As the “Krone” learned exclusively, the first interim verdict in the dispute over the million-dollar inheritance of the late Formula 1 star Niki Lauda arrived sooner than expected on Tuesday. The Vienna Regional Court for Civil Cases supports widow Birgit Lauda.
It’s been four years since the motorsport legend passed away. But, as the “Krone” reported, his fortune is being wrestled with in court. Niki Lauda apparently did not change his will after 2007, there is only a provision for the widow Birgit and the teenage twins in the deed of incorporation of the Lauda private foundation.
Will not be changed after 2007
If a spouse or children are not included in a will, they are entitled to a mandatory share under Austrian law. That accounts for one-sixth of the woman’s assets, namely Birgit Lauda. The private foundation Lauda in the “Niki nazionale” that has been bunkering all its assets – from houses to investments – since the late 1990s, has not yet paid out this mandatory part. With different arguments: The fact that Niki lived in Ibiza was mentioned in the trial – therefore the Spanish courts are responsible for the dispute over the compulsory shares. In addition, the foundation wanted 44-year-old Birgit Lauda to be declared unworthy.
Verdict: The plaintiff is not hereditary
Both are off the table with the redeeming interim verdict: the court confirms the center of the life of the Formula 1 legend, and that was clear in Vienna. Niki lived and worked here, could be found in coffee houses and regularly picked up the twins from school. Therefore, Austrian law applies. There was also no indication or legal basis for the alleged unworthiness of the inheritance.
there is a right to a compulsory part
In addition, the judgment states that the right to a compulsory portion exists in substance. So it is now “only” more about the amount of the claim. And that can run into the tens of millions! “We are happy for our client with this success”, Birgit Lauda’s lawyer Christoph Kerres confirms to “Krone” the arrival of the interlocutory judgment. Incidentally, the lawyer does not want to comment further on the verdict because the verdict is not yet final. Both sides have four weeks to appeal.
Source: Krone
I am Wallace Jones, an experienced journalist. I specialize in writing for the world section of Today Times Live. With over a decade of experience, I have developed an eye for detail when it comes to reporting on local and global stories. My passion lies in uncovering the truth through my investigative skills and creating thought-provoking content that resonates with readers worldwide.
