{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01638176638176638, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.386363636363637, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A DOCTRINAL JUSTIFICATION OF THE INSTITUTION OF COMPULSORY SHARE IN MODERN LEGISLATURE

In terms of content, compulsory share is the most efficient and effective testation restriction. In the European Continental legal systems, this institution allows a testator’s family members to inherit a legally defined portion of the inheritance against the testator’s will. In modern legal theory and practice, the question is increasingly raised regarding the justifiability of guaranteeing the compulsory share. Views advocating a comprehensive restriction, even an outright abolition, of this institution are gaining prominence, arguing as they are for each individual to thus be able to fully exercise their property rights as they see fit. Although this has been the subject of fierce debate in legal circles recently, one must bear in mind that the compulsory share is a very important inheritance law institution with multiple functions and that it should not be called into question in Europe. Therefore, the present author outlines the classical theories justifying the existence of the institution of compulsory share, analyses their basic tenets and ideas, and goes on to put forward his observations regarding which arguments can be used to defend regulating compulsory inheritance in modern legal systems. Keywords :      compulsory share, testator, will, theories of compulsory share justifiability.