Is "Giving" Considered a Disposition of Property?

- All house construction procedures are under Mr. Meo's name, so the house belongs to Mr. Meo.

- The three wills of Mr. Meo for the Bishop's Office of City P to inherit are invalid because Mr. Meo had a fourth will made on February 17, 2000.

- The plaintiff argued that the fourth will was invalid because the health examination of Mr. Meo was not performed according to proper procedures, and the confirmation papers used by the Forensic Examination Council were invalid because they did not follow the correct form, which was no basis to reject the will dated February 17, 2000.

The first instance judgment rejected the plaintiff's request to inherit the house and land of Mr. Meo.

- Ms. Tuyet is entitled to the house and land of Mr. Meo and has the obligation to complete the procedures according to the provisions of law.

Maybe you are interested!

On April 19, 2003, Mr. Luong Vinh Phu (representative of the Bishop's Court of City P) appealed: The will of February 17, 2000 of Mr. Meo had many defects that the Court of First Instance recognized as wrong.

Appeal Judgment No. 24/DSPT dated January 7, 2004, the People's Court of Province B stated: The plaintiff's claim that the will dated February 17, 2000 had many defects was incorrect because it was confirmed by a medical practitioner and confirmed by the ward's People's Committee. The Court of First Instance rejected the request of the Bishop's Court, recognizing the will dated February 17, 2000 for Ms. Tuyet to inherit Mr. Meo's inheritance as lawful.

The appeal judgment upheld the first instance judgment.

Thus, in the above case, Mr. Meo had up to 4 wills deciding on a type of property, which is real estate in Duc Long ward, city P, province B. The will dated February 17, 2000 was made last by Mr. Meo, fingerprinted and signed by Mr. Meo, and confirmed by the People's Committee of Duc Long ward, city P. Before making this will, Mr. Meo had a health check-up, and had a confirmation from the medical agency that Mr. Meo was healthy enough to make a will. The first-instance and appellate courts recognized this will as legal.

3.2.3. Will of an illiterate person

Nowadays, due to the development of our country's education system, the majority of people are literate. However, there are still some people who are illiterate. These people are often elderly. Some people make wills by asking others to write them for them. However, there are wills that do not meet the requirements of the law. When disputes arise, courts at all levels also have different assessments of the value of wills.

Here is an example:

Mr. Do Van Chieu and Ms. Vu Thi Le had 5 children together: Mr. and Mrs. Do Van Tung, Do Thi Hao, Do Van Hieu, Do Thi Khieu and Do Thi Hieu. Around 1977, Mr. Le and Ms. Chieu divorced.

In 1987, Mr. Le and Mr. Tung directly went to buy and sell 232 square meters of land with some perennial trees at 42/2/4 Tran Phu, Ward 1, City V from Mr. Nguyen Van Nga.

In 1990, Mrs. Hao and her husband asked Mr. Tung to let them stay on the land and wrote a request to stay.

On January 5, 1994, Mr. Le asked Mr. Trinh Van Than to write a will for him because Mr. Le was illiterate; later, Mr. Le asked Mr. Tran Cong Khanh and Ms. Nguyen Thi Tanh to be witnesses. The will stated that Mr. Le gave Ms. Hao all the land and house at 42/2/4 Tran Phu, Ward 1, City V. The will was not certified or authenticated. When Mr. Le made the will, he was sick and in poor health but still conscious and clear-headed.

Mrs. Hao requested to inherit all the real estate according to Mr. Le's will. Mr. Tung did not recognize the will.

Mr. Trinh Van Than (the person who wrote the will) stated: Mr. Le and Mrs. Hao asked him to write the will because Mr. Le was illiterate. When Mr. Than wrote the will, Mrs. Tanh and Mr. Khanh were present.

Mr. Tran Cong Khanh (witness of the will) stated: The will was written in advance. Mr. Khanh read the contents of the will and signed it because Mr. Le asked him to be a witness. At that time, Mr. Le was still healthy and died about 3 months later.

Ms. Nguyen Thi Tanh stated: According to Ms. Tanh, Mr. Nga sold this land to Mr. Le and Mr. Tung. The will was written by Mr. Than in advance. When the will was written, Ms. Tanh was not present. After the will was written, Mr. Le invited Ms. Tanh to be a witness. At that time, Ms. Tanh and Mr. Khanh signed the will together, but did not read the content. A few days after making the will, Mr. Le died.

