You married in England, retired to France, and bought a house together near Bergerac, Uz\u00e8s or Honfleur. Then your husband or wife dies. The French notaire opens the file and uses words you have never heard in an English probate: usufruit<\/i> (a life interest that lets you use the house and take any rent from it, without owning the bricks), quotit\u00e9 disponible<\/i> (the share of the estate the deceased was allowed to give away), and donation au dernier vivant<\/i> (a gift between spouses that increases what the survivor receives). This article explains, in plain English, what the surviving spouse of a British couple automatically receives from a French house, how a couple can increase that protection while both are alive, what tax is due, and what to do when the notaire, the children or the tax office blocks the outcome you expected. French legal terms are translated the first time they appear. The position described here is the law in force in France on 27 September 2026, verified against the official codes and published decisions of the Cour de cassation (France’s highest civil court). Brexit did not change French succession law itself, but it matters in two practical ways developed below: you are now a third-country national for residence purposes, and England and Wales never joined the European succession regime, so the English and French systems still answer the same death in different languages.<\/p>\n
One warning before you read on. Your English will does not govern your French house by itself. Since 17 August 2015, France applies the European succession rules, under which anyone may designate the law of their country of nationality to govern their whole succession, including nationals of states outside the Union, with an open choice among nationalities for dual nationals. See the official guidance at Your Europe: planning a cross-border inheritance (European Union, English)<\/a>. A British testator can therefore choose English law in a will, but that choice has limits where French courts protect children, as explained in part II. Our companion analysis of English wills and the French r\u00e9serve h\u00e9r\u00e9ditaire<\/i> (the forced share of the estate that the law reserves to certain heirs) sets out that mechanism in detail: British Will, French House After Brexit: Choosing English Law<\/a>. The present article answers the narrower, urgent question: your spouse has died, or may die, and you need to know what keeps you in the house.<\/p>\n When your spouse dies leaving children, French intestacy law (the rules that apply without a will) gives you, the surviving spouse, a personal choice. Article 757 of the Civil Code states: “Si l’\u00e9poux pr\u00e9d\u00e9c\u00e9d\u00e9 laisse des enfants ou descendants, le conjoint survivant recueille, \u00e0 son choix, l’usufruit de la totalit\u00e9 des biens existants ou la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 du quart des biens lorsque tous les enfants sont issus des deux \u00e9poux et la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 du quart en pr\u00e9sence d’un ou plusieurs enfants qui ne sont pas issus des deux \u00e9poux.” (Article 757, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: where the deceased leaves children, you take either the usufruit<\/i> (life interest) over all of the existing property, or outright ownership of one quarter of it. The distinction between children of the couple and children from an earlier relationship matters for the form of the choice, and where there are stepchildren the tax bill on their share can be severe, as our analysis of the 60 per cent stepchild rate explains. Most surviving spouses of an intact first family choose the life interest over the whole house, because it lets them live there or let it and keep the rent for life, while the children hold the nue-propri\u00e9t\u00e9<\/i> (the bare ownership, which becomes full ownership when the life interest ends).<\/p>\n Three refinements decide real cases. First, if you make no choice and then die yourself, the administration treats you as having chosen the life interest: the official service-public.fr succession guide confirms that the surviving spouse is then treated as having taken the life interest over the whole estate (see the official succession guide (service-public.fr)<\/a>) Second, where the deceased leaves no children but leaves parents, Article 757-1 of the Civil Code provides: “Si, \u00e0 d\u00e9faut d’enfants ou de descendants, le d\u00e9funt laisse ses p\u00e8re et m\u00e8re, le conjoint survivant recueille la moiti\u00e9 des biens. L’autre moiti\u00e9 est d\u00e9volue pour un quart au p\u00e8re et pour un quart \u00e0 la m\u00e8re. Quand le p\u00e8re ou la m\u00e8re est pr\u00e9d\u00e9c\u00e9d\u00e9, la part qui lui serait revenue \u00e9choit au conjoint survivant.” (Article 