[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, notarized wills are not necessarily the most effective. According to Article 114, Paragraph 3 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021), if there are several wills with conflicting contents, the latest will shall prevail. This article abolishes the priority rule for notarized wills established by Article 20 of the original Inheritance Law of the People's Republic of China (effective October 1, 1985). However, it is necessary to distinguish the time boundaries: If the decedent died before January 1, 2021, the Inheritance Law in force at that time shall apply according to the "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Time Effect of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China" (effective January 1, 2021), and notarized wills shall still take precedence over handwritten, proxy, audio, and oral wills. To determine which one is valid, first look at the time of death, then look at the form of the will and the last intention. For more details, please refer to the following link:Legal services for inheritance and family property division.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

"Is a notarized will the most effective?" is one of the most frequently asked questions in inheritance consultations. Typical scenarios include: an elderly person executed a notarized will in their early years, but later made a handwritten will with a particular child after living together with them in their later years, and the two wills contradict each other; one party holds a notarized will to claim sole ownership of the property, while the other party produces a later handwritten will; and questions are raised about the qualifications of the notary office and the witnessing process. When handling similar cases in Beijing, the court first reviews the time of the decedent's death to determine whether the Civil Code or the original Inheritance Law applies, and then reviews the formal requirements and authenticity of the wills one by one. For cases involving the overall arrangement of family property, it may be necessary to combine other relevant factors for comprehensive consideration.Divorce litigation and family dispute resolution servicesSynchronous sorting out.

II. Key points of contention

There are three main points of contention. Firstly, the time limit for the application of the law: for those who died before January 1, 2021, the original Inheritance Law applies, and notarized wills take precedence; for those who died after this date, the Civil Code applies, and the last-made will shall prevail. Secondly, the validity of notarized wills themselves may be questioned: whether the notary office is qualified, whether the procedure is legal, and whether the testator had full capacity for civil conduct at the time of making the will. Thirdly, the overlap and revocation of the will's content: if the testator performs civil legal acts that are contrary to the content of the will, it shall be deemed as a revocation of the relevant content according to Article 1142 Paragraph 2 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China. For matters involving the disposition of real estate and the effect of transfer of ownership, reference may be made to relevant provisions.Real estate sales and construction project servicesDetermine the change in ownership rights.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

[Case Review] The decedents, Wang Zhiguo and Zhang Hua, were married. During their marriage, they purchased a house located at No. 201, Changping District, Beijing and registered it under Wang Zhiguo's name. On February 6, 2002, the couple jointly executed a notarized will, stipulating that each of their shares in the house would be inherited by their daughter, Wang Li. Wang Li was required to pay her son, Wang Ming, 100,000 yuan in one lump sum. Otherwise, the will would be deemed invalid and the inheritance would be handled in accordance with the law. Wang Zhiguo died in 2004, and Zhang Hua died in 2007. On May 1, 2006, Zhang Hua executed a self-written will, stating that the 2002 notarized will was invalid and that she would leave the entire house to Wang Ming. On July 6 of the same year, Wang Li issued a receipt acknowledging that she had received 60,000 yuan in compensation from Zhang Hua. Wang Ming's son, Wang Gang, sued to inherit the house based on the 2006 self-written will.

[Focus of the controversy] First, when the 2002 notarized will and the 2006 self-written will conflict in terms of validity, which one takes precedence? Second, did Wang Li fulfill her obligations, and does the receipt for 60,000 yuan constitute a change to the will?

[Lawyer's Strategy and Court's Rationale] Wang Li entrusted Zhu Guiying, a lawyer from Beijing Henglue Law Firm, to represent her. After reviewing the evidence, Zhu Guiying argued the following points: First, all the decedents died before the implementation of the Civil Code. According to Article 20 of the former Inheritance Law of the People's Republic of China, handwritten wills, written wills by others, audio recordings, and oral wills cannot revoke or modify notarized wills. Therefore, the 2006 handwritten will cannot revoke the 2002 notarized will. Second, Wang Zhiguo has already passed away, so Zhang Hua has no right to unilaterally change Wang Zhiguo's share of the inheritance. Third, according to Article 21 of the same law, if the heir who inherits under a testamentary will with obligations accepts and performs the obligations, he or she shall legally enjoy the right of inheritance. Wang Li explicitly agreed to pay 100,000 yuan in court. Fourth, the 6,000 yuan receipt actually refers to the distribution of compensation for the demolition of the original house in 1997, which does not comply with the statutory form for amending a notarized will and does not produce the effect of amendment. The court adopted the above arguments, determined that the notarized will was valid and that the handwritten will could not revoke the notarized will, and ruled to dismiss all the claims of the plaintiff, Wang Gang. The litigation fees of 11,000 yuan shall be borne by the plaintiff. This case was handled by Beijing Henglue Law Firm.Zhu GuiyingThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202011246828, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Practical advice: First, confirm the time of the decedent's death to determine whether the Civil Code or the original Inheritance Law applies. Second, if there are multiple wills in the household, check the time of their preparation, formal requirements, and the qualifications of the witnesses one by one, and take the latest valid will as the basis. Third, a notarized will is not irrevocable, but its revocation requires evidence to prove that the testator lacks civil capacity, was subject to fraud or coercion, or that the notarization process was illegal. Fourth, if an elderly person re-writes a will in their later years, it is recommended to simultaneously revoke the old will and keep audio and video recordings to reduce disputes after the fact. The legal basis is Articles 113 to 143 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021), Articles 20 and 21 of the original Inheritance Law of the People's Republic of China (effective October 1, 1985), and the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Time Effect of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China" (effective January 1, 2021). For cases involving the recovery of inheritance funds and property, relevant provisions can be referenced accordingly.Creditor-debtor relations and enforcement case servicesHandle it.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Advice

