Legal inheritance refers to the inheritance method in which the scope, order, conditions, shares, principles of inheritance distribution, and procedures of inheritance are directly stipulated by law. Legal inheritance disputes account for a relatively large proportion of family disputes, and often have greater difficulty in trial due to factors such as a large number of parties, high litigation interests, difficulty in identifying facts, and often accompanied by family conflicts. In judicial practice, there is still a lack of legal uniformity in determining the relationship between stepparents and children, and determining the specific scope of inheritance.
In recent years, with the development of the economy and society, various new types of heritage have constantly emerged, and there is often significant controversy over how to properly handle them. In order to promote the unity of legality and proper handling of such cases, this article combines typical cases in judicial practice to sort out, extract, and summarize the trial ideas and key points of judgment for legal inheritance disputes.
Catalogue
I Typical Cases
II Difficulties in Trial of Legal Inheritance Dispute Cases
III Trial Ideas and Key Points of Judgment for Cases of Legal Inheritance Disputes
IV Other issues that need to be addressed
I Typical Cases
Case 1: Examination of whether the parties involved have the status of inheritors
Sun and Chen registered their marriage in 1984, and after the marriage, Chen and his son Chen Jia (aged 9 at the time), born to their ex husband, lived together with Sun and Chen. In 1991, the two agreed to divorce, and Chen and Chen Jia both moved out of Sun's residence. Chen Jia lived abroad for a long time after reaching adulthood. The property involved in the case was registered for ownership in 2000, with the registered property owner being Sun. After Sun's death in May 2016, there were conflicting opinions among the parties regarding whether Chen Jia had the right to inherit Sun's estate.
Case 2: Examination involving the unilateral abandonment of inheritance by the inheritor and subsequent repudiation
Wu and Deng had children such as Wu Jia during their marriage. Shen is a husband and wife of the Wu Jia family, and they also have two children. Wu Jia passed away in June 2010 without leaving a will. In August 2017, Wu and Deng signed the "Declaration of Abandoning Inheritance" through notarization, expressing their voluntary and irrevocable waiver of their legal inheritance rights to the Wujia estate. Hou Wu and Deng claimed to have been deceived into signing relevant documents and that giving up inheritance was not a true intention, so they filed a lawsuit requesting the division of Wu Jia's estate.
Case 3: Determination of the scope of the estate of the deceased
Li and Zhang have a marital relationship, and they died in April 2006 and December 2020 respectively. Before their birth, they had two children, Li Jia and Li Yi. In 2005, when the house under Li's name was relocated and resettled, Li, Zhang, and Li Jia each enjoyed 30 square meters of relocation benefits. The corresponding relocation funds were used to purchase the involved house, which was registered under Li Jia's name. Li and Zhang attended a housewarming banquet hosted by Li Jia during their lifetime. Li Yi believes that the property in question has a parental share of the estate and should be divided using the legal inheritance method, while Li Jia believes that there is no parental share in the property in question. Due to unsuccessful negotiations, Li Yi sued and demanded that Li Jia pay him the discounted price of the house.
Case 4: Examination of whether some heirs can claim to be divided into estates
Wang and Lin have a marital relationship, and they died in April 2010 and January 2019 respectively. The two have three children, Wang Jia, Wang Yi, and Wang Bing. Lin has a relatively high retirement income and hired a nanny to take care of his daily life during his stay at home. Since July 2016 until his death, Lin has been living in a hospital, with nurses and caregivers taking care of his life. The cost of hiring a nanny and hospitalization related expenses will be paid by Lin. During Lin's hospitalization, Wang Jia visited Lin at the hospital every day without any special circumstances. Wang Yi and Wang Bing also visited Lin every month from time to time before his death. After Lin passed away, Wang Jia sued and claimed to inherit 60% of Lin's estate on the grounds of fulfilling more of his maintenance obligations.
