1.Wang A, Wang B, et al. v. Zhao (retrial of dispute over succession)

[Judgment Abstract]

The term ‘bequests’ refers to all of the property that the deceased is personally in possession of, and other rights and interests attached thereto under the law at the time of their death. For any of the deceased’s bequests of family property, the property distributable to others shall be firstly separated from the bequests, and then the scope and method of distribution of the remaining bequests shall be determined. According to judicial practice, where a deceased had no will, agreement on bequeath or legacy-support agreement, the procedures of statutory succession shall be followed after the beginning of succession. To be specific, bequests shall first be inherited by the first-order legal successors, with the share of succession generally equal to those in the same order of succession. Nevertheless, any successor may claim a larger share of bequests provided that they have made predominant contributions towards supporting the deceased or that they lived with the deceased.

2.Duan A & Duan B v. Duan C, Duan D, Duan E & Duan F (case regarding dispute over succession)

[Judgment Abstract]

According to Article 16 of the Inheritance Law, citizens have the right to set up wills to dispose of individual property. Both spouses have the right to dispose of shares they own by making a will. When one spouse writes a will and both parties jointly sign it and dispose of the common property of the spouse, it is considered that the spouses have jointly signed the will based on the common declaration of intention, but not when one spouse writes the will for the other. This is not subject to the regulations regarding wills written by another agent as in the Inheritance Law. Therefore, if a husband and wife enter into a will to dispose of their common property, and one party writes the contents of the will and the two parties jointly sign it, the will is based on the common declaration of intention of the husband and wife, and therefore should be valid.

3.Gu v. Si, et al. (case regarding dispute over statutory succession)

[Judgment Abstract]

A legacy-support agreement, despite being written by another person on behalf of the parties concerned, should be deemed as legal and valid provided that, with the signatures of both the testifier and the legator, it is witnessed by a testifier, in conformity with formal elements, and faithfully expresses the volition of the legator. Where the supporter has fulfilled his obligation of support to the legator, he shall be entitled to a share of the legator’s estate. When the legator’s estate has not been specified yet, the court should determine the share that the supporter is entitled to.

From：www.chinalawinfo.com