UG researchers publish WODC report on public support for abolition of legitimate portion

Dr Mark Beuker, Dr Hans ter Haar, Prof. Wilbert Kolkman, Prof. Leon Verstappen and Dr Irene Visser (Faculty of Law), together with Dr Marieke Haan and Dr Elianne Zijlstra (Faculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences) from the Notarial Institute of the University of Groningen, have published a WODC report on the 'Support for the Legitimate Portion'.

The study was commissioned by the Scientific Research and Data Center (WODC) of the Ministry of Justice and Security. It addresses the question of public support for the legitimate portion and the legal and social consequences of possible abolition of the legitimate portion for children 21 and older.

The legitimate portion

A child can claim the legitimate portion if he or she has been disinherited by a parent in a will. When a child has been disinherited and then makes a claim for the legitimate portion, he or she does not receive items, but can claim money from the heirs. That money claim is calculated by half of what the child would receive from the estate if there were no will and no gifts made by the parent.

The problem with the legitimate portion is that, on the one hand, it infringes on the freedom of parents to decide to whom they leave what. On the other hand, it gives substance to the family relationship between parent and child. Underlying the legitimate portion as regulated by law is the idea that children are the natural successors to their parents and that therefore they are entitled to at least part of the inheritance, even in the event of disinheritance.

Survey results

The representative survey of the Dutch population shows that 40% are always in favor of the legitimate portion. A group of 19% of the Dutch population is against the legitimate portion in all cases. In addition, 40% are in favor in some cases and against in others. The survey result is striking. An (alleged) lack of public support was, on the contrary, often mentioned as an argument against the legitimate portion. So now it appears that complete abolition of the legitimate portion is not supported by the vast majority (80%).

The fact that family ties have become looser and society more individualistic over the past decades is an argument in favor of abolishing the legitimate portion. However, the social science literature does not appear to support this. Family networks have become more complex, but family ties have not become weaker. The findings of this study support this.

Study afternoon

A study afternoon on the findings of the report will be held by the Family and Juvenile Law Association on 28 November 2024.

You can read the report by cliking the link below:

This article was published by the Faculty of Law.