Funeral matters: wishes, rights and documents · France / Switzerland
Family exhumation: standing, consent and transfer dossier
A family-requested exhumation requires the actual requester’s standing and identification of the remains, grave and destination. France’s mayoral and dispute framework differs from Swiss cantonal arrangements, illustrated by Geneva’s early-exhumation route. Assemble identity, relationship, mandate and known disagreements before examining permissions and operational conditions. Vault ownership alone does not establish every right to remove remains. Destination approval and reburial or cremation records need separate evidence.
Julie by AlphaDeep is an AI legal assistant for French law: it researches official references to help answer your questions (Légifrance, case law, service-public), analyses your documents and drafts your letters, for individuals and professionals alike.
Requester-standing, family-position and destination dossier
- Official texts cited
- Sources checked on
- Drafted with AI assistance, our method
General legal information with official references and dated checks. It is not personalised advice: for a decision that commits you, have your situation checked by a qualified professional.
Julie by AlphaDeep
Which remains, grave and destination are identified?
France: identify remains, grave and proposed destination without merging different persons’ requests. Switzerland: retain the equivalent identification chain; a shared tomb title alone does not determine which remains the application concerns.
Read the referencesYour file concerns “Family exhumation: standing, consent and transfer dossier”. Does it concern France or Switzerland? Share the document for requester and standing and the decision you need to prepare.
3 free questions at signup. Avoid names and sensitive information.
Who has standing to request this particular exhumation?
France: R2213-40’s family-request branch concerns the closest relative and supporting evidence. Switzerland: establish the applicant’s capacity under the actual Geneva procedure separately; French kinship standing is not imported automatically.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Requester-standing, family-position and destination dossier
Synthetic example: fictional records. Requester-standing, family-position and destination dossier.
Synthetic example: fictional records · Requester-standing, family-position and destination dossier
- Jurisdiction
- France
- Requester and standing
- Person A1, relationship L1
- Grave and remains
- Grave S1, person D1
- Consent and mandate
- Documents F1, mandate M1
- Destination and permissions
- Place T1, decisions P1
Destination approval and reburial or cremation records need separate evidence.
Which remains, grave and destination are identified?
France: identify remains, grave and proposed destination without merging different persons’ requests. Switzerland: retain the equivalent identification chain; a shared tomb title alone does not determine which remains the application concerns.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
What family agreement or known disagreement must be disclosed?
France: retain known consents and disclose a family dispute for the relevant judicial resolution. Switzerland: document known agreement and disagreement, while checking the actual local standing rules; silence is not assumed unanimous consent.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Preparation reference: Requester-standing, family-position and destination dossier
| Preparation question | Point to verify |
|---|---|
| Who has standing to request this particular exhumation? | France: R2213-40’s family-request branch concerns the closest relative and supporting evidence. Switzerland: establish the applicant’s capacity under the actual Geneva procedure separately; French kinship standing is not imported automatically. |
| Which remains, grave and destination are identified? | France: identify remains, grave and proposed destination without merging different persons’ requests. Switzerland: retain the equivalent identification chain; a shared tomb title alone does not determine which remains the application concerns. |
| What family agreement or known disagreement must be disclosed? | France: retain known consents and disclose a family dispute for the relevant judicial resolution. Switzerland: document known agreement and disagreement, while checking the actual local standing rules; silence is not assumed unanimous consent. |
| Which mayoral, cantonal or court decisions are needed? | France: connect mayoral and any judicial decisions to the specific request. Switzerland: Geneva’s early-exhumation branch requires municipal agreement and cantonal authorisation; the concession title does not replace those distinct permissions. |
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Which mayoral, cantonal or court decisions are needed?
France: connect mayoral and any judicial decisions to the specific request. Switzerland: Geneva’s early-exhumation branch requires municipal agreement and cantonal authorisation; the concession title does not replace those distinct permissions.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
What identity, relationship and mandate evidence supports the request?
France: retain relevant identity, domicile, kinship and mandate references. Switzerland: collect the corresponding capacity and representation documents; the general preparation tool should not contain unnecessary identifiable records of relatives or the deceased.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Which health, timing or attendance conditions apply?
France: R2213-41 and R2213-42 contain circumstance-specific conditions, not one blanket annual wait. Switzerland: verify actual health and operational requirements separately; the French timing branch cannot establish the Geneva operation’s conditions.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Which official provision helps explain this situation?
A family-requested exhumation requires the actual requester’s standing and identification of the remains, grave and destination. France’s mayoral and dispute framework differs from Swiss cantonal arrangements, illustrated by Geneva’s early-exhumation route. Assemble identity, relationship, mandate and known disagreements before examining permissions and operational conditions. Vault ownership alone does not establish every right to remove remains. Destination approval and reburial or cremation records need separate evidence.
What destination approval and reburial or cremation records are needed?
France: connect destination permission and subsequent reburial or cremation records. Switzerland: Geneva’s early request also identifies destination and proposed subsequent operation; exhumation approval does not prove every later permission is complete.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Why does vault ownership not establish every right to remove remains?
France: vault or monument ownership does not alone establish exhumation standing. Switzerland: concession rights likewise do not automatically establish all authority over remains; keep property, applicant capacity and public permissions separate.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
What other questions arise in this file?
Which remains, grave and destination are identified?
France: identify remains, grave and proposed destination without merging different persons’ requests. Switzerland: retain the equivalent identification chain; a shared tomb title alone does not determine which remains the application concerns.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Which mayoral, cantonal or court decisions are needed?
France: connect mayoral and any judicial decisions to the specific request. Switzerland: Geneva’s early-exhumation branch requires municipal agreement and cantonal authorisation; the concession title does not replace those distinct permissions.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Which health, timing or attendance conditions apply?
France: R2213-41 and R2213-42 contain circumstance-specific conditions, not one blanket annual wait. Switzerland: verify actual health and operational requirements separately; the French timing branch cannot establish the Geneva operation’s conditions.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Why does vault ownership not establish every right to remove remains?
France: vault or monument ownership does not alone establish exhumation standing. Switzerland: concession rights likewise do not automatically establish all authority over remains; keep property, applicant capacity and public permissions separate.
Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42ExhumationGeneva LCim K1 65 : 8AGeneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduit
Which official references should you consult?
- Code général des collectivités territoriales : opérations funéraires : R2213-40, R2213-41, R2213-42www.legifrance.gouv.fr
- Exhumationwww.service-public.gouv.fr
- Geneva LCim K1 65 : 8Asilgeneve.ch
- Geneva RCim K1 65.01 : 18silgeneve.ch
- Ville de Genève : guide des proches en deuil et texte communal reproduitwww.geneve.ch
Texts cited last checked: 3 November 2026