757-1, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: you take half the estate, and each surviving parent takes a quarter, with a predeceased parent’s quarter passing to you. Third, gifts your spouse already made to you during life are set against your intestacy share rather than added to it. Article 758-6 of the Civil Code provides: “Les lib\u00e9ralit\u00e9s re\u00e7ues du d\u00e9funt par le conjoint survivant s’imputent sur les droits de celui-ci dans la succession. Lorsque les lib\u00e9ralit\u00e9s ainsi re\u00e7ues sont inf\u00e9rieures aux droits d\u00e9finis aux articles 757 et 757-1 , le conjoint survivant peut en r\u00e9clamer le compl\u00e9ment, sans jamais recevoir une portion des biens sup\u00e9rieure \u00e0 la quotit\u00e9 d\u00e9finie \u00e0 l’article 1094-1 .” (Article 758-6, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: lifetime gifts to you count toward your share, and you can claim only a top-up capped at the enhanced spouse’s allowance of Article 1094-1, developed in part II.<\/p>\n A trap British couples should know is the tontine<\/i> clause (a survivorship clause in the purchase deed providing that the survivor is deemed to have owned the property from the start). Many British buyers were sold a tontine as a simple way to protect the survivor. The Cour de cassation treats it far more strictly. On 12 January 2022 (appeal No 20-12.232, published in the Bulletin), the First Civil Chamber held: “Il r\u00e9sulte de la combinaison de ces textes que le conjoint survivant est tenu \u00e0 un rapport sp\u00e9cial en moins prenant des lib\u00e9ralit\u00e9s re\u00e7ues par lui du d\u00e9funt dans les conditions d\u00e9finies \u00e0 l’article 758-6.” In English: the surviving spouse must bring lifetime gifts received from the deceased into account through a special equalisation mechanism. The court added, about the couple before it: “La cour d’appel a retenu que le pacte tontinier compris dans l’acte d’achat de l’appartement constituait une donation d\u00e9guis\u00e9e de [E] [C] en faveur de son \u00e9pouse.” In English: the tontine pact in the flat’s purchase deed constituted a disguised gift from the husband to his wife. And: “Il s’ensuit que cette donation est soumise au rapport dans les limites et selon les modalit\u00e9s pr\u00e9vues \u00e0 l’article 758-6 du code civil.” In English: that gift is therefore subject to equalisation under Article 758-6. Read the full decision here: Cass. 1re civ., 12 January 2022, No 20-12.232<\/a>. The lesson is direct: a tontine between spouses is analysed as a gift, and the children can demand that it be brought into the accounting. If your purchase deed contains a tontine, ask the notaire handling the succession to quantify its effect before you make your Article 757 choice, because the two interact.<\/p>\n Two deadlines organise the months after death. You cannot be forced to make your succession choice immediately: Article 771 of the Civil Code provides that “L’h\u00e9ritier ne peut \u00eatre contraint \u00e0 opter avant l’expiration d’un d\u00e9lai de quatre mois \u00e0 compter de l’ouverture de la succession.” In English: no one can compel you to choose before four months have passed since the death, although a creditor, a co-heir or the State can then formally require you to decide. And the estate’s tax return (d\u00e9claration de succession<\/i>) must be filed within six months where the deceased died in metropolitan France, and within one year in all other cases: Article 641 of the General Tax Code states: “Les d\u00e9lais pour l’enregistrement des d\u00e9clarations que les h\u00e9ritiers, donataires ou l\u00e9gataires ont \u00e0 souscrire des biens \u00e0 eux \u00e9chus ou transmis par d\u00e9c\u00e8s sont : De six mois, \u00e0 compter du jour du d\u00e9c\u00e8s, lorsque celui dont on recueille la succession est d\u00e9c\u00e9d\u00e9 en France m\u00e9tropolitaine; D’une ann\u00e9e, dans tous les autres cas.” Where your spouse died in a London hospital while resident in France, the one-year period applies, but do not treat it as breathing space: interest and penalties run from the deadline. Useful official references for this section are Article 757 of the Civil Code<\/a>, Article 757-1 of the Civil Code<\/a>, Article 758-5 of the Civil Code<\/a>, Article 758-6 of the Civil Code<\/a>, Article 771 of the Civil Code<\/a>, Article 641 of the General Tax Code<\/a> and the official guide Quelles sont les r\u00e8gles pour h\u00e9riter ? (service-public.fr)<\/a>.