Recently, by Jiang Ning, Zhu Kun lawyer handled by G a will inheritance dispute case won the first trial, in the case of the existence of a number of wills, successfully overturned the other party submitted to set up the date after the validity of the will on behalf of, to assist the client to keep most of the inheritance of the parents.

Client G's mother left four wills during her lifetime, all of which indicated that she wished to leave all of her real estate and savings in her name to G. The wills were signed by the client's mother and were signed by her husband. However, starting three days before his mother's death, his elder brother withdrew and transferred the balance of his mother's bank account one after another without consulting him, and continued to do so until after his mother's death. After the funeral arrangements were completed, his brother asked G to cooperate in the notarization of the transfer of the entire estate to his brother's son on the grounds that his mother had left a will in her name.

According to Article 1135 of the Civil Code, the will should be witnessed by two or more witnesses, written by one of them, and signed by the testator, scribe and other witnesses, indicating the year, month and day. In the process of this case, the contractor lawyer first applied for access to the will on behalf of the date of the hospital monitoring, to understand the authenticity of the witness behavior; And then, through the detailed combing of the evidence in the case, for the witnesses in court questioning, the agent found that the case of the will on behalf of a number of problems from the form and the witnessing process, such as: (1) on behalf of the will on behalf of the date of the decedent's passing away is very close to the date of hospitalization medical record shows that The hospitalization records showed that the decedent was already in a state of malignant consumption, and G's elder brother was aware of the situation; (2) the testator and witnesses in the will did not sign the date, which did not conform to the formal elements of the will as stipulated in the current civil code; (3) the content of the will was guided and questioned by the witnesses, which was not independently expressed by the testator, and it could not represent the true expression of the testator's will; (4) the witnessing process was not in conformity with the “principle of temporal and spatial consistency”. “The principle of consistency in time and space; (5) witnesses and beneficiaries of the will have an interest, and the testimony is contradictory, repeated, there are false statements.

In response to the above issues, the contractor lawyers fully expressed their arguments in court, and also summarized the key points involving the validity of witnessing the will in depth after the court hearing, and supplemented and submitted the legal and theoretical basis and class judgment to support the above views. In the end, the court of first instance in the judgment basically adopted all of the above views, and so that the other party submitted the establishment of the date of the will is invalid, the case to G submitted will as the basis for the division of property.

At the beginning of the commission, G did not hold much hope for the division of property, only disagreed with his brother's refusal to communicate with the practice of litigation, and is willing to respect his mother's wishes. The final result of the case completely exceeded the party's expectations, although the judgment has not yet come into effect, but G of King&Capital lawyers are very satisfied with the solid professional skills, work attitude of excellence, and repeatedly expressed their thanks.