What Changed
- Comparative analysis of business succession law across Germany, Austria, and Switzerland details asset valuation and managerial value contributions by transferees.
- European comparative study on future inheritance agreements identifies a gradual shift toward contractual acceptance, despite prohibitions on third-party estate contracts.
- Analysis of European private international law reveals a structural two-track distinction between classical coordination rules (Rome I-III) and regulatory rules (GDPR, DSA, CSDDD).
The latest issue of the legal journal RabelsZ (Issue 3, 2026) has been published as an Open Access release under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0). Accompanied by an editorial detailing the publication's future governance structure and process, this issue features academic contributions directly affecting legal professionals, cross-border corporate advisors, and legal scholars operating within or analyzing German-based legal systems, European succession law, and EU private international law. The issue includes the 19th Rabel Lecture delivered in 2025, three comparative and dogmatic essays, and literary reviews in comparative private and private international law (pp. 563–592).
Business Succession and Inheritance Law: Germany, Austria, and Switzerland
In the 19th Rabel Lecture (2025), Susanne Kalss addresses business transfer and succession law in "Unternehmensnachfolge und Erbrecht: Deutschland, Österreich und die Schweiz im Vergleich" [The Transfer of a Business and Succession Law Consequences: Germany, Austria, and Switzerland Compared] (pp. 413–464, DOI: 10.1628/rabelsz-2026-0028). Kalss demonstrates that business assets fundamentally differ from general personal property because they are difficult to divide, fluctuate rapidly in value, separate economic benefit from administrative authority, and affect diverse stakeholders. Consequently, German-based legal systems in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland stipulate special statutory provisions under existing or impending inheritance laws. These provisions govern asset valuation, valuation dates, and claim deferral options. The study emphasizes that business management must be evaluated economically as a value-adding, asset-based contribution made by the transferee for the collective benefit of all stakeholders, requiring explicit accounting when dividing inherited assets.
Contracting on Future Inheritance in European Comparative Perspective
Hannelore Thijs evaluates cross-border succession planning in "Contracting on a Future Inheritance: A Comparative Perspective" (pp. 465–495, DOI: 10.1628/rabelsz-2026-0029). Moving beyond the traditional division between the Roman law prohibition and the German law recognition of inheritance contracts, Thijs establishes a comparative typology categorizing three agreement types: succession agreements, waiver agreements, and agreements regarding a third party's future estate. The comparative findings show that while European jurisdictions lack a uniform approach, most recognize at least one agreement type under regulatory restrictions. Waiver agreements enjoy relatively broad acceptance, succession agreements remain controversial, and agreements on a third party's future estate remain predominantly prohibited. However, the analysis identifies a gradual shift toward broader acceptance of contractual mechanisms for future inheritance.
Temporal Fairness under the EU Matrimonial Property Regulation
Denise Wiedemann analyzes conflict-of-laws principles in "Zeitliche Anknüpfungsgerechtigkeit im Internationalen Ehegüterrecht der Europäischen Union" [Temporal Fairness in Conflict of Laws: The Immutable Connecting Factor under the EU Matrimonial Property Regulation] (pp. 496–531, DOI: 10.1628/rabelsz-2026-0023). Wiedemann examines the fixed, immutable connecting factor established in the EU Matrimonial Property Regulation, which governs property relations between spouses broadly. Tracing its historical development, the article evaluates two methods to restrict this wide scope: interpreting exceptions narrowly to construct a restricted concept of matrimonial property, or deploying overriding mandatory provisions. The article notes, however, that these restrictive options are constrained by the Regulation's text and the Court of Justice of the European Union's (CJEU) uniform interpretation approach.
Regulatory Law and Modern European Private International Law
Leonhard Hübner explores structural shifts in European Private International Law (PIL) in "Die Zweispurigkeit des europäischen IPR. Zur Transformation klassischer Kollisionsrechtsdogmatik durch europäisches Regulierungsrecht" [The Two-Track Nature of European Private International Law. The Transformation of Classic Conflict-of-Law Doctrine by European Regulatory Law] (pp. 532–562, DOI: 10.1628/rabelsz-2026-0024). Hübner identifies a structural duality contrasting classic coordination-PIL (Rome I–III)—which coordinates legal orders based on legal equality—with an emerging regulatory-PIL (GDPR, DSA, CSDDD) that extends European standards to third-state actors. Hübner deconstructs six classic doctrines (neutrality, multilateralism, decisional harmony, rule structure, separation from public law, and separation from procedural law), demonstrating that while valid for coordination-PIL, applying them to regulatory-PIL creates systematic mischaracterizations. The essay establishes criteria to classify regulatory instruments and calls for constructive engagement with regulatory private international law.
Who May Be Affected
Legal practitioners, scholars, estate planning professionals, cross-border business owners, and third-state actors subject to EU regulatory legislation.
Cross-Border Context
Compares statutory approaches across Switzerland, Germany, Austria, and the European Union, specifically addressing cross-border estate planning, matrimonial property rules, and the extraterritorial application of EU law to foreign entities.
What to check next
- Consult the full Open Access articles via their published DOIs (10.1628/rabelsz-2026-0028, 10.1628/rabelsz-2026-0029, 10.1628/rabelsz-2026-0023, 10.1628/rabelsz-2026-0024) for complete citations and legislative texts.
- Review the journal's editorial statement regarding updates to its governance structure and submission process.
This article provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. Consult the official text and obtain advice appropriate to your circumstances where needed.