<\/p>\n For comparison, the English intestacy is less generous to the survivor where there are children. Under the intestacy rules of England and Wales, as summarised in HM Revenue and Customs’ own manual, the surviving spouse or civil partner takes the personal belongings, a fixed statutory sum and half of what remains outright (see HMRC Inheritance Tax Manual IHTM12121 (gov.uk)<\/a>). Your children take the other half outright, immediately. A British spouse who assumes the English pattern applies to the Dordogne house will therefore underestimate both their French rights and the children’s power to demand equalisation. That cultural misunderstanding causes most of the blocked files our cabinet sees.<\/p>\n Beyond your share of ownership, the law gives you, as the spouse who actually lived in the house as the main home when your partner died, two housing rights that operate even before the estate is divided. First, Article 763 of the Civil Code grants a one-year right: “Si, \u00e0 l’\u00e9poque du d\u00e9c\u00e8s, le conjoint successible occupe effectivement, \u00e0 titre d’habitation principale, un logement appartenant aux \u00e9poux ou d\u00e9pendant totalement de la succession, il a de plein droit, pendant une ann\u00e9e, la jouissance gratuite de ce logement, ainsi que du mobilier, compris dans la succession, qui le garnit.” (Article 763, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: if you were actually living in the home as your main residence, you are entitled, automatically and for one year, to occupy it without paying any rent, with the furniture it contains. The same article adds that where the home was rented or only partly owned by the deceased, the succession reimburses a year’s rent or occupation payment, and it closes with a sentence of real practical weight: “Les droits pr\u00e9vus au pr\u00e9sent article sont r\u00e9put\u00e9s effets directs du mariage et non droits successoraux. Le pr\u00e9sent article est d’ordre public.” (Article 763, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: these rights are treated as direct effects of the marriage, not as inheritance rights, and the provision is mandatory law. Because the year’s right is an effect of the marriage, it survives even arrangements that reduce your inheritance share, and no will can remove it.<\/p>\n Second, Article 764 of the Civil Code adds a lifetime right of habitation (droit viager d’habitation<\/i>): “Sauf volont\u00e9 contraire du d\u00e9funt exprim\u00e9e dans les conditions de l’article 971 , le conjoint successible qui occupait effectivement, \u00e0 l’\u00e9poque du d\u00e9c\u00e8s, \u00e0 titre d’habitation principale, un logement appartenant aux \u00e9poux ou d\u00e9pendant totalement de la succession, a sur ce logement, jusqu’\u00e0 son d\u00e9c\u00e8s, un droit d’habitation et un droit d’usage sur le mobilier, compris dans la succession, le garnissant.” (Article 764, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: unless the deceased deprived you of it in the strict form of an authentic (notarial) will, you hold until your death a personal right to live in the home and use its furniture. Two details matter enormously in practice. A deprivation of the housing right does not touch your life interest: the article continues, “La privation de ces droits d’habitation et d’usage exprim\u00e9e par le d\u00e9funt dans les conditions mentionn\u00e9es au premier alin\u00e9a est sans incidence sur les droits d’usufruit que le conjoint recueille en vertu de la loi ou d’une lib\u00e9ralit\u00e9, qui continuent \u00e0 ob\u00e9ir \u00e0 leurs r\u00e8gles propres.” (Article 764, Civil Code<\/a>) And where the house no longer suits your needs, for example stairs you can no longer climb, you may let it for non-commercial, non-agricultural use to fund more suitable accommodation: “lorsque la situation du conjoint fait que le logement grev\u00e9 du droit d’habitation n’est plus adapt\u00e9 \u00e0 ses besoins, le conjoint ou son repr\u00e9sentant peut le louer \u00e0 usage autre que commercial ou agricole afin de d\u00e9gager les ressources n\u00e9cessaires \u00e0 de nouvelles conditions d’h\u00e9bergement.” (Article 764, Civil Code<\/a>) Either side can require an inventory of the furniture and a schedule of condition of the property, so arrange both early and keep copies.<\/p>\n The lifetime right is not automatic: you must claim it within one year of the death. Article 765-1 of the Civil Code states: “Le conjoint dispose d’un an \u00e0 partir du d\u00e9c\u00e8s pour manifester sa volont\u00e9 de b\u00e9n\u00e9ficier de ces droits d’habitation et d’usage.” (Article 765-1, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: you have one year from the death to declare that you want the housing and use rights. The Cour de cassation enforces that deadline strictly. On 2 March 2022 (appeal No 20-16.674, published in the Bulletin), the First Civil Chamber restated the rule: “Selon ces textes, le conjoint survivant dispose d’un an \u00e0 partir du d\u00e9c\u00e8s pour manifester sa volont\u00e9 de b\u00e9n\u00e9ficier de son droit viager au logement.” In English: the surviving spouse has one year