression, almost automatic. In technical terms, a \u201cclausola di stile\u201d (boilerplate clause or formulaic clause). In legal terminology, a \u201cclausola di stile\u201d (boilerplate clause) is a formula written by custom or tradition, which lacks any genuine intent on the part of the person who signs it. It is, in essence, an empty formula, incapable of generating legal effects. A court of first instance (corte di merito\u2014a lower court in the Italian judicial system) recently provided a practical illustration of this principle. The argument?<\/p>\n The revocation contained in the subsequent will was allegedly a mere boilerplate clause, and the previous will would have remained valid for all dispositions not incompatible with those contained in the more recent will.<\/p>\n The decision of the court reaffirms a cornerstone of testamentary hermeneutics: the intent of the deceased must be sought within the testamentary instrument (scheda testamentaria). The court, recalling the judgment of the Court of Cassation (Corte di Cassazione\u2014Italy\u2019s supreme court for civil and criminal matters) No. 22983 of 9 October 2013, reaffirms that In wills, there are no useless words, and a single phrase can determine the entire structure of an inheritance. In succession disputes, the Judge has the delicate task of serving as a faithful interpreter of the deceased\u2019s last wishes, which can only be done by respecting with the utmost rigor what has been left in writing.<\/p>\n It is, therefore, important:<\/p>\n Words, as the saying goes, carry weight. In succession law, however, they carry even more weight. They are a person\u2019s final voice and become definitive. Among the most common words with which a will opens are these: (Italian: I revoke all my previous testamentary dispositions \u201c \u201cRevoco ogni mia precedente disposizione testamentaria\u201d). A formality, for […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":771,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-770","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\n(Italian: I revoke all my previous testamentary dispositions<\/em> \u201c \u201cRevoco ogni mia precedente disposizione testamentaria<\/em>\u201d).<\/p>\n
\nCase law, however, offers a very different interpretation and attributes to these words a radical and unequivocal power.<\/p>\nBoilerplate Clause vs. Express Revocation<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nThe application of this category to the declaration of testamentary revocation is an error that case law has chosen to censure.
\nThe expression \u201cI revoke all my previous testamentary dispositions<\/em>\u201d is interpreted as a full and valid express revocation, governed by Article 680 of the Italian Civil Code (Codice Civile), which represents the testator\u2019s intent to nullify all previous wishes and leaves no room for alternative interpretations.<\/p>\nThe Concrete Case: A Recent Ruling by a court<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nA first holographic will (testamento olografo\u2014a will entirely handwritten, dated, and signed by the testator) had been drafted, disposing of all the testator\u2019s assets. Fifteen years later, a new one was drafted, with different beneficiaries, which opened with the formula \u201cI revoke all my previous testamentary dispositions<\/em>.\u201d Following this, the testator limited himself to disposing of his real estate assets, without saying anything about his financial assets, which had been mentioned in the first will. Intestate succession (successione legittima) therefore opened with respect to that portion of the estate.
\nUpon his death, the heirs who were beneficiaries of the financial assets under the previous will opposed the distribution of the financial assets among the intestate heirs.<\/p>\nThe Principle of Self-Sufficiency of the Will<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nThe expression \u201cI revoke all my previous testamentary dispositions<\/em>\u201d sweeps away every previous testamentary instrument and cannot be hermeneutically confined only to incompatible dispositions that were the subject of a previous will, not even through the consideration of external elements.<\/p>\n
\n\u201cthe requirement of form, necessary precisely to guarantee the testator\u2019s intent, does not allow relevance to be given to an intent not manifested in the testamentary declaration. The search for the testator\u2019s intent outside the will is therefore inadmissible given the irrelevance of non-formal manifestations of testamentary intent<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\nConclusions and Practical Implications<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n