[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, it's not the entire will that is invalidated, but only the illegal parts that are invalid, while the remaining parts remain valid. According to Article 1143 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (adopted on May 28, 2020 and implemented on January 1, 2021), a will must express the testator's true intention. A will made under fraud or coercion is invalid, and a forged will is invalid. If a will is tampered with, the tampered content is invalid. Additionally, according to Article 1141, a will shall reserve a necessary share of the estate for an heir who lacks the ability to work and has no source of livelihood. If a will disposes of shares of property belonging to a spouse or others, the disposed portion will not take effect and will revert to statutory inheritance. The remaining provisions disposing of the testator's lawful personal property will still be valid.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

Many people mistakenly believe that if just one part of the will is illegal, the entire document will be invalidated, and thus give up on protecting their rights; others hold onto wills that clearly dispose of others' property and demand full transfer of ownership, only to hit a roadblock during the registration process. In practice, common illegal or flawed provisions include: listing an entire house registered under a spouse's name or belonging to a couple as being inherited by a single person; including equity shares or demolition compensation payments that do not belong to them in the will; failing to reserve a share for an heir who lacks the ability to work and has no source of income; and content that violates public order and good morals. All of these situations will affect the actual implementation of the will.

II. Key points of contention

First, whether the testator has the right to dispose of property. A will can only dispose of the testator's lawful property. Where the will involves the couple's jointly owned property, the testator shall first allocate half of the jointly owned property to the spouse, and the remaining part shall be the testator's inheritance. Second, the mandatory reserved share. The part that cancels the necessary share is invalid, but only that part, and the validity of the other contents of the will is not affected. Third, whether the expression of intention is true. A will made under fraud or coercion is invalid as a whole, and the modified part is only invalid as to the modified content. Fourth, the relationship between form and content. If the formal requirements are illegal, the entire will may not be established, while the content part being illegal usually only affects the validity of the corresponding part. The two should be judged separately, which is also the case with other legal documents.\nInheritance of property and division of family assetsThis is the first level that needs to be clarified when handling a case.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

A will inheritance dispute handled by our firm perfectly illustrates this rule. Zhao *ming and Li *lan jointly purchased House No. 502 before their deaths, which was considered their marital joint property. Li *lan died in May 2010 without leaving a will; Zhao *ming made two self-written wills in November 2008 and December 2017, stating that his own share of House No. 502 and the share inherited from Li *lan would all be inherited by Zhao *1. Zhao *2 refused to cooperate with the transfer of ownership and raised objections to the authenticity of the two wills, claiming that the handwriting was inconsistent. Zhao *1 entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Li YonghuiThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101199611955812, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) filed a lawsuit. The dispute between the two parties focused on the authenticity of the will and the method of dividing the house. When the court asked questions, both the plaintiff and the defendant said they could not provide comparison samples or apply for handwriting identification. The court determined that the contents of the two self-written wills corroborated each other, and Zhao *2 failed to provide evidence to refute his defense, which was not accepted. At the same time, the court determined that Li *lan died before Zhao *ming and left no will. Her 50% share should be handled by Zhao *ming, Zhao *1, and Zhao *2 in accordance with the statutory inheritance. The final judgment ruled that House No. 502 would be inherited by Zhao *1, and Zhao *2 should assist in handling the transfer registration within 15 days after the judgment takes effect. Zhao *1 would pay Zhao *2 a house discounted price of 521,667 yuan. It can be seen that the will does not take effect on the share that does not belong to oneself, and this part still returns to the statutory inheritance. 律师（执业证号：11101199611955812，以司法行政机关核发证件为准）提起诉讼。双方的争议集中在遗嘱的真实性与房屋分割方式上。法院询问时，原、被告均表示无法提供比对样本，也不申请笔迹鉴定。法院认定两份自书遗嘱内容相互印证，赵某2未举证推翻其抗辩，不予采纳；同时认定李某兰先于赵某明去世，未留遗嘱，其50%份额应由赵某明、赵某1、赵某2三人按法定继承处理。最终判决502号房屋由赵某1继承所有，赵某2于判决生效十五日内协助办理转移登记，赵某1支付赵某2房屋折价款521667元。可见遗嘱对不属于自己的份额不发生效力，这部分仍回归法定继承。