from the death to express the wish to benefit from the lifetime housing right. The court accepted that the expression of wishes can be tacit, but drew a hard line: “Si cette manifestation de volont\u00e9 peut \u00eatre tacite, elle ne peut r\u00e9sulter du seul maintien dans les lieux.” In English: even if the expression can be tacit, simply staying on in the property is not enough. The appeal court had treated a widow’s uninterrupted peaceful occupation for over a year as a tacit claim; the Cour de cassation quashed that reasoning for breach of Articles 764 and 765-1. Read the decision here: Cass. 1re civ., 2 March 2022, No 20-16.674<\/a>. For a British widow or widower who simply carries on living in the house and assumes the law has noticed, this decision is the single most important paragraph in French succession practice: write to the notaire, within the year, stating that you claim the lifetime housing right under Article 764, and keep proof of sending. The official texts for this section are Article 763 of the Civil Code<\/a>, Article 764 of the Civil Code<\/a> and Article 765-1 of the Civil Code<\/a>.<\/p>\n Couples who want the survivor to receive more than the default intestacy share use the donation entre \u00e9poux<\/i>, commonly called the donation au dernier vivant<\/i>: a gift between spouses, made during the marriage before a notaire, that takes effect at the first death. Where the deceased leaves children, Article 1094-1 of the Civil Code offers three enhanced options: “Pour le cas o\u00f9 l’\u00e9poux laisserait des enfants ou descendants, issus ou non du mariage, il pourra disposer en faveur de l’autre \u00e9poux, soit de la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 de ce dont il pourrait disposer en faveur d’un \u00e9tranger, soit d’un quart de ses biens en propri\u00e9t\u00e9 et des trois autres quarts en usufruit, soit encore de la totalit\u00e9 de ses biens en usufruit seulement.” (Article 1094-1, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: you may give your spouse either the outright ownership of whatever you could give a stranger, or one quarter in full ownership plus the life interest over the other three quarters, or the life interest over everything. The middle option, a quarter in ownership plus three quarters in life interest, is the classic choice of British couples with children: the survivor owns a solid slice and controls the whole house for life. The same article adds the cantonnement<\/i> (the right to scale down): “Sauf stipulation contraire du disposant, le conjoint survivant peut cantonner son \u00e9molument sur une partie des biens dont il a \u00e9t\u00e9 dispos\u00e9 en sa faveur. Cette limitation ne peut \u00eatre consid\u00e9r\u00e9e comme une lib\u00e9ralit\u00e9 faite aux autres successibles.” (Article 1094-1, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: unless the giver forbade it, you may limit what you actually take to part of the gifted property, and that restraint is not treated as a gift to the other heirs. Scaling down is a quiet tax-planning tool: you take the house and leave the savings accounts to the children, for example, without the law pretending you gave anything away. Where the deceased leaves no children at all, Article 1094 of the Civil Code is broader: “L’\u00e9poux, soit par contrat de mariage, soit pendant le mariage, pourra, pour le cas o\u00f9 il ne laisserait point d’enfant ni de descendant, disposer en faveur de l’autre \u00e9poux en propri\u00e9t\u00e9, de tout ce dont il pourrait disposer en faveur d’un \u00e9tranger.” (Article 1094, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: you may give your spouse outright ownership of everything you could give a stranger.<\/p>\n Two cautions complete the picture. First, a gift of future property between spouses can always be taken back while both are alive: Article 1096 of the Civil Code provides that “La donation de biens \u00e0 venir faite entre \u00e9poux pendant le mariage est toujours r\u00e9vocable.” (Article 1096, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: a gift of future assets made between spouses during the marriage is always revocable. Gifts of present assets that take effect during the marriage, by contrast, can be revoked only on the narrow statutory grounds of Articles 953 to 958, and later children do not revoke gifts between spouses. Review your donation au dernier vivant<\/i> after any divorce, remarriage or new child, and have the notaire confirm in writing whether it still stands and what it covers. Second, neither a will nor a spouse-to-spouse gift can strip the children’s r\u00e9serve h\u00e9r\u00e9ditaire<\/i>. Article 912 of the Civil Code defines it: “La r\u00e9serve h\u00e9r\u00e9ditaire est la part des biens et droits successoraux dont la loi assure la d\u00e9volution libre de charges \u00e0 certains h\u00e9ritiers dits r\u00e9servataires, s’ils sont appel\u00e9s \u00e0 la succession et s’ils l’acceptent. La quotit\u00e9 disponible est la part des biens et droits successoraux qui n’est pas r\u00e9serv\u00e9e par la loi et dont le d\u00e9funt a pu disposer librement par des lib\u00e9ralit\u00e9s.” (Article 912, Civil Code<\/a>) In English: the forced share is the portion the law guarantees to protected heirs, and the disposable portion is everything else. The Cour de cassation has repeatedly protected that share against foreign-law arrangements. On 4 July 2018 (appeals Nos 17-16.515 and 17-16.522, published in the Bulletin), the First Civil Chamber approved a court of appeal that had held, for French immovable property, that “la d\u00e9volution successorale desdits immeubles devait tenir compte des r\u00e8gles de la r\u00e9serve h\u00e9r\u00e9ditaire, laquelle, d’ordre public interne, ne pouvait \u00eatre \u00e9cart\u00e9e par des dispositions testamentaires \u00e9tablies selon la loi du domicile du d\u00e9funt et r\u00e9gissant son statut personnel”. In English: the distribution of the French properties had to respect the forced-share rules, which, as a matter of internal public policy, could not be set aside by testamentary provisions made under the law of the deceased’s domicile. Read the decision here: Cass. 1re civ., 4 July 2018, Nos 17-16.515 and 17-16.522<\/a>. For a British testator this does not make an English-law choice useless, but it means the choice must be drafted with the forced share in mind, ideally alongside the spouse-to-spouse gift, so that the survivor’s enhanced share sits inside the disposable portion and the children’s forced shares are funded from the rest. The governing texts are Article 1094-1 of the Civil Code<\/a>, Article 1094 of the Civil Code<\/a>, Article 1096 of the Civil Code<\/a>, Article 912 of the Civil Code<\/a> and, for the European choice-of-law mechanism, Your Europe: planning a cross-border inheritance (European Union, English)<\/a>.<\/p>\n The tax news for the surviving spouse is the best in this article. Since the TEPA reform of 2007, no succession duty is due between spouses. Article 796-0 bis of the General Tax Code provides: “Sont exon\u00e9r\u00e9s de droits de mutation par d\u00e9c\u00e8s le conjoint survivant et le partenaire li\u00e9 au d\u00e9funt par un pacte civil de solidarit\u00e9.” (Article 796-0 bis, General Tax Code<\/a>) In English: the surviving spouse, and the partner bound by a civil solidarity pact, are exempt from death-transfer duties. You still file the d\u00e9claration de succession<\/i> within the Article 641 deadlines, and the notaire still charges fees and disbursements, but the tax line for the spouse’s share is zero. The children, by contrast, are taxed beyond their allowances. Each child benefits from a personal allowance of 100,000 euros: Article 779 of the General Tax Code provides that “il est effectu\u00e9 un abattement de 100 000 \u20ac sur la part de chacun des ascendants et sur la part de chacun des enfants vivants ou repr\u00e9sent\u00e9s par suite de pr\u00e9d\u00e9c\u00e8s ou de renonciation.” (Article 779, General Tax Code<\/a>) In English: an allowance of 100,000 euros applies to the share of each parent and to the share of each living child, or of each child represented by their own descendants. Above the allowance, the progressive scale of Article 777 applies, rising steeply, which is why the cantonnement technique and lifetime gifts are worth modelling with the notaire before anyone dies.<\/p>\n Where the deceased was still domiciled in the United Kingdom for tax purposes, or held British assets alongside the French house, two overlapping systems claim a slice. On the French side the rule is territorial and blunt: Article 750 ter of the General Tax Code taxes, even where the deceased was not domiciled in France, “Les biens meubles et immeubles, que ces derniers soient poss\u00e9d\u00e9s directement ou indirectement, situ\u00e9s en France […] lorsque le donateur ou le d\u00e9funt n’a pas son domicile fiscal en France […]” (Article 750 ter, General Tax Code<\/a>). In English: movable and immovable property, held directly or indirectly and situated in France, is subject to French transfer duties even where the giver or the deceased was not fiscally domiciled in France. Your Dordogne house is therefore always taxed in France. The bilateral safety net is the succession convention signed in Paris on 21 June 1963 between France and the United Kingdom, whose official text is published by the French tax administration: Convention of 21 June 1963, France\u2013United Kingdom, succession duties (impots.gouv.fr, PDF)<\/a>. The convention fixes the situs of property, which deems immovable property to be situated where it stands, and which organises the credit to be granted against double taxation. In practice the French house is taxed in France and the United Kingdom gives relief against any British charge on the same asset, but the paperwork must be filed on both sides of the Channel, in both languages, with valuations the two administrations will each accept. Keep the French attestation immobili\u00e8re<\/i> (the notarial deed publishing the transfer of the property), the valuation reports, and the proof of French payment together: HMRC and the French tax office will each ask for the other’s documents.<\/p>\n If the file blocks, act early and in the right order. Where a notaire will not release funds or will not recognise your English-law choice, your Article 757 option, your housing claim or your spouse-to-spouse gift, put the notaire on written notice, then apply to the tribunal judiciaire<\/i> (the ordinary civil court) for the blocked step: an inventory, an expert valuation, a provisional distribution or the appointment of a common representative. Remember that after four months any interested party can formally require an heir to choose, so a silent child cannot stall the estate indefinitely. Where the dispute is fiscal, challenge the assessment through a formal claim (r\u00e9clamation<\/i>) within the statutory time limit shown on the notice, attaching the treaty, the valuations and the proof of any British tax paid on the same property. Where children allege that your life interest, your tontine or your spouse-to-spouse gift exceeds the disposable portion and eats into their forced share, the answer is an accounting, not a quarrel: have the notaire draw up the Article 758-5 calculation mass, impute your lifetime gifts under Article 758-6, and test the result against Article 1094-1 before anyone signs a renunciation. The texts that structure every challenge are Article 796-0 bis of the General Tax Code<\/a>, Article 779 of the General Tax Code<\/a> and Article 750 ter of the General Tax Code<\/a>.<\/p>\n A British spouse who survives in a French house holds more cards than English instincts suggest: a choice between a life interest over everything and a quarter in full ownership, a year’s occupation without paying rent as a mandatory effect of the marriage, a lifetime right to remain that must be claimed in writing within the year, and, where the couple planned ahead, an enhanced share under a donation au dernier vivant<\/i> that the survivor may scale down to suit the family’s tax position. No succession duty falls on the spouse’s share, while the French house itself is always taxed in France under the territorial rule, with the 1963 convention preventing the same asset from being taxed twice. The three published decisions quoted above draw the boundaries in red ink: staying on in the house is not the same as claiming the lifetime right, a tontine between spouses counts as a gift and must be equalised, and the children’s forced share cannot be wished away by foreign-law paperwork. Put the three protective steps in your file today: sign or review the spouse-to-spouse gift before a notaire, align it with an English-law choice that respects the forced share, and calendar the one-year housing claim alongside the six- or twelve-month tax return. Done in that order, the survivor keeps the roof, the children keep their guaranteed share, and the file moves instead of blocking.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" British spouse dies owning a French house? Usufruit or quarter share, the year’s stay without paying rent, the lifetime housing right, the donation au dernier vivant, spouse tax exemption and how to unblock the file.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":16349,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kj_source_type":"","_kj_official_id":"","_kj_official_url":"","_kj_judilibre_id":"","_kj_jur":"","_kj_lieu":"","_kj_chambre":"","_kj_rg":"","_kj_date":"","activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","footnotes":""},"categories":[80312,80314],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2132621","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-british-desk","category-decryptage"],"yoast_head":"\nI. What the Surviving Spouse Automatically Receives From the French House<\/h2>\n
A. Usufruit Over the Whole House or Ownership of a Quarter: How Article 757 Works<\/h3>\n
B. Staying in the House: the Year’s Occupation Without Paying Rent and the Lifetime Right to Remain<\/h3>\n
II. Giving Your Spouse More: the Donation au Dernier Vivant, the Tax Position and Challenging a Blocked File<\/h2>\n
A. The Three Enhanced Shares of Article 1094-1, Cantonnement and the Children’s Forced Share<\/h3>\n
B. No Succession Tax Between Spouses, the 1963 Treaty and How to Challenge the Bill<\/h3>\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n