Before the Bulgarian Code of Private International Law entered into force, there were no express statutory rules on the matter. The Supreme Court, in Interpretative Decision 65-89 of the General Assembly of its Civil Chamber (published in Darzhava i Pravo, No. 2\/1990, pp. 117\u2013120), expressly held that succession to immovable property in Bulgaria was governed by Bulgarian law as the law of the place where the property was situated (lex rei sitae). Even where Bulgarian courts applied the law of the deceased\u2019s nationality (see the judgments cited in Conflict Rules in the Law of Succession of the People\u2019s Republic of Bulgaria, Sofia, 1977, pp. 60\u201365), a reference back to Bulgarian law (renvoi) resulted in Bulgarian law governing succession to immovable property here. Bulgarian private international law recognised renvoi in succession matters both before and under the Code (Article 40). The applicable foreign law includes the conflict rules of the country concerned. If those rules refer back to Bulgarian law (remission or first-degree renvoi), Bulgarian substantive law applies. If they refer to the law of a third country (transmission or second-degree renvoi), that country\u2019s substantive law applies (Article 40(3)). In the case discussed, the conflict rules of both foreign countries referred back to Bulgarian law as the law of the place where the immovable property was situated.<\/p>\n
Professor Tadzher, in International Family and Succession Relations (Sofia, 1994, pp. 313 ff.), considered the period before the Code entered into force. In the absence of legislation or interpretative rulings of the former Supreme Court on intestate succession involving a foreign element, treating lex patriae (the law of the deceased\u2019s nationality) as the general connecting factor was, in his view, more a myth than an accurate account of the existing rules. Bulgarian courts had consistently applied Bulgarian law: as the law of the forum (lex fori), as the law of the place where the property was situated, as the law of the deceased\u2019s nationality or as the law of the country where the succession opened. Writing in 1994, Professor Tadzher noted the absence in practice of cases applying foreign law as the law of the deceased\u2019s nationality. Before the Code entered into force, he favoured a system under which different succession rules could apply to movable and immovable property. For immovable property in Bulgaria, he considered it sufficient to retain direct rules on succession such as those in the Bulgarian Constitution, the Property Act, the Agricultural Land Ownership and Use Act and the Forests Act, among others. He also gave reasons for applying the law of the country of the deceased\u2019s last domicile to intestate succession.<\/p>\n
Section III of the Consular Convention between the People\u2019s Republic of Bulgaria and the United Kingdom (promulgated in State Gazette No. 38\/1969) does not specify the substantive law applicable to intestate succession or to the form of wills made by British subjects. In cross-border succession the conflict rules of England and Wales distinguish between types of property: intestate succession to immovables is governed by the lex rei sitae, and succession to movables by the law of the deceased\u2019s last domicile (lex ultimi domicilii). On this distinction see Cheshire and North\u2019s Private International Law, P. M. North and J. J. Fawcett, 13th ed., LexisNexis UK, 2004, pp. 984\u20131000. The same work discusses the English concept of domicile at pp. 134\u2013146. Domicile in English law differs from the continental European concept used in civil-law jurisdictions. In addition to actual residence, the English approach described here requires an intention to settle permanently in that place with no intention of returning to the country of origin (animus manendi et non revertendi). That intention may be proved by any means of evidence permitted under the law of the forum. South African private international law likewise distinguishes between movable and immovable property; South Africa is traditionally associated with the common-law family in this respect.<\/p>\n
This article does not provide a legal opinion or advice about any particular person or situation. For legal assistance with an individual case, consult a lawyer.<\/em>
\n