美国法上的遗嘱外部因素探析
|
摘要
严格的遗嘱形式主义是对遗嘱人真实意志的保障,是为实现遗嘱人的意思自由而服务的,而不是要限制遗嘱自由,因此,存在于有效遗嘱之外的表示,出自遗嘱的真实意志时,法院应当给予这种表示以效力。为此,美国继承法在司法和理论上提出了"援引并入"及"独立性重要事实"等一系列规则,将合法遗嘱的外部因素通过一个"接口机制"引入遗嘱,使得遗嘱人的意图有实现可能。适用援引并入理论需要满足三个条件:第一,通过遗嘱人的遗嘱必须能够明确地找到其希望将该外部文件并入遗嘱的意图。第二,提供参考的文件必须是在遗嘱做出时就存在的,如果在遗嘱做出之后才完成了这份文件,就应该适用"独立性重要事实"理论。第三,被并入的外部文件必须在遗嘱中有明确指明。独立性重要事实理论的实质为:一个行为或事件定义了遗嘱中的受益人或遗产等重要因素,如果该行为或事件除了对于该遗嘱之外还具有其他独立重要的意义,那么可以通过对该原理的适用而认可其效力。"援引并入"及"独立性重要事实"等都属于广义的遗嘱解释的范畴。
Strict will formalism is the guarantee of the will of the testator,its purpose is to realize the meaning of the testator's freedom of will,not to limit the freedom of will. Therefore,in the presence of an effective will,the court shall give effect to such representation when the true will is made. The American Inheritance Law puts forward a series of rules,such as citing incorporation and independent important facts in judicial and theoretical aspects. The external factors of legal will are introduced into the will through an interface mechanism,which makes it possible for the testator's intention to be realized. Three conditions need to be met to apply the incorporation theory: First,through the will of the testator,it must be able to clearly find the intention of incorporating the external document into the will. Second,the reference document must exist when the will is made. If the document is completed after the will has been made,the theory of independent important facts should be applied. Third,the incorporated external documents must be clearly stated in the will. The essence of the independent important facts theory is an act or event defines important factors as the beneficiary or inheritance in a will,then if the act or event also has other important significance than the will,the validity of the principle can be recognized by its applicability. Citing incorporation and important facts of independence belong to the category of broad will interpretation.
Strict will formalism is the guarantee of the will of the testator,its purpose is to realize the meaning of the testator's freedom of will,not to limit the freedom of will. Therefore,in the presence of an effective will,the court shall give effect to such representation when the true will is made. The American Inheritance Law puts forward a series of rules,such as citing incorporation and independent important facts in judicial and theoretical aspects. The external factors of legal will are introduced into the will through an interface mechanism,which makes it possible for the testator's intention to be realized. Three conditions need to be met to apply the incorporation theory: First,through the will of the testator,it must be able to clearly find the intention of incorporating the external document into the will. Second,the reference document must exist when the will is made. If the document is completed after the will has been made,the theory of independent important facts should be applied. Third,the incorporated external documents must be clearly stated in the will. The essence of the independent important facts theory is an act or event defines important factors as the beneficiary or inheritance in a will,then if the act or event also has other important significance than the will,the validity of the principle can be recognized by its applicability. Citing incorporation and important facts of independence belong to the category of broad will interpretation.
引文
(1)Newton v.Seaman's Friend Society,130 Mass.91(1881);Bottrell v.Spengler,175 N.E.781(Ill.1931).
(2)Allen v.Maddock11 Moo.p.C.427,14 Eng.Rep.757(1858).
(3)前引(1)。
(4)Adam J.Hirsch,Inheritance and Inconsistency,57 Ohio St.L.J,1996,pp.1057、1106.
(5)In re Piffard’s Estate.18 N.E.718(N.Y.1888).
(6)David Tieman,The Adoption of the Doctrine of Facts of Independent Significance in Tennessee,31 U.Mem.L.Rev,2000,pp.207、213.
(7)前引(4),p.1057.
(8)Marshall v.Northern Trust Co.of Chicago,22 Ill.2d 391,176 N.E.2d 807(1961).
(9)前引(1)。
(10)前引(1)。
(2)Allen v.Maddock11 Moo.p.C.427,14 Eng.Rep.757(1858).
(3)前引(1)。
(4)Adam J.Hirsch,Inheritance and Inconsistency,57 Ohio St.L.J,1996,pp.1057、1106.
(5)In re Piffard’s Estate.18 N.E.718(N.Y.1888).
(6)David Tieman,The Adoption of the Doctrine of Facts of Independent Significance in Tennessee,31 U.Mem.L.Rev,2000,pp.207、213.
(7)前引(4),p.1057.
(8)Marshall v.Northern Trust Co.of Chicago,22 Ill.2d 391,176 N.E.2d 807(1961).
(9)前引(1)。
(10)前引(1)。