What sources does Taxxa search?

Taxxa searches a continuously updated collection of more than one million pages from tax authorities, government publications, legislation and case law across the European jurisdictions it covers. Every response cites the underlying material, so a professional can inspect the rule, its jurisdiction and whether it is current before relying on the result.

Can Taxxa work with a team’s own documents?

Yes. Research can combine the public knowledge base with a team’s own PDF, DOCX, CSV and TXT files in one workspace. That makes it possible to compare a client document with the relevant guidance, trace a conclusion to its source and prepare a draft without losing the evidence that supports it.

Who is Taxxa built for?

Accountants, auditors, tax advisors, payroll specialists, bookkeepers and advisory teams working across European jurisdictions. Shared workspaces keep research available to colleagues, and citations make review easier.

Where is customer data stored, and is it used to train models?

Customer data stays in the European Union and is never used to train language models.

Does Taxxa replace professional judgement?

No. Taxxa is a research and drafting workspace. It helps professionals reach an informed starting point faster; the professional still reviews the evidence and makes the final decision. It does not file returns, post bookkeeping entries or give legal advice.

LithuaniaLiteko

Heir's refusal set aside; creditor may seize 3/16 of estate

Panevėžys appeal court set aside a debtor's refusal to inherit as against his creditor, recognised his 3/16 share in six properties and allowed enforcement of a 2012 writ against that share.

By Taxxa AI OyPublished 11 November 2026

Legal & Corporate

Creditor I. K. enforces a 23 November 2012 writTeismai Nr. 2-238-777/2011 against debtor G. G. After the debtor's father V. K. G. died on 16 December 2023Teismai, G. G. did not accept the inheritanceTeismai and the Klaipėda 5th notary office issued a 20 March 2024 intestacy certificate Nr. 795 to the mother D. G., registered in the Nekilnojamojo turto registras. I. K. sought to invalidate the refusal and the certificate, to recognise G. G.'s one-quarter shareTeismai in a flat with cellar, two land plots, a garden building, a greenhouse and yard structures, and to direct enforcement at that share. The Tauragė District Court Šilutė Palace by judgment of 22 April 2026 dismissed the claimTeismai and ordered I. K. to pay representation costs.

The Panevėžys Regional Court, acting for the Klaipėda Regional Court, by Sprendimas Nr. e2A-644-425/2026 of 11 November 2026, reversed and granted the claim in partTeismai. No one must accept an inheritance, but exercising that right must not infringe creditors' rights, and the debtor had to prove his refusal left enforcement intact. The court found the actio Pauliana conditions of Civilinis kodeksas 6.66 met: I. K. holds an undoubted claim; the refusal, though unilateral and gratuitous, removed from Lithuania the only reachable assetTeismai while enforcement since 2012 had yielded nothing; the debtor knew of the compulsory recovery and offered no personal asset, income or Spanish-recovery evidence beyond a company started in 2024; and that he knew or should have known the refusal infringed the creditor rights. Inconvenience of enforcing in Spain does not cure the harm in Lithuania.

Relief is relative under CK 6.66(4)Teismai: the refusal is invalid only as against I. K. and only to the share G. G. could have taken by lawTeismai. Because the estate was the father's half of joint propertyTeismai shared with the surviving spouse and two first-line sonsTeismai, that share is 3/16 of each of the six propertiesTeismai, not the one-quarter pleaded. The court therefore partly invalidated certificate Nr. 795 and its registration to that 3/16 extentTeismai, recognised G. G.'s inheritance right to 3/16 of each objectTeismai, and allowed enforcement of the 2012 writ against those sharesTeismai, dismissing the remainder. The mother good faith was not assessed, being legally irrelevant for a gratuitous unilateral refusal, and the one-year limit for challenging the refusal was not missed where I. K. learned of it from the bailiff's 13 August 2025 proposal and sued on 20 August 2025. Costs were split to reflect 75 percent success for the creditor. Legal basis: Civilinis kodeksas 5.5, 5.11, 5.13, 5.50, 5.60 and 6.66; Civilinio proceso kodeksas 326(1)(2), 330 and 93.

Before refusing an inheritance while debts are enforced, assess whether the refusal leaves reachable assets and be ready to prove solvency with personal asset and income evidence.

Sources

Sprendimas Nr. e2A-644-425/2026 | Panevėžio apygardos teismas | 2026-11-11