[Case Summary]This case is a dispute over a bequest (in which the heirs defend themselves and protect their statutory inheritance shares). After the death of Mr. Zhang and Mrs. Zhou, their grandson, Zhang Mou 6, submitted the "Confirmation Letter", "Will 1" and "Will 2" to claim that the house No. 201 was bequeathed to him, and sued the court. Zhang Mou 1 and his three siblings entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case on their behalf.Li YonghuiThe lawyer appeared in court to defend the case. Both the first-instance and second-instance courts adopted the lawyer's opinion: confirming that "Will 2" is valid, and that Zhang *6 inherits seven-twelfths of Zhang's share according to the will, with the remaining shares being inherited by the six defendants in equal shares of one-twelfth each; the second-instance court upheld the original judgment. The core disputes include: the formal requirements and validity of multiple wills/affirmations, and the division of shares between bequests and statutory inheritance. Applicable legal provisions: the laws at the time regarding the formal requirements of holographic wills and printed wills, as well as the relevant provisions on statutory inheritance.

I. Review of the Case Facts

"Can grandchildren directly inherit the house based on their grandfather's will?" and "Is a printed will valid without witnesses?" are common questions regarding bequest and inheritance. Zhang * and Zhou * had five children. House No. 201 was the couple's jointly owned property. Zhang * 4 (deceased, whose daughter is Qiang * 1), Zhang * 6 (the son of Zhang * 3), and others were the inheritors. After Zhang * and Zhou * passed away, Zhang * 6 submitted copies of the "Confirmation Letter", "Will 1", and "Will 2", claiming that the house No. 201 was bequeathed to him. He then sued Zhang * 1 and the other four children, as well as Qiang * 1 and Qiang * 2, as defendants. The four children entrusted Henglue Law Firm to handle the case.Li YonghuiThe lawyer appears in court to defend himself and safeguard his own legitimate rights and interests.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: The effectiveness of multiple documents.Are the "Confirmation Letter" (without the original copy), "Will 1" (without the witness's signature), and "Will 2" (a witnessed will) legally valid and effective?
  • Focus II: The division between bequest and statutory inheritance.House No. 201 is jointly owned by a couple. If Zhou *'s share is not inherited according to the law when he dies without a will, who will inherit Zhang *'s share according to the valid will?
  • Focus Three: Disputes in the Second Instance.Zhang *6 appealed, claiming that the "Confirmation Letter" constitutes a gift or a promise to waive the right of inheritance, and disputing whether it is valid.

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The defendant (the four children) claimed that:Zhang *1 and the other three people claimed that they did not recognize the "Confirmation Letter" because there was no original copy, and that Zhou * did not make a will, so her share should be inherited according to law. They requested to protect their legally entitled inheritance shares.

The plaintiff (Zhang *6) alleged that:Zhang *6 claimed that his grandparents left a will before their death, bequeathing Room No. 201 to him, and requested that the court rule that he should inherit the ownership of the house.

Legal opinion of Hengluo Law Firm:Li YonghuiThe lawyer pointed out in court that since there was no original copy of the "Confirmation Letter", he did not recognize its authenticity. Zhang *6 had no evidence to prove that Zhou * had made a will, so Zhou *'s share could not be inherited by Zhang *6 according to the "Confirmation Letter". Zhang *6 claimed that the "Confirmation Letter" was a promise made by the heirs to waive their inheritance rights during the lifetime of the decedent, but the intention to waive inheritance rights should be expressed after the decedent's death, which is not legally supported. Regarding "Will 1" and "Will 2", the lawyer argued the validity based on formal requirements, and the court ultimately determined that "Will 2" was a valid holographic will. Accordingly, Zhang *'s share was inherited by Zhang *6 at a ratio of 7/12, and the remaining shares were inherited according to law.

  • Denying the authenticity of the Confirmation Letter without the original document, and preventing it from being used as a basis for inheritance
  • The argument that the promise to "waive the right of inheritance" during one's lifetime does not comply with the law.
  • Distinguish the essential elements of various forms of wills and support the attribution of the share of the valid holographic will

IV. Outcome of the case

The first-instance court ruled that: the "Confirmation Letter" was not admitted as evidence because there was no original copy, and even if it were genuine, it did not meet the formal requirements of a printed will; "Will 1" was invalid because there were no signatures of witnesses; "Will 2" was a valid oral will and should be admitted as evidence. After Zhou * died, one-half of his share of the house was divided equally among the six defendants, with each of them receiving one-twelfth; after Zhang * died, his share was inherited by Zhang *6 in accordance with "Will 2", who received seven-twelfths. The first-instance court ruled that Zhang *6 would receive seven-twelfths and the remaining five defendants would each receive one-twelfth. Zhang *6 appealed, and the second-instance court accepted the appeal.Li YonghuiThe lawyer's opinion is that the "Confirmation Letter" is neither a valid gift nor a legal waiver of the inheritance commitment. The appeal request is not established, and the original judgment should be maintained.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

The will shall comply with the statutory formal requirements. A printed will shall be signed by witnesses, and a testamentary will shall be signed by qualified witnesses. The intention to renounce the inheritance shall be expressed after the death of the decedent. In the event of a dispute over a bequest, the heirs shall promptly entrust a lawyer to distinguish the legal effect of the document and safeguard their share. This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm [Li YonghuiThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101199611955812, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts on behalf of the client, relying on the provisions of inheritance law, to protect the client's share of the inherited estate.

VI. Common Questions About Inheritance Cases (FAQ)

  1. Q: Can the grandchildren directly inherit the house based on their grandfather's will?
    A: A will must comply with the statutory formal requirements to be valid; only the heirs or legatees designated in a valid will may inherit the corresponding shares according to the will.
  2. Q: Is it valid to print a will without a witness?
    A: When printing a will, there should be at least two witnesses present to witness it and sign each page of the will. If there are no witnesses' signatures, the will is generally invalid.
  3. Q: Is it valid to renounce the promise of inheritance while still alive?
    A: The expression of intention to renounce inheritance should be made after the death of the decedent. A "renunciation" promise made during the decedent's lifetime is generally not recognized.
  4. Q: How can a holographic will be considered valid?
    A: It is necessary to have more than two qualified witnesses present, with one of them acting as a proxy, indicating the year, month, and day, and having the proxy, other witnesses, and the testator sign the document.
  5. Q: How can Beijing Inheritance Lawyers assist in responding to lawsuits?
    A: Distinguish the formal requirements and legal effect of various documents, clarify the difference between bequests and statutory inheritance shares, and systematically safeguard the rights and interests of the parties involved.