Lhe subscriber to life insurance can, until his last breath, modify the names of the persons who will receive the capital of his contract (provided that none has previously accepted the benefit). He does not have to inform the insurer during his lifetime. This is what the Court of Cassation has just specified, on the occasion of the following case.
In 1998 and 2004, Mr. X subscribed, for the benefit of his wife, two life insurance contracts distributed by the Savings Fund, and managed by the Ecureuil company, until the latter was absorbed by CNP Assurances.
On May 25, 2014, Mr. X, then aged 84, modified the beneficiary clauses for the benefit of J, younger of his 10 children, holder of a invalidity pension. On January 27, 2015, he appointed, his elder, as the only beneficiary of half of the capital, his other children (including J) having to share the other.
However, when he died, in 2019, the CNP pays all of the funds (222,000 euros) to his daughter J. She spends them in part. But, in 2020, she received a reimbursement request: the CNP indicated that she had discovered with delay the existence of the endorsements of 2015, deposited in the premises of the Savings Fund, but not transmitted to its services.
Willingness of the subscriber
I refuse to restore the money. “If the endorsements were not brought to the attention of his father’s lifetime insurer, they are unenforceable for him”explains his advice, Me Christelle Elgart, lawyer in Bastia. This is, in fact, what the Court of Cassation then judges: since June 13, 2019 (18-14.954), it considers that the modification of the beneficiary clause by a way other than testamentary (amendment or simple letter) is only valid if it has reached the insurer before the death of the insured.
Bastiian magistrates follow this reasoning and judge that the endorsements of 2015 are “Effective deprived”. The CNP was then appealed to cassation. His lawyer, Me Jérôme Rousseau, says that this jurisprudence does not respect “The will of the subscriber” and is not based on any text: theArticle L132-8 of the insurance code, in fact, does not require such a condition.
You have 23.43% of this article to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.