From our other sites
The story
The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from relatives — including a brother — of Kosuke Nozaki, known as “Kishu Don Juan” (who died in 2018 at age 77), who had argued that his will leaving roughly ¥1.3 billion to Tanabe City in Wakayama Prefecture was invalid. In a ruling dated September 30, the top court upheld the lower and high court decisions, finalizing the will’s validity. The relatives had claimed the handwriting looked unnatural and that Nozaki had no clear motive for the donation, but both the district and high courts found no evidence suggesting forgery. On 5ch, discussion centered on a quirk of inheritance law: even with a valid will, Nozaki’s ex-wife retains the right to claim her “reserved portion” (iryubun, a guaranteed minimum share), while siblings have no such reserved portion at all — and posters argued over exactly how the shares would break down.
In a lawsuit over the validity of a will leaving roughly ¥1.3 billion — the estate of a wealthy man known as “Kishu Don Juan” — to charity, the Supreme Court has decided to reject an appeal from relatives who argued the will was invalid. The decision, dated September 30, finalizes the first and second trial rulings that upheld the will.
The case involved relatives of Kosuke Nozaki (77 at the time of his death), a wealthy resident of Tanabe City, Wakayama Prefecture known as “Kishu Don Juan,” who died in 2018. They sought to have invalidated his will, which left approximately ¥1.3 billion of his estate to Tanabe City.
The relatives argued that “the handwriting looks unnatural, and there’s no reasonable motive for donating to Tanabe City.” But the Wakayama District Court, in the first trial, ruled the will “valid,” finding “nothing unreasonable, since the handwriting shows characteristics and quirks unique to Nozaki.” The Osaka High Court, in the second trial, likewise rejected the relatives’ appeal, stating that “even if the characters closely resemble those in another document written by Nozaki, that does not imply the will was forged.”
Source: news.yahoo.co.jp / Original article here
What people said
Wasn't he some guy from Spain?
Wasn't that a dog breed?
How do you even get your IME to spit out a dumb conversion like that?
Though we still don't know if she'll be found not guilty by the Supreme Court yet.
Since there are no kids, if it's just the wife (and no will), it goes to the siblings too.
A: Will valid, wife guilty → 100% to Tanabe City
B: Will valid, wife not guilty → split between Tanabe City and the wife (the estate goes to the city in full, but the wife can claim half as her "reserved portion")
C: Will invalid, wife guilty → 100% to the siblings
D: Will invalid, wife not guilty → wife gets 3/4, siblings get 1/4
https://www.sankei.com/article/20260323-XXTUR2QLS5KP5DLJ4YTDT3WVQM/
If there were no will, the statutory inheritance share would be 3/4 for the ex-wife and 1/4 split among the brothers.
But if the will is ruled valid, Tanabe City gets the entire estate per the will, while the ex-wife can still assert a claim to 1/2 as her "reserved portion."
The brothers have no reserved portion, so in that case they get nothing.
If the ex-wife is later convicted on appeal and the will is also ruled invalid, the brothers would inherit everything.
Because siblings don't get a reserved portion.
Siblings do have a statutory inheritance share, but no reserved portion. So if there's a will, the will takes priority — according to Gemini.
If there are no kids, the wife gets half.
Half, as her reserved portion.
Even then, she'd still get her reserved share. A wife's rights are insanely strong.
There he is — Japan's number one!
Is this some big reversal? Wait, which way was it again?
I thought the woman was going to get it.
The wife gets her reserved portion.
Siblings don't get a reserved portion.
Not the reserved portion — the inheritance share. If the will is invalid, the donated amount goes back into the estate, so the siblings could inherit from it.
Oh, that's only if it's invalid — yeah, that's true.
Re: #107
Nope, go look it up.
Going by this thread, I'd guess it's 3/8.
"Per Article 1042, Paragraph 2 of the Civil Code, you multiply by the wife's statutory inheritance share of 3/4."
Gemini says the correct method is to multiply the reserved portion by the statutory inheritance ratio.
No idea if Gemini's actually right though.
Inheritance disputes happen even without much money on the line. My dad's side of the family went through it — there's always emotional baggage involved.
According to a tax accountant, the worst fights happen over estates worth tens of millions of yen. Once you get up into the hundreds of millions, apparently disputes actually get rarer.
You can just picture him realizing that and going "fine, I'll give it all to the city instead," right?
And he even put out books while he was alive — the real, literal "look how great I am" kind of book. Looking at it now, it's kind of sad.
My older brother and his wife don't have kids, and we don't get along. He told me he's leaving everything to his wife, that I won't see a single yen, and that he's already written a will.
Do I have zero right to anything?
Siblings don't get a reserved portion, so no — you're out of luck.
Nope.
Though it'd be different if the wife died first.
If there's a will, you get nothing. Same as this case — siblings have no reserved portion.
Without a will you would've gotten something. Guess you should've stayed on good terms with your brother.
Because if there's no will (i.e. it's invalid), all the siblings together get 1/4.
If the will turns out to be a forgery, they get that 1/4.
Someone who hates the wife and siblings, or someone trying to honor what they think he really wanted, going "no way am I letting them get the money, grrr" and forging it.
Or maybe I wrote it myself, wanting to cut down how much money goes to the wife.
Background and Key Points
Even once a will is confirmed “valid,” that doesn’t mean the other heirs end up with nothing. Under Japan’s Civil Code, spouses and children are guaranteed a minimum share called the “reserved portion” (iryubun), but siblings are not entitled to one at all. The thread’s disagreements centered on how the shares would break down if the will somehow turned out to be invalid (the statutory inheritance ratio of 3/4 for the ex-wife and 1/4 for the siblings, versus the separate calculation used for the reserved portion) — the numbers shifted back and forth throughout the thread, including posts citing generative-AI answers. A common misunderstanding worth flagging: a “valid will” doesn’t mean the designated recipient gets the entire estate free and clear — a spouse’s right to claim their reserved portion survives even when a will exists. The circumstances of Nozaki’s death (the separate criminal case involving his ex-wife) is an entirely different legal proceeding from this will-validity lawsuit; the Supreme Court’s latest decision concerns only the authenticity and validity of the will itself.
*This article is excerpted and summarized from the 5ch (News Express+) thread “[Supreme Court] “Kishu Don Juan’s” will leaving approx. ¥1.3 billion to Tanabe City, Wakayama ruled valid — relatives’ appeal to invalidate it rejected.”
Leave a Reply