A proverbial tug-of-war involving the legendary French singer, Johnny Hallyday’s, $100 million estate is reaching an exciting climax as new technology and social media is being used as evidence.
French and American intestacy laws have been pitted against each other since the French Elvis’ death in 2017. Now, the case of Hallyday’s residency appears to have been settled by tracking the star’s Instagram posts.
The argument involves Hallyday’s biological children, Laura Smet, 35, David Hallyday, 52 and their stepmother, Hallyday’s second wife, Laeticia, 44, whom he lived with in Los Angeles prior to his death.
In his Will, written in Los Angeles, Hallyday disinherited his biological children, leaving the entirety of his £89 million fortune to his wife, Laeticia. Whilst it is legal to disinherit or omit children from a Will under Californian law, it is illegal to do so in France.
The residency of the French singer has been ping-ponging through court ever since his death and the Will was announced.
If Hallyday is classed as a full-time American resident, it could be argued that his final wishes should stand as they were completed and made in accordance with the law of the land in which he was a permanent resident.
However, his children claim that the singer was a secret resident of France and used their father’s Instagram posts as proof of the singer’s whereabouts in the final years of his life.
The Instagram posts found that Hallyday spent 46% or 168 days in France during 2014. In 2015, 41% or 151 days were spent in the country of Hallyday’s birth. Furthermore, in the final eight months of his life, whilst Hallyday fought cancer, his time was spent in France. Evidence enough to suggest that Hallyday spent enough time in France to be classed as a resident that is liable to abide by French intestacy laws.
The French court allowed the evidence to stand and it was considered crucial in determining the frequency of his French stays. The court ruled in favour of Hallyday’s children which means his estate will be divided under French law.
Whereas the original Will saw his estate pass directly to Hallyday’s wife, French law will now decree that Hallyday’s wife alongside their two adopted children and Hallyday’s two biological children will now share the estate and all become equal beneficiaries.
Massively against Hallyday’s wishes, the court ruling determining Hallyday to have been a French resident will also mean that his estate will be liable to inheritance tax.
Hallyday had first left France following crippling tax laws which he viewed as unfair. In 2014, the government announced a 75% supertax on earnings over one million euros. Hallyday vowed never to live in France again until the tax laws relinquished its unfair grip on wealthy earners. Whilst the law was abolished by the end of 2014, his wife’s legal team claim that Hallyday has never really returned as a resident since that point.
Laeticia Hallyday’s legal team have argued that the singer considered the USA to be his only permanent residency, using his official paperwork to prove his permanent home. In 2014 he obtained a US green card, allowing Hallyday, his wife and two adopted children to live permanently in America.
His wife has claimed that they will appeal the decision so that her husband’s final express wishes can be carried out.
Have you experienced a difficult case concerning conflicting laws between the deceased’s permanent place of residence and their place of birth? Is this a rare contentious probate case, or in an internationally diverse world, are these issues becoming increasingly common?