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

According to Articles 113, 114, 113, and 115 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021), a will disposition of personal property is only valid if it complies with the law. The mandatory reserved portion cannot be revoked, and the illegal parts are invalid but do not affect the validity of the remaining parts. Suggestions: First, conduct a property inventory before making a will to clearly distinguish between marital joint property, personal property, and held-for-others property, and only dispose of the share belonging to oneself; Second, if there are inheritors in the family who lack the ability to work and have no source of livelihood, it is necessary to reserve a necessary share for them; Third, the content of the will should avoid attaching illegal conditions, such as making inheritance conditional on not getting married or having children; Fourth, for those who are unsure about their existing wills, they can entrust a lawyer to review and provide an opinion, which involves legal issues.Property transactions and construction projectsFor issues regarding ownership, they should be resolved first.Specialised legal servicesFirst, conduct ownership verification at the property level, and then determine the scope of the disposal action.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

The most easily overlooked issue in wills that violate the law is the issue of shares: when elderly people make wills, they often leave the entire couple's jointly owned house to a certain child, but in the end, only the share belonging to them in the house takes effect, and the spouse's half and the share under the spouse's name still need to be handled according to statutory inheritance. The final distribution results may be very different from the elderly's original intention. Another misunderstanding is that if a will is invalid, it needs to be redone entirely. In fact, in most cases, only the corresponding parts are invalid. For wills with content problems that have been discovered, feasible correction paths include the testator making a new legally valid will to revoke or modify the original will. A reminder to parties: the party claiming a mandatory share needs to prove that they lack working capacity and have no source of livelihood. They should prepare a working capacity appraisal, income and livelihood proof.Beijing Henglu Law FirmIt is recommended to keep written records at both the stages of making a will and resolving disputes, so as to facilitate subsequent evidence collection.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Can you win the case if you argue that part of the will is invalid?

If it can be proven that the will disposed of shares of property that do not belong to the testator, or revoked the mandatory share, the corresponding parts are likely to be deemed invalid; however, the rest of the will is still valid, and the entire will will not usually be invalidated. It is recommended to first conduct a verification of the ownership of the property before determining the scope of the claim.

Q2: What evidence do I need to prepare?

The original will, the death certificate and proof of kinship of the decedent, the registration materials of the ownership of the house or shares, the certificates proving the time of acquisition of the property and the source of the investment, the materials on the marital status of the decedent, and the proof that the party claiming the reserved share lacks the ability to work and has no source of livelihood.

Q3: What is the approximate cost of legal fees?

Disputes over the validity of a will are usually charged based on the value of the disputed property, or may be negotiated on a per-case basis; litigation fees are prepaid based on the amount in dispute, and the losing party will bear the costs after the litigation is successful; if handwriting authentication or property appraisal is required, the fees will be calculated based on the actual costs, subject to the terms of the entrustment contract and the court's notice.

Q4: How long does it take to handle cases like this?

The first-instance trial usually lasts three to six months, and the time will be extended accordingly if appraisal and evaluation are involved. The second-instance trial usually adds three to four months. For cases where there are no disputes over the majority of the content, but only disputes over individual shares, the cycle can be shortened by first confirming the undisputed parts and then dealing with the disputed issues.

Q5: What should I do if I find problems with the content of the will?

First, fix the will text and the evidence of property ownership, and determine which shares are involved in the illegal content. If the testator is still alive, it is recommended that he/she make a legally valid will to revoke or amend the original one. If a dispute has already arisen, a lawsuit should be filed promptly to request that the corresponding parts be declared invalid and handled in accordance with the statutory inheritance rules.

The above content is based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. The facts of individual cases and the jurisdiction of the court may affect the conclusions. Welcome to consult Henglu Law Firm about specific situations.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the necessary evidence to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Legal services for inheritance·Attorney Li Yonghui·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on current laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In the event of a dispute, please consult a practicing lawyer promptly.