Study Of The Motivation And Content Of Bequests

In the Luzhou bequest case,the judge ruled that the bequest was invalid by violating the terms of public order and good customs,and restricted the right of bequests for cohabitants outside of marriage.Since the case,the validity of extramarital bequests has been controversial.Extending on this basis,the deeper question is "whether motives should be evaluated in bequests".That is to say,the motive is not a constituent element of the legal act of bequest,and whether the wrong motive and the illegal motive should have the effect of affecting the validity of the bequest.Judicial differences on whether motives affect the validity of bequests have already appeared in judicial practice,but the inheritance code of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China does not regulate the wrong and illegal motives of bequests.Linked together,there is no consensus on the motivation to affect the validity of the bequest.In the context of the Civil Code,in order to unify the legal application of motives and the validity of bequests,this paper evaluates the validity of bequests from the perspective of examining motives,and makes it clear that in the current general classification system,the errors of bequest motives are reviewed by means of major misunderstanding clauses,and It is illegal to examine the motives of bequests in violation of the mandatory provisions and the terms of public order and good customs.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,this paper is organized into four parts:The first part defines the boundaries of motives and proposes the reasons for examining the motives of bequests.The nature of motivation is clarified by comparing the concepts of motivation and meaning,reason,and purpose.Motivation is not the expression of meaning,but the inner cause before the formation of the expression of meaning;from the traditional theory of causes to the modern theory of causes,motivation has also become a distant cause in dualism and is included in the category of cause.The analysis of motives does not involve the deficiencies in bequests,and the reasons for the exclusion of motives based on the transaction security and reliance interests of the actor and the other party are not applicable to bequests as unilateral legal acts and acts of cause of death;in addition,based on the cognition of personal property rights in bequests,the duty of marital fidelity defends equivalence values,reiterates the need to examine bequest motives.The second part displays the judicial differences in the analysis of motives affecting the validity of bequests.The relevant precedents in judicial practice are divided into motives that affect the validity of bequests and motives that do not affect the validity of bequests,and are combined with scholars’ arguments to support the judgment or not.The focus of these bequest disputes is precisely the evaluation of the validity of the bequest by motivation,that is,the motivation of bequest leads to different judgments in the same case in the same type of bequest disputes.my country’s "Civil Code" and its judicial interpretation do not stipulate the motive regulation clauses in bequests,but the objective existence of the problem of bequest motives in judicial practice makes the judge’s discretion a key factor in whether to examine the motives in bequests.This further shows the urgency of forming a unified standard for legal application.The third part summarizes the traditional academic disputes that motivation affects the validity of bequests.Discuss whether motives affect the validity of bequests from two aspects: wrong motives and illegal motives.The erroneous theory of bequest motives dating back to the age of Roman law has formed a negative theory that motives are wrong and that they do not interfere with the true meaning;motives are the true,exceptional conditions and the only affirmation that wrong motives will lead to the invalidity of a will.The Roman law legacy error theory emphasizes the principle of equitable and flexible resolution of motive errors.Negation of motives to unlawfully influence the validity of bequests is an effective element of autonomy of will and strict compliance with legal acts;affirmative theory holds that motives have the legitimacy of judging the legitimacy of bequests to embody legal interests;and motives can enter the evaluation of bequest validity by becoming content.The controversy over the theory of bequest motives is not only reflected in academic research,but also in the legislative techniques of various countries.To sort out the differences between different theories and analyze the modern succession of legislative cases has reference significance for the development of dogmatics on the treatment of bequest motives in my country’s civil code.The fourth part clarifies the position of our country’s civil code on the motive of bequest and its theological development.The Civil Code of our country does not stipulate that the motives of bequests are wrong and the motives are illegal.In the "Civil Code",the overall classification system adopts the mode of "integration and integration".We should review the motive errors by means of the major misunderstanding clause,and under the premise of recognizing the rationality of the binary distinction between the bequest motive error and the representation error,some bequest motive errors should be included in the major misunderstanding clause of Article 147 of the Civil Code for relief.The illegal motives should be reviewed by means of violating mandatory regulations and public order and good customs,and illegal motives and motives that can be interpreted as content should be included in Article 153 of the Civil Code for regulation.