CASE LAW NO. 72/2024/AL On the Determination of Inherited Property as Land Use Rights in Cases Where the Will Does Not Specify the Exact Area of Land (Please note that this image is not related to the specific case being discussed).

CASE LAW NO. 72/2024/AL

On the Determination of Inherited Property as Land Use Rights in Cases Where the Will Does Not Specify the Exact Area of Land

Approved by the Judges’ Council of the Supreme People’s Court on February 20^th, 21^st, and 23^rd, 2024, and published under Decision No. 119A/QĐ-CA on May 15^th, 2024, by the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court.

Source of the Case Law:

The Cassation Decision No. 60/2022/DS-GĐT dated December 19^th, 2022, by the Judges’ Council of the Supreme People’s Court in the civil case of “Inheritance Dispute over Land Use Rights” between the plaintiff, Mrs. Nguyễn Thị G, and the defendant, Mr. Nguyễn Văn U, with interested parties including 19 people.

Location of the Case Law’s Content:

Paragraphs 4, 5 and 8 of the “Court’s Opinion” section.

Summary of the Case Law:

– Case Background:

The inherited property is the land use rights determined by a legally valid will, which specifies the boundaries but does not indicate the exact area of the land and has no disputes regarding the boundaries.

– Legal Resolution:

In this case, the Court must determine the inherited property as land use rights based on the actual measured area of land according to the boundaries indicated in the will.

Relevant Legal Provisions:

Articles 624, 630, and 634 of the Civil Code 2015.

Keywords:

“Inherited Property”; “Legally Valid Will”; “Inheritance by Will”; “Determination by Boundaries.”

CASE DETAILS

In the complaint dated March 15^th, 2017, and during the proceedings, the plaintiff, Mrs. Nguyễn Thị G, stated:

Her parents, Mr. Nguyễn Văn M (deceased in 1998) and Mrs. Nguyễn Thị B (deceased in 2010), had eight children: Nguyễn Thị H, Nguyễn Thị M1, Nguyễn Văn C (deceased, year unknown), Nguyễn Thị G, Nguyễn Văn K (deceased in 2016), Nguyễn Văn L, Nguyễn Thị P, and Nguyễn Văn U. The estate left by Mr. M and Mrs. B is a piece of land with an area of 32,500m² located on Map Sheet No. 10D, plots No. 809 and 810 in Hamlet N, Commune T, District C (now District P), Cà Mau Province.

The disputed land originated from Mrs. B’s parents, who later gave it to Mr. M and Mrs. B to manage and use. In 1993, Mr. M registered it in the cadastral registry on Map Sheet No. 10D, plots No. 809 and 810, and was issued a Land Use Rights Certificate by the People’s Committee of District C.

In 1994 and 1995, Mr. Nguyễn Văn U moved to live separately on a piece of land in Hamlet A, Commune T, District P, while Mrs. G lived with her parents from a young age and managed and used the 32,500m² land from then until now.

On May 16^th, 1998, Mr. M made a will leaving Mrs. G 15,000m² of land for agriculture, and 10,000m² for whoever would worship their ancestors. Mr. M was still lucid when making the will. In 2000, Mr. U forged Mr. M’s signature to obtain a Land Use Rights Certificate in his name from the People’s Committee of District C without Mrs. G’s knowledge.

In 2004, Mrs. B held a family meeting and agreed to give Mrs. G the entire 32,500m² of land to manage and worship the ancestors. The family meeting minutes were certified by the People’s Committee of Commune T.

In 2006, Mrs. B made another will leaving the entire piece of land to Mrs. G. After Mrs. B’s death, Mrs. G continued to manage and use the land until now. However, in 2016, Mr. U prevented Mrs. G from using the land, claiming it had been given to him by their parents.

Therefore, Mrs. G filed a lawsuit requesting the Court to annul the Land Use Rights Certificate issued by the People’s Committee of District C to Mr. U on November 15^th, 2000, and recognize her land use rights according to the will for the piece of land with an area of 32,500m² (actual measurement is 35,180.7m²). The house on the land belonged to Mr. M and Mrs. B; Mr. U only constructed it when he was still living with their parents, and when he moved out, Mrs. G took over and repaired it.

The defendant, Mr. Nguyễn Văn U, stated the followings:

He agreed with the family relationship as described by Mrs. G.

The disputed land originated from Mr. M and Mrs. B’s efforts in 1950. In 1983, Mrs. G built a temporary house on the frontage of the disputed land for trading purposes, while he, the youngest son, continued living with and taking care of their parents, directly managing and using the land. Around 1993, he built a house using family funds because he was living with the family at that time.

In 1998, his parents gifted him the land, which was recorded in the family meeting minutes, and he submitted it to the competent authority to obtain a Land Use Rights Certificate. That same year, he registered according to regulations and was issued a Land Use Rights Certificate by the People’s Committee of District C on November 15^th, 2000.

After Mr. M passed away, due to financial difficulties, he moved elsewhere to make a living, while his wife and children continued living on the land. In 2010, Mrs. B died, and to help Mrs. G earn an income, he moved out, leaving the house for Mrs. G to live in and farm on the land. The land he and his wife are currently using in Hamlet I, Commune T was purchased with their own money.

Regarding the parents’ will and family meeting giving the land to Mrs. G, he was unaware.

In the counterclaim dated March 16^th, 2018, Mr. U requested the Court to compel Mrs. G to return to him the entire area of the disputed land and the single-story house on the land.

The interested parties’ statements:

1. Mrs. Nguyễn Thị M1 stated: Mrs. G has lived with their parents since she was a child. She witnessed their parents making the will