Lon the Day of the Dead, Wednesday November 2, many families go to lay flowers on a grave. Raphaël X, he certainly would not go to his father, Robert, whom he still refused to pay, even though he was condemned to do so, in the following circumstances.
On January 21, 2016, at 12:15 pm, Robert died of cancer. His PACS partner, Juanita Cassiet, who watched over him day and night, immediately said goodbye to Raphaël, who settled in the United States. He explained to her that he should arrange the funeral within six working days. Raphaël asked him – verbally – to “take care of everything” and promised to repay it when he returned to France.
MI Cassiet, an artist with a moderate income, promotes the necessary expenses. He can ask Robert’s bank to reimburse him the funeral fee, as permitted by the monetary and financial code (article L312-1-4). But “Robert has no money in his current account, because he invested everything”he explained.
Mr. X, who arrived in France on January 26, 2016, left the next day, without paying anything. Although his father’s estate includes more than 200,000 euros in life insurance premiums, a death capital that should finance the funeral, as well as several cars, the young man refuses to return MI Cassiet the 6,258 euros he owed her – 2,407 euros for the cremation, 2,145 euros for the catering costs of the guests and 1,706 euros for the insurance of the vehicles – and criticized him for not asking him to prove these costs .
On June 16, 2017, Mr.I That’s why Cassiet took him to court. His lawyer, Mr.e Martine Wolff, can use the articles of the civil code (205 and 371) that require children to pay for the funeral of their parents. But it chooses those (articles 1301 and following) that control the “business management” : the person who intervenes in the affairs of others, without being authorized to do so, but to provide him with a service, taking into account, in this case, his geographical distance and the urgency to act, must be compensated. if his actions have been “useful”.
The magistrates of the first instance judge, on 1eh July 2019, that all expenses incurred by Mr.I It was Cassiet “useful”. They feel it “the objection opposed by the defendant, in addition to showing an obvious lack of beauty with regard to the assets of the estate, is completely abusive”. They ordered Mr. X to pay, in addition to reimbursement, 3,000 euros in damages.
He appealed… which allowed him to pay nothing. The Aix-en-Provence Court of Appeal confirmed, on June 15 (2022), that it was not “to get angry [Mme Cassiet] to increase him in the steps he should take himself”.
It justifies the costs “accessories” funeral, “in this case, the notice published in a local newspaper, the thanks and the cost of the restaurant on the day of the ceremony”WHO “related to the customs and manners of his father’s relatives and the people around him until his last days”. He pointed out that Mr. X “Is it not, despite his distance, that neither the rules of politeness consisting of gratitude nor the customs of reception after [la cérémonie]these usages are also enforced in his country of residence..
It further mentioned that, despite the many supporting documents produced by Ms.I Cassiet, “Mr. X did not reimburse any expenses, preferring to continue the battle for more than five years”. Judging his behavior “dilatory”he judges him with a “civil fine” of 3,000 euros.
MI Cassiet still doesn’t see anything. The lawyers of Mr. He is X “may refuse” to enforce the appeal decision if it has not been translated − at its expense − into English “in the official language of his country of residence”. New cost: 240 euros.