The value of a notarized will lies in its strong formal evidentiary force and limited room for dispute, but it is not a once-and-for-all solution. If the decedent makes a new will after the implementation of the Civil Code, the notarized will may be replaced by the valid will made later; conversely, if the inheritance occurs before the implementation of the Civil Code, the priority of the notarized will will still be protected by the original inheritance law. When making a judgment, three key factors should be taken into account: the time of death, the time of the will, and the legality of the form. If there are doubts about the authenticity of the will or the testator's capacity for action, an appraisal should be applied for as soon as possible and evidence such as medical records and videos should be preserved. If further clarification of family and property arrangements is needed, assistance can be sought through legal professionals.Special services and other case-related servicesMake an appointment for an evaluation.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Which is more effective, a notarized will or a self-written will written later?

It depends on the time of the decedent's death. If the decedent died before January 1, 2021, Article 20 of the former Inheritance Law of the People's Republic of China applies, and the notarized will takes precedence. The self-written will cannot be revoked or amended to the notarized will. If the decedent died after the implementation of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, Article 1142 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China applies, and the last will takes precedence if the contents of several wills conflict with each other. The self-written will made later, if it is legally formal and true in intention, can replace the previous notarized will. Therefore, it cannot be simply assumed that the notarized will always takes precedence. It is necessary to comprehensively judge based on the time of death and the form of the will.

Q2: What evidence is needed to prove that a will is valid or invalid?

The core evidence includes: the original copies of each will and the proof of the time of their establishment, the notarization certificates and case files handled by the notary office, the death certificates and household registration cancellation materials of the decedent, the medical records and physical examination reports before and after the making of the will, the audio and video recordings of the establishment process, the witnesses' testimonies, and the materials proving the testator's capacity for action or the existence of fraud or coercion. If there are doubts about the authenticity of the signature, samples of signatures from the same period should be collected for handwriting identification. The evidence should focus on "whether the form is legal, whether the intention is true, and the chronological order", forming a complete chain of evidence. Oral objections alone are difficult to overturn the notarization documents.

Q3: How much does it cost to litigate a dispute over the validity of a will?

The litigation fees shall be paid in accordance with the "Measures for the Payment of Litigation Fees", which are calculated based on the amount of the disputed subject matter. The losing party shall bear the fees or the fees shall be shared according to the proportion of victory and defeat. There is no unified government pricing for attorneys' fees. Attorneys' fees are usually charged on a per-case basis, a percentage of the amount of the disputed subject matter, or on an hourly basis. The specific charges shall be subject to the provisions of the entrustment contract. Inheritance cases are subject to the rules restricting risk-based representation. In this case, the acceptance fee for the first-instance case alone is 11,000 yuan, and the higher the amount of the disputed subject matter, the higher the fees will be. It is recommended to first assess the chances of winning and the cost of the dispute over the validity of the will, and then decide whether to resolve the dispute through litigation. If necessary, priority should be given to mediation and consultation.

Q4: How long does it usually take for a lawsuit regarding the validity of a will to reach a conclusion?

According to the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 24, 2021 and implemented on January 1, 2022), first-instance ordinary procedures generally conclude within six months, and simplified procedures within three months; where handwriting identification, real estate appraisal, or evidence collection by notary agencies are involved, the time period will be extended accordingly. If one party appeals, the second-instance court generally concludes the case within three months. However, if the testator has passed away for a long time or there are many parties involved, the time required for service and evidence collection will be longer. Overall, such cases often take more than half a year from the filing to the issuance of a valid judgment.

Q5: If you find that there are disputes over the will, what should you do first?

It is recommended to handle this matter in three steps: First, immediately secure all the original wills, check the date of making each will, the signatures and the witnesses' information to avoid the original wills being lost or damaged; Second, confirm the time of the decedent's death, determine whether the Civil Code or the original Inheritance Law applies, and preliminarily determine which will might be valid; Third, collect supporting materials such as medical records, videos, and witnesses' contact information, and apply for handwriting identification if necessary. Do not transfer or divide the property without authorization until the dispute is resolved. It is recommended to engage a professional lawyer as soon as possible to provide legal advice, and then start negotiations or litigation after clarifying the legal pathway.

This article is written based on the common judicial interpretation in the Beijing area. If the case occurs in other regions, it is recommended to consult local lawyers to verify the regional differences.

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

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on current effective 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 in a timely manner.