Vienašaliai sandoriai paveldėjimo teisėje: valios išreiškimo forma ir teisinės pasekmės
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article examines the question of implementation of the right to inherit or, in other words, the excercise of the successoral option. With the opening of succession, every successor has the right to accept or to renounce the succession. This option can be exercised by way of concluding unilateral legal transactions, such as acceptance of succession and renunciation of succession. These two legal transactions are analysed in regard to the form of expression of will and the legal consequences they produce. As long as acceptance of succession may be express or tacit (deduced from some factual circumstances clearly attesting the will of an heir to inherit), renunciation of succession has to be express or result from the law which attaches legal consequences to the non-acceptance of succession, i.e. to silence on the part of an heir. The article also deals with the question relating to the time limits for excercing the successoral option. Under Lithuanian law, a successor has three months from the opening of the succession to deliberate and exercise his option. Author comes to a conclusion that this period could not be regarded as an extinctive time limit which extinguishes the subjective right of an heir to inherit. The question of revokation of unilateral legal transactions is analysed in the case of a renunciation of succession. While debate is taking place as to the possibility to revoke the renunciation of succession, the author of this article proposes to establish a rule allowing a successor, who has renounced, to retain the faculty of accepting succession if it has not been accepted by any other person or if the other heirs, who have accepted, do not object to such a revokation. In such a case the heir would take the succession in its actual condition at the time of revokation and without prejudice to the rights which third parties may have acquired to property of the succession. Author comes to a conclusion that the two concepts used in the text of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania – “renunciation of succession” and “non-acceptance of succession” – are not identical concepts and do not entail the same legal effects. If a successor dies before exercising his option, his own heirs acquire the right to deliberate and exercise the option instead of the successor who died. In the case of renunciation, the trasmition of the right to inherit is not passed onto the heirs of the successor who has renounced and who himself died. The article takes a comparative approach, presenting some of the solutions accepted in the legal systems of France, Quebec, Germany and Russia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.008 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".