II. Difficulties in Trial of Legal Inheritance Dispute Cases
In cases of statutory inheritance disputes, since the deceased has already passed away, the examination of their living conditions and behavioral intentions can mostly only be inferred through circumstantial evidence. This makes it difficult to examine whether the parties have the qualifications of inheritors, whether specific property belongs to the estate, and whether some inheritors have fulfilled their main maintenance obligations.
1. Difficulty in determining the identity of an heir
In cases of statutory inheritance disputes, except for spouses and close relatives who have a blood relationship, adoptive parents and children, stepparents and children, widowed daughter-in-law or son-in-law who have fulfilled their main maintenance obligations, have the right to demand that the inheritance be divided as heirs; Individuals who rely on the support of the deceased, or those who support the deceased more than the inheritor, may also receive appropriate inheritance.
Unlike situations where the identity of spouses is relatively clear, whether stepparents' children should be recognized as inheritors and whether those who support the deceased more can receive inheritance should be judged based on the facts of the case. However, the relevant facts of the case are generally the facts of life between the deceased and the parties over a period of time, and most of them need to be examined in conjunction with detailed evidence such as the parties' statements, witness testimony, photos, videos, and payment records.
Some of the supporting matters and evidence are often formed over a decade or even decades before the trial of the case, and there is a significant dispute between the parties regarding the authenticity of the relevant content. Therefore, it is difficult to examine and determine whether the parties have the status of inheritors and whether they can share the estate.
2. Difficulty in determining the scope of heritage
In legal inheritance disputes, the estate of the deceased is often mixed with the common property of the husband and wife or the common property of the family. When hearing such cases, the first step is to analyze the property and determine the scope of the estate.
However, in such cases, the shared property of the family is mostly obtained through expropriation and resettlement, purchase of after-sales public housing, or self built housing. Especially in the process of expropriation and resettlement, some heirs, due to their inconvenience in movement, have their children handle the specific procedures at the expropriation unit. If the resettlement house is only registered under the name of the child who has gone through the procedures, whether there is a share of the inheritance of the deceased in the resettlement house needs to be comprehensively determined based on the case, and such issues often become the focus of controversy and difficulty in the trial of the case. In addition, in family life, some heirs may entrust their salary cards, deposits, and financial products to some children for safekeeping or use before their death. Whether such property directly kept and controlled by the children of the deceased is reasonably used should be recognized as gift or custody, which requires a comprehensive determination based on multiple factors. This issue also increases the difficulty of determining the scope of the estate of the deceased.
3. Difficulty in determining the proportion of inheritance division
In cases of statutory inheritance disputes, the rules for inheritance division are relatively complex: inheritors in the same order generally inherit an equal share of the inheritance, but inheritors who have special difficulties in life and lack the ability to work, inheritors who have fulfilled their main maintenance obligations to the deceased, or inheritors who live together with the deceased, can divide the inheritance more; Inheritors who have the ability and conditions to support but do not fulfill their obligation to support should receive little or no inheritance; If the inheritors reach a consensus through consultation, they may also be divided unevenly.
In the trial of a case, there is often a significant dispute between the parties regarding whether the heir has fulfilled the main maintenance obligation or has not fulfilled the maintenance obligation. Moreover, such facts are difficult to prove through a single fact or evidence. During the trial, it is not only necessary to consider and compare the energy and property invested by the heir, but also to consider the life state, physical condition, and source of income of the deceased before their death. Even if the above facts are determined, it is still necessary to comprehensively consider the overall situation of the case when determining the proportion of inheritance division.
4. Difficulty in determining whether to retract after giving up inheritance
In such cases, some heirs explicitly renounce inheritance and then retract, and whether the parties can retract often becomes the main focus of controversy in the case.
In general, courts that refuse to allow inheritors to retract after giving up inheritance, but if there are specific circumstances such as fraud, coercion, or violation of public order and good customs, inheritors may be allowed to retract as appropriate. Under strict standards for determining specific circumstances, it is also difficult to examine and determine relevant facts, so it is difficult to examine whether the inheritor can retract after giving up inheritance.
(to be continued...)