In the bustling city of Shanghai, an extraordinary story happened between an 88-year-old man Ma and his neighbor Liu, a fruit stall owner. This is not only a case about the gift of property, but also a hymn to the interweaving of law and human feelings.
Ma, a lonely old man who has experienced the pain of losing his wife and child, seems to be left with endless loneliness and desolation in his later life. However, in this long period of loneliness, he met Liu, a simple and kind fruit stall owner. Liu's kindness and care made Ma feel the warmth and care that he had not seen for a long time.
Shortly after his son's death, Ma made a surprising decision - to sign a "bequest and maintenance agreement" with Liu. He wants to give his real estate worth 3 million, as well as deposits and other properties, to this fruit stall owner who is not related to him. Behind this agreement is Ma's gratitude to Liu for his selfless care, as well as his arrangements and sustenance for his future life.
However, after Ma's death, the agreement sparked controversy. Ma's relatives believe that the elderly may have a mental disorder at the time of signing the agreement and do not have full civil capacity, so the agreement is invalid. They hope to regain the property belonging to Ma through legal means.
In the face of such challenges, the court opened a hearing. The court of first instance held that there was no evidence to prove that Ma's capacity was limited at the time of signing the agreement, and that the agreement was an expression of the true intentions of both parties and was legally binding. Liu also provided evidence to prove that after he signed the agreement with Ma, he fulfilled his obligation to raise Ma's life, death and burial in accordance with the agreement. Therefore, the court of first instance upheld Liu's claim.
However, Ma's relatives were not reconciled, and they appealed to the Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court. In the course of the trial, the court of second instance fully considered Ma's mental state and cognitive level at the time of signing the agreement. The court held that although Ma was old, based on the available medical diagnosis and medical history, it was difficult to conclude that he lacked sufficient clarity of mental state and cognitive level at the time of signing the agreement. In addition, the court also combined the judgment of Ma's relatives and the general public on Ma's mental state and cognitive status, and finally determined that Ma had full capacity for civil conduct at the time of signing the agreement.
The court of second instance also emphasized that the bequest and maintenance agreement is an institutional arrangement that gives natural persons autonomy over their own past and posterior affairs. In this case, Ma's choice to donate the property to Liu was not only a reward for Liu's selfless care, but also an arrangement for his later life. This choice did not go beyond the scope of Ma's understanding and cognition at that time, nor did it adversely affect him. Therefore, the court finally confirmed the validity of the Bequest and Maintenance Agreement and rejected the appeal request of Ma's relatives.
The verdict of this case not only reflects the respect and protection of the autonomy of the elderly, but also shows the deep understanding of humanity and emotions in society. In this seemingly cold legal world, we can still feel warmth and care. This care not only comes from the protection of the rights and interests of the elderly by the law, but also from the kindness and compassion in the hearts of each of us.
In this story, we see the interweaving of law and human feelings, as well as the care and respect of society for vulnerable groups. Such stories make us believe that on the road to a society governed by the rule of law, we can not only achieve the goal of fairness and justice, but also convey the power of warmth and care.