Articles 2444 through 2461 outline Argentina’s forced heirship system. The system vests certain individuals with the right to succeed the decedent and have certain portions of the decedent´s estate reserved for them, regardless of the decedent’s testamentary instrument or testamentary gifts. Article 2444 defines such forced heirs as including descendants, ascendants, and spouses.
The appellant sued to establish co-residence with the deceased, a man with whom she lived for more than five years but never married. The claim was related to the fact that the man died without a will, so inheritance defaulted to take place in order of precedence according to Ukrainian legislation. Without establishing co-residence, the appellant had no legal right to inherit at all, but establishing co-residence with the deceased would give her the opportunity to inherit the property as a fourth-line heir, as she lived with the deceased for at least five years.
The petitioner filed to amend a provision in pension payments by the Nepalese Army that withheld payments from married daughters. The Court ruled to invalidate this measure based on the grounds that pension payments to children were stopped at 18 years, before the legal age of marriage, making it obsolete. However, the Court also acknowledged that this provision was contrary to Article 11 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal which guarantees equal rights to all, in particular highlighting that equality is meant in practical terms sometimes necessitating positive discrimination.
Meera Dhungana, an important women’s rights advocate in Nepal, petitioned the government to deem void a provision of the Bonus Act in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal that prevents married daughters of a deceased from receiving compensation upon his death. The petitioner claimed that this provision discriminates against women based on their gender and marital status, thus contradicting the Constitution and international gender rights conventions.
This case addressed whether children fathered by a man outside of his marriage had inheritance rights. The appellants were both children born out of wedlock by married men.
