Judgment Main Opinion
A citizen may make a will to donate and dispose of his personal property in accordance with the provisions of the Succession Law, and may impose attached obligations on the heir of the property in accordance with law. Nevertheless, any attached obligation shall not contravene the basic spirit of legal provisions; otherwise, the relevant contents shall be deemed null and void.
Where a citizen makes a will stipulating that the right to inherit property is conditional on restricting the surviving spouse’s freedom of remarriage, such a will shall be invalid for infringing upon the legitimate rights and interests of women and marital freedom. The heir shall not be bound by such illegal obligation and shall still enjoy the corresponding inheritance rights stipulated by law and the will.
Case Brief
Plaintiff Zhang Jia filed a legacy donation dispute against Defendant Cai Jia with the Xishan District People’s Court of Wuxi City.
The plaintiff Zhang Jia alleged: He is the nephew of Zhang Yi, and the defendant Cai Jia was Zhang Yi’s wife. The couple had no children during their marriage. Zhang Yi passed away on December 4, 2006. Before his death, Zhang Yi made a will regarding three bungalows at No.9 Zhangxiangshang and a three-storey building with two floors at No.10 Zhangxiangshang, Gangxia Community, Donggang Town, Xishan District. The will stipulated: After my death, if my wife Cai Jia remarries, the aforesaid houses shall all belong to my nephew Zhang Jia.
Following Zhang Yi’s death, Cai Jia remarried to Zhang Ping and has been occupying the above-mentioned houses ever since. Zhang Jia repeatedly requested Cai Jia to return the houses but failed. Therefore, he petitioned the court to adjudicate that the aforesaid real estate be owned by him.
The defendant Cai Jia defended: She cohabited with Zhang Yi as husband and wife starting from May 1994. Shortly afterwards, they purchased the two-storey three-unit building at No.10 Zhangxiangshang, Gangxia Community, Donggang Town, Xishan District from Zhang Xing. The building constitutes marital joint property. As the first statutory heir, she is entitled to inherit Zhang Yi’s share of the estate, and Zhang Jia has no right to claim any share of the building.
The three bungalows at No.9 Zhangxiangshang were constructed by Zhang Yi, and she had resided there with Zhang Yi after marriage. The true intent of Zhang Yi’s will was that the bungalows would pass to Zhang Jia only if she moved away and remarried after Zhang Yi’s death. In fact, she remarried Zhang Ping and continued living in the bungalows without moving out. Moreover, she and Zhang Ping renovated the three bungalows after marriage. During the renovation, their marriage, the birth of their daughter, and the holding of the daughter’s 100-day banquet, Zhang Jia never claimed ownership of the bungalows. Accordingly, Zhang Jia’s current claim has exceeded the inheritance statute of limitations, and his claim should be dismissed.
The first-instance court of Xishan District People’s Court of Wuxi City ascertained the following facts:
Cai Jia and Zhang Yi began cohabiting as husband and wife in May 1994 and completed marriage registration on October 31, 2006, having no children together. Zhang Yi passed away on December 4, 2006. During his lifetime, the couple resided in the two-storey building at No.10 and the three bungalows at No.9 Zhangxiangshang, Gangxia Community, Donggang Town, Xishan District.
While seriously ill, Zhang Yi wrote a testament on November 19, 2006, which stated:
After my death, the right to use the three eastern buildings shall belong to my wife Cai Jia, and the three western bungalows shall also serve as her residence. If my wife Cai Jia remarries in the future, the three bungalows shall be inherited by my nephew Zhang Jia.
The testament bore the signatures of witnesses including Cai Jia, Zhang Bing, elder brother Zhu Fafa, and brother-in-law Sun Dede. The named Zhang Jia in the testament is Zhang Yi’s nephew.
It was further verified that Cai Jia registered her marriage with Zhang Ping on June 12, 2007. They renovated and repainted the three bungalows in October 2007, had a daughter in April 2008, and held a 100-day banquet for the daughter in the bungalows in November 2008.
Court Judgment
The first-instance court held: A citizen may dispose of personal property by making a will in accordance with the Succession Law. Notarization is permitted but not mandatory. A citizen may also impose attached obligations on heirs through a will, and his right to dispose of private rights shall be respected. However, any attached obligation shall not violate the fundamental spirit of the Constitution and laws; otherwise, it shall be deemed invalid.
In this case, Zhang Yi handwrote and signed the testament with clear year, month and date, with several witnesses signing for attestation, disposing of his residential real estate. The testament therefore constitutes a holographic will.
Where a citizen bequeaths personal property to the state, a collective organization, or anyone other than statutory heirs by will, it constitutes a legacy donation. Zhang Jia, as the nephew of Zhang Yi, falls outside the scope of statutory heirs. His claim is based on the legal relationship of legacy donation, hence the cause of action of this case is legacy donation dispute.
Zhang Jia’s claim involves two properties: the three bungalows at No.9 and the two-storey building at No.10 Zhangxiangshang. The core dispute is whether the two properties should be owned by Zhang Jia.
Regarding the two-storey building at No.10 Zhangxiangshang: The legacy donation part in Zhang Yi’s testament only covers the three bungalows at No.9, while the building at No.10 is not included in the scope of legacy donation. Zhang Jia is neither a statutory heir of Zhang Yi, nor does the circumstances of subrogation inheritance or succession by survivorship apply. Therefore, Zhang Jia’s claim for ownership of the building at No.10 is untenable in law and shall be dismissed by the first-instance court.
Regarding the three bungalows at No.9 Zhangxiangshang: Zhang Yi’s will attached a restrictive condition to the inheritance and donation of the estate, namely if my wife Cai Jia remarries in the future, the three bungalows shall belong to my nephew Zhang Jia. This constitutes a will inheritance with attached obligations, under which failure to perform the obligation shall trigger conversion to legacy donation. The attached obligation for Cai Jia to inherit the bungalows is a prohibition on remarriage.
A will that makes the right to inherit property conditional on restricting the spouse’s marital freedom violates the Constitution and laws and unlawfully restricts Cai Jia’s freedom of marriage. Pursuant to Article 21 of the Succession Law of the People’s Republic of China, where a testamentary inheritance or legacy donation is attached with obligations, the heir or legatee shall perform such obligations. If one refuses to perform without just cause, the people’s court may deprive him of the right to accept the estate upon application by relevant entities or individuals. The obligations stipulated herein must be lawful.
In this case, Cai Jia has legitimate grounds to refuse to perform the illegal attached obligation and still retains the right to inherit the three bungalows. Therefore, the relevant provision concerning Zhang Jia’s right to legacy donation is invalid, and Zhang Jia has no right to accept the legacy.
Marital freedom is a fundamental civil right stipulated by the Constitution and a basic marital system under the Marriage Law. Specifically, it embodies the personality right of marital autonomy: a natural person may independently decide his or her marital affairs within the scope permitted by law, free from coercion and interference by any other person. Whether Cai Jia remarries after Zhang Yi’s death shall be entirely decided by herself, and remarriage is her statutory right. By setting restrictive terms in the will to limit Cai Jia’s marital freedom, Zhang Yi violated the constitutional and legal provisions on marital freedom. Accordingly, the clause if my wife Cai Jia remarries in the future, the three bungalows shall belong to my nephew Zhang Jia in the will is null and void, and the relevant legacy donation content in favor of Zhang Jia is invalid.
It is further pointed out that even if the aforesaid clause were valid, in accordance with legal provisions, a legatee shall make an express declaration of accepting or waiving the legacy within two months upon knowing the legacy. Failure to make a declaration within the time limit shall be deemed a waiver of the legacy.
After Zhang Yi’s death, Cai Jia remarried Zhang Ping in June 2007, resided in the former marital house, renovated the property, and held her daughter’s 100-day banquet in November 2008. As the holder of the testament and a villager living in the same village, Zhang Jia ought to have known that the conditional trigger for the legacy had been fulfilled. However, he failed to adduce evidence proving that he made an acceptance declaration within two months after the condition took effect, which shall also be deemed a waiver of the legacy.
In conclusion, Zhang Jia’s claims in this case are unsupported by law and shall be rejected by the first-instance court.
In accordance with Article 2 and Article 5 of the Marriage Law of the People’s Republic of China, and Article 16 and Paragraph 2 of Article 25 of the Succession Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Xishan District People’s Court of Wuxi City rendered Civil Judgment No. (2012) Xi Fa Hu Min Chu No. 0307 on January 9, 2013, dismissing all claims of Zhang Jia.
After the first-instance judgment was pronounced, Zhang Jia filed an appeal and later applied to withdraw the appeal during the second-instance proceeding. The Wuxi Intermediate People’s Court made Ruling No. (2013) Xi Min Zhong No. 0453 on April 28, 2013, granting the withdrawal of the appeal, and the first-instance judgment has taken legal effect accordingly.
Legal Comment
A legatee under legacy donation is not a statutory heir, hence legacy donations are often made with attached conditions. Such institutional design conforms to the basic civil law principles of fairness and reasonableness and equivalent compensation. Nevertheless, the legality of the conditions set by the donor is often the core dispute in such cases.
In this case, the donor clearly stipulated in the will that the three bungalows would pass to his nephew Zhang Jia if his wife remarried, with multiple witnesses present and signing the testament. This reflects that such traditional conceptions are still prevalent in many underdeveloped regions. Outdated social notions and even some village conventions implicitly approve of depriving remarried women of land use rights, house ownership rights, share dividend rights and other interests, which obviously contravene laws and regulations.
In response to such circumstances:
First, in individual cases, parties shall actively resort to judicial remedies for legal protection.
Second, where illegal deprivation of the legitimate rights and interests of women and children (including married-out women and remarried women) is prevalent locally, parties shall seek solutions through various channels. For instance, initiating individual litigation to obtain supportive court judgments; meanwhile, seeking assistance from women’s federations at all levels and relevant government departments.