Ma, an 88-year-old man who lives alone, donated his 3 million real estate to Liu, a fruit stall owner near his home. As soon as this news came out, it immediately attracted widespread attention from the society. People are talking, what's going on? Why did Ma give the property to a fruit stall owner who was not related to him?
It all started in 2017. At that time, Ma's wife and only son died one after another, and he lived alone in the house involved in the case. Liu, a fruit stall owner near his home, took good care of him. In 2017, Ma and Liu signed a "Bequest and Maintenance Agreement", stipulating that Ma would donate real estate, savings and other properties to Liu after his death, and Liu would be responsible for Ma's food, clothing, housing, transportation, medical care, pension and other support obligations. In March 2019, Ma and Liu went to a notary office in Shanghai to notarize the "Bequest and Maintenance Agreement".
However, after Ma's death, a dispute arose between Liu and Ma's relatives over the validity of the Bequest and Maintenance Agreement, which in turn led to a lawsuit. The court of first instance held that there was no evidence to prove that Ma was already in a restricted or incapable civil capacity during the signing of the Bequest and Maintenance Agreement, and there was no evidence to prove that the Bequest and Maintenance Agreement was not Ma's true expression of intent, so the agreement was an expression of the true intentions of both parties and was legally binding in accordance with the law. At the same time, the court of first instance found that the evidence provided by Liu could prove that he had fulfilled his obligation to raise Ma's life and death in accordance with the agreement after signing the bequest and maintenance agreement with Ma. Therefore, the court of first instance ruled in favor of Ma's claim.
Ma's family was dissatisfied and appealed to the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court. After hearing, the court of second instance held that human aging is a continuous and gradual process, and the same is true of the course of Alzheimer's disease.
In this case, based on the available medical diagnosis and medical history, it is not sufficient to determine that Ma lacked sufficient clarity in his mental state and cognitive level at the time of signing the agreement. Combined with the judgment of Ma's mental state and cognitive status reflected by Ma's relatives in their interactions with Ma at that time, as well as the judgment of Ma's mental state and cognitive status of ordinary people in society who came into contact with Ma, it is difficult to conclude that Ma lacked a sufficiently clear mental state and cognitive level.
For Ma, the establishment of a bequest and support relationship with Liu was a way for him to arrange for himself to be cared for and supported during his lifetime, and to dispose of his posthumous property, and the rights and obligations contained in this legal relationship did not exceed the scope of Ma's understanding and cognition at that time. Moreover, the act of signing the bequest and maintenance agreement engaged in by Ma was a bilateral legal act, not just a single legal act, and the legal act itself was not unfavorable to Ma. Therefore, the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court confirmed that the "Bequest and Maintenance Agreement" reflected the true intentions of Ma and Liu, and the content did not violate the provisions of the law, nor did it affect the rights and obligations of others, and was legally binding.
During the period of living with Ma, Liu fulfilled his daily care and spiritual support, and handled the funeral affairs for Ma after his death, and fulfilled the obligations stipulated in the "Bequest and Maintenance Agreement". In summary, the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court rejected the appeal request of Ma's relatives and upheld the original judgment.
This case has led us to think about bequest maintenance agreements. The purpose of the establishment of the bequest and maintenance agreement is mainly to ensure the livelihood of those who do not have a legal support obliger, or who have a legal support obligor but are unable to actually perform the support obligation. The agreement is an institutional arrangement that gives natural persons autonomy over their own affairs before and after their deaths. According to the law, bequest and maintenance agreements have priority over statutory succession and testamentary succession. As a result, some fear that such agreements could be exploited to the detriment of other legal heirs. Therefore, when signing a bequest and maintenance agreement, both parties need to strictly abide by the provisions of the law, ensure that the content of the agreement is fair and reasonable, and do not violate the prohibitions of the law, especially to ensure that the true wishes of the legatee, that is, the elderly, are fully respected and reflected.
At the same time, the bequest and maintenance agreement is also a two-way compensatory act, and both parties have the obligation to treat and pay each other, and the rights enjoyed by either party are based on the performance of the corresponding obligations as consideration. The supporter shall faithfully perform the obligations of the bequest and maintenance agreement, and the care of the legatee shall conform to the general requirements and general expectations of society for the support of the elderly, ensure that the dependants enjoy a peaceful life in their old age, and must not infringe on the personal health and property safety of the dependents.
In this case, the reason for affirming the validity of the "Bequest and Maintenance Agreement" signed by Ma and Liu and Liu's performance of the agreement is mainly due to the fact that the evidence on record in this case and the facts reflected in the statements of the parties are in line with the institutional provisions and purpose of the bequest and maintenance agreement. Ma has passed away, and I hope that all parties in this case will understand and respect Ma's choice before his death from the perspective of respecting the deceased.
This case tells us that as a member of society, we should respect everyone's choices, whether they are made in life or after death. meantime
Attention should also be paid to those lonely elderly people, and more care and help should be given to them. Only in this way can our society be more harmonious and better.