A Case Study Of Wu XX, Ning XX, Vs Feng XX, Feng XX For A Dispute Of Inheritance

China's current laws and relevant judicial interpretation about the inheritance of stepchildren and the rules about statutory share are not perfect. There are many difficulties in identifying whether stepchildren have formed maintenance relationship between stepparents and applying the rules about statutory share in judiciary practice. The existence of these problems, on the one hand, existing in some controversies while stepchildren having statutory share. On the other hand in dealing with difficult problems in judicial practice lack of a clear basis, can only rely on the discretion of the judge, result in the parties not convincing and damage law of unity.This paper has about 20 thousand words, there are three parts in total:The first part, Case description. The author selected a typical inheritance disputes-Wu XX, Ning XX vs Feng XX, Feng XX inheritance dispute. Briefly introduce the case of this legal dispute and summarize its controversial focus according to the case. The cognizance of inheritance about stepchildren and the difficulty in operating in judiciary practice of the statutory share system.In the second part is the disagreement and legal analysis of the case. Because of the ambiguousness and inaccuracy of our country's current law, resulting in many different opinions about the controversial focus in judiciary practice. First of all, our current law has no further explanation about “the stepchildren who supported with maintenance” in article 10 of the inheritance law in China, resulting in different points of view in judicial practice. In the case, A controversial focus is whether Ning XX enjoy the right to inheritance. The core is the establishment of a dependency relationship. The author have summarizes the view of the academic circles agree with, disagree with, and then published his own views. The author believes that Ning XX as a minor, have lived together for a long time with stepparents, should be more inclined to support the establish of relations. Secondly, the rules about statutory share in article 19 of the inheritance law, there are no clear definitions about “the lack of ability to work”, “no life source ”, “necessary share of heritage” in current law, thus, it is difficulty to identify in judicial practice. Identified on the “no life source”, the author thinks that if there is someone who bound to furnish support to beneficiaries, it should be combined with maintenance obligations to one's own finances. Only when maintenance obligation can't fulfill this duty, to make sure the beneficiaries not have the source of life. Focus on two, Ning XX whether meet the double no condition. I think the parents do not have enough capacity to perform their obligations, in addition to being a minor no other source of income should be identified as “double-lack person”. Meanwhile, as for reserved amount, Inheritance Law should be taken to judicial discretion, to be determined by the court in accordance with the conditions determined by the legislative, but no more than what beneficiaries should have by statutory succession.The third part, legislation perfect. In the previous studies, the author suggest: first, precluding the inheritance of stepchildren who have maintain relationship with stepparents. The relationship between them should be brought into the Law of Adoption. Then, in article 19 of the inheritance law, changing “necessary share of heritage” to “the cost of living necessary”.