@misc{Tułak_Norbert_Dopuszczalność_2019,
 author={Tułak, Norbert},
 copyright={Copyright by Wydział Prawa, Administracji i Ekonomii Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2023},
 address={Wrocław},
 howpublished={online},
 year={2019},
 publisher={E-Wydawnictwo. Prawnicza i Ekonomiczna Biblioteka Cyfrowa. Wydział Prawa, Administracji i Ekonomii Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego},
 language={pol},
 abstract={The Supreme Court in the resolution of 17.3.2017 ruled that it is permissible to conclude an agreement on a waiver of legitime, indicating as the basis of Article 1048 of the Civil Code. The position of the Supreme Court presented in the ruling should be considered incorrect. This is justified by the significant doubts appearing, especially in the context of the regulation contained in Article 1047 Civil Code. The reference to the inferential directive and the maiori ad minus should be regarded as unfounded, as is the application of the rule that is unknown to the law, in the case of which 'what is not expressly prohibited is allowed'. The view that the exclusion of the admissibility of concluding renegotiation agreements restricts the principle of freedom of testing is irrelevant. Finally, the issue of legal consequences caused by the conclusion of the agreement on waiving the right to a reserved portion of a third party, which the Supreme Court omits in its ruling, raises doubts.},
 title={Dopuszczalność zawarcia umowy zrzeczenia się zachowku. Glosa do uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 17.3.2017 r., III CZP 110/16},
 keywords={inheritance law, waiver of succession, waiver of legitime, legitime, inheritance contracts},
}