First instance judgment No. 02/DSST dated January 7, 1997 of the People's Court of City V recognized that the house and land in Province B was purchased by Mr. Tung and Mr. Le together because the purchase documents were in the names of both people; did not recognize the will because Mr. Le was illiterate and the will was not authenticated according to the provisions of Article 655 of the 1995 Civil Code.

Ms. Hao appealed: Request for recognition of the will.

In the appeal judgment No. 18/DSPT dated April 9, 1997, the People's Court of Province B recognized the will as valid, and assigned to Ms. Hao the house and land according to Mr. Le's will.

On June 30, 1997, Mr. Tung filed a complaint disagreeing with the Court of Appeal's recognition of the will.

In Decision No. 71/KN-VKSTC-V5 dated November 5, 1997, the Supreme People's Procuracy appealed the above appellate judgment because Mr. Le's will was illegal because the land and house did not belong to Mr. Le in its entirety, but Mr. Le's decision to dispose of all of it to Ms. Hao was wrong, and Mr. Le's children all admitted that Mr. Le was illiterate, but Mr. Le's will was not certified or certified by a competent authority, which violated Article 655 of the 1995 Civil Code.

In the final judgment No. 50/GDT-DS dated March 24, 1998, Court D stated that on January 5, 2001, Mr. Le asked Mr. Trinh Van Than to write a will expressing Mr. Le's will, with Mr. Le's signature and fingerprint, and the will had 2 witnesses, so the above will was valid. The final judgment rejected the appeal of the Supreme People's Procuracy.

After studying the above case, we found that Mr. Le was illiterate, but his will was not certified by a state notary or certified by the People's Committee of the commune, ward or town, so the will was not valid according to the provisions of Clause 3, Article 655 of the Civil Code. On the other hand, both witnesses declared that they were not present when Mr. Than wrote the will, so it is not in accordance with the provisions of Article 659 of the Civil Code on the fact that witnesses to the will must be present when making the will.

The judgment at first instance and the appeal of the Supreme People's Procuracy determining that the will was invalid were correct. The appellate judgment and the final judgment were incorrect in determining that the will was valid.

3.2.4. Witnesses to the will

Mr. Do Thoi Kiet (died on March 2, 1998) and Ms. Nguyen Thi Biet (died on January 14, 2001) had two children together, Ms. Do Minh Thuyet and Ms. Do Thi Nguyet. Mr. Kiet and Ms. Biet left behind assets including a house and an orchard on an area of 6,278 m2 located in Binh Phuoc Hamlet, Binh Nham Commune, T District, B Province. The two were granted a land use right certificate for this land area in 1997.

According to Ms. Nguyet's statement: On September 15, 2000, Mr. Biet made a will to give all of the above assets to Ms. Nguyet and her husband, Mr. Thuy. The content of the will was drafted by Mr. Biet, and Ms. Nguyet took it to be typed. Then Mr. Biet signed it in front of Mr. Sinh. Mr. Sinh confirmed the will. On September 16, 2000, Ms. Nguyet gave the will to Ms. Le Thi Dieu and Mr. Vo Van Tu to sign and confirm.

Mr. Know.

Mrs. Nguyet and Mr. Thuy requested to inherit all of Mr. Kiet's estate.

According to Ms. Thuyet's statement: On September 16, 1997, Mr. Kiet made a power of attorney for Mr. Biet to know.

full authority to decide on civil transactions regarding the properties owned by Mr. Kiet. This authorization is confirmed by the People's Committee of District T.

On September 20, 1997, Mr. Biet made a document to revoke the right to inherit the inheritance with the following content: Mr. Biet was given the right to dispose of the property by Mr. Kiet according to the authorization document dated September 16, 1997. Mr. Biet revoked the right.

inherit the inheritance of Mrs. Nguyet, her husband and adopted children regarding the separate and common properties of Mr. Kiet and Mr. Biet. Mrs. Biet willed the separate and common properties of her and her husband to her three grandchildren, Hung, Diem, and Hoang (Mrs. Thuyet's three children). The revocation document has the signature and fingerprint of Mr. Biet.

On January 3, 2001, Mr. Biet made a will stating: After his death, Mrs. Thuyet will have full rights to inherit the property of the house and garden land which are the property of Mr. Kiet and Mr. Biet. Mr. Biet asked Mr. Nguyen Van Thang to write this will for him. Mr. Biet signed and rolled his fingerprints. Mr. Nguyen Van Thang and Mr. Luong Van Dam signed as witnesses.

Ms. Thuyet requested to inherit the entire estate of Mr. Kiet and Mr. Biet according to the will made on January 3, 2001 or requested that Mr. Hung, Ms. Diem, and Mr. Hoang (Ms. Thuyet's 3 children) inherit the estate of Mr. Kiet and Mr. Biet according to the renunciation made on September 20, 1997.

First instance judgment No. 55/DSST dated November 14, 2002 of the People's Court of T district decided:

- I request Ms. Nguyet to file a lawsuit regarding the request to divide the inheritance of Mr. Kiet and Mr. Biet according to the will made on September 15, 2000.

- Accept Ms. Thuyet's request to divide the inheritance of Mr. Kiet and Mr. Biet according to the will established on September 20, 1997.

Mr. Hung, Ms. Diem, and Mr. Hoang jointly inherited the inheritance of Mr. Kiet and Mr. Biet according to the will dated September 20, 1997, including all the real estate that was the inheritance of Mr. Kiet and Mr. Biet.

define:

On November 25, 2002, Ms. Nguyet appealed.

Appeal Judgment No. 48/DSPT dated April 21, 2003, People's Court of Province B received

- Regarding the disinheriting document of Mr. Biet made on September 20, 1997 with the following content:

The court ordered the disinheritance of Mrs. Nguyet's husband, wife and children, and the bequest of property to Mrs. Thuyet's three children, but Mrs. Thuyet's children (the beneficiaries) did not carry out the bequest.

registered according to the provisions of law on donation of real estate assets as prescribed in Article 463 of the 1995 Civil Code, so this paper is no longer valid.

- Regarding the will dated September 15, 2000, signed by Mr. Biet, but Mr. Biet only signed in front of one witness, Mr. Sinh, so the will is not valid.

- Regarding the will dated January 3, 2001: Mr. Nguyen Van Thang was the person who wrote the will for Mr. Biet and was also a witness to the will, so he is not trustworthy enough for the will. The will is invalid.

The above appellate judgment divided the inheritance of Mr. Kiet and Mr. Biet according to the law.

After studying the above case, we found that Mr. Biet's bequest of all the land and houses to Ms. Thuyet's three children was not in accordance with the provisions of Article 674 of the 1995 Civil Code. Although there was an incorrect assessment of the bequest, the appellate judgment still did not recognize Mr. Biet's bequest as being in accordance with the law. Regarding the will dated January 3, 2001, the appellate judgment held that Mr. Nguyen Van Thang, who was the person writing the will, was not allowed to witness the will, which was not in accordance with the provisions of Article 657 of the Civil Code on witnesses to the making of wills.

3.2.5. Forged will

Mr. Nguyen Van Tam (died in 1957) and Mrs. Phan Thi Dan (died in 1983) had 10 children together, including Mr. and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Manh, Nguyen Thi Ba, Nguyen Thi Tu, Nguyen Thi Tot, Nguyen Thi Han, Nguyen Van Tuc, Nguyen Thi Cham, Nguyen Huu Hanh, Nguyen Tan Tai and Nguyen Van Chich. The legacy of Mr. Tam and Mrs. Dan includes a house on 502 m2 of residential land, 12 coconut trees, 1 cotton tree, 1 bowl tree, 1 standing cabinet, and 1 altar cabinet. In 1997, when the State built the stadium, it reclaimed 350 m2 of land, the legacy of Mr. Tam and Mrs. Dan, and compensated 100 million VND.

Mr. Nguyen Huu Hanh (plaintiff) stated: Mr. Tam and Mr. Dan died without a will. He requested to divide the inheritance.

Ms. Nguyen Thi Cham (defendant) said that in 1993, Mr. Dan left a will to Ms. Cham giving all the house and land, so Ms. Cham did not agree to divide the inheritance.

Judgment No. 201/DSST dated December 10, 1997 of the People's Court of Long Xuyen town and Judgment No. 126/DSPT dated April 3, 1998 of the People's Court of An Giang province annulled the 1993 will presented by Ms. Cham; divided the inheritance according to the law.

Thus, in this case, Ms. Cham presented the will of Mr. Dan which she said Mr. Dan had made in 1993. The testimony and documents presented by Ms. Cham contradicted the fact that Mr. Dan died in 1983. The Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal legally annulled the will presented by Ms. Cham because Mr. Dan died in 1983 and could not have made a will in 1993.

3.2.6. Is "giving away" considered a disposition of property?

Mr. Dao Van Luan and Ms. Dinh Thi Moc are husband and wife, have 3 children together: Mr. Dao Dang Khoa, Mr. Dao Duc Bang and Ms. Dao Thi Kim Thinh. Ms. Dinh Thi Moc died in January 1995, without a will. Mr. Dao Van Luan died in November 1995. Mr. Luan and Ms. Moc left behind a level 4 house on an area of 1,000 m2 at group 18, Minh Ha street, Tien Cat, city V, province P.

Mr. Dao Duc Bang died in 1976, had a son named Dao Manh Phu. Mr. Dao Dang Khoa died in 2003, had a wife named Hoang Thi Thanh.

Since the two elders passed away, the inheritance has been managed by Ms. Hoang Thi Thanh.

Ms. Dao Thi Kim Thinh and Mr. Dao Manh Phu requested to divide the inheritance of land and house of Mr. Luan and Mr. Moc.

Ms. Hoang Thi Thanh presented the will made by Mr. Luan in 1982, signed by Mr. Luan, with 2 witnesses. Ms. Thanh said that Mr. Luan's will gave her and her husband all of their assets, so she did not agree to divide the inheritance. The will stated: "... I intend to give Khoa and Thanh all of the house and land."

Judgment No. 07/DSST dated January 13, 2004, the People's Court of City V decided: Reject the will of Mr. Luan presented by Ms. Thanh, divide the inheritance according to the law.

Ms. Thanh appealed to request inheritance division according to the will.

The appeal judgment No. 17/DSPT dated April 25, 2004 of the People's Court of P province stated: The will of Mr. Luan was recognized by all parties as the signature of Mr. Luan, but when Mr. Luan wrote the will in 1982, Mr. Moc was still alive. In 1995, Mr. Moc died, but Mr. Moc still had no opinion about this will. On the other hand, although he wrote the will in 1982, Mr. Luan later wrote many letters asking Ms. Thinh to draft another draft of the will for him. In these letters, Mr. Luan wrote that he wrote the will in 1982 so that Ms. Thinh and her husband could keep the house and land. Thus, in terms of form, the will did not have the signature of Mr. Moc, who was a co-owner of the property with Mr. Luan. In terms of content, Mr. Luan did not write for the purpose of dividing the inheritance. Therefore, Mr. Luan's 1982 will was incorrect in both content and form, so it could not satisfy Ms. Thanh's appeal.

The appeal judgment upheld the first instance judgment.

We find that the above appellate judgment's reasoning is incorrect, because: Even if Mr. Moc did not comment on Mr. Luan's will, Mr. Luan's will is still effective for Mr. Luan's inheritance, which is equal to 1/2 of the couple's joint property. However, Mr. Luan's will only "assigned" so it cannot be considered that Mr. Luan had decided on the property. Therefore, the will is not effective.

3.2.7. Validity of the will

Mr. Nguyen Thien Chon and Ms. Vo Thi Thanh have two children, Mr. Nguyen Thien Nhon and Ms. Nguyen Thi Truc, who are both residing in the US. Mr. Nhon has a daughter, Ms. Nguyen Thi Phuong Oanh; Ms. Truc has a daughter, Ms. Nguyen Thi Kim Hoa. Mr. Chon died in 1972 without a will. In 1973, Ms. Thanh demolished the old house (of Mr. Chon and Ms. Thanh) and built a new house on Mr. Chon and Ms. Thanh's land.

On January 28, 1997, Mr. Thanh made a will to transfer all the assets of Mr. Chon and Mr. Thanh in Thanh Yen Hamlet, Thanh Tri Commune, Go Cong Tay District, T Province to Ms. Oanh, including: 0.8 hectares of cultivated land, 0.42 hectares of fertile land, an ancestral house with tiled walls and a rainwater pond. Mr. Thanh's will had two witnesses, confirmed by the Hamlet Police and the People's Committee of Thanh Tri Commune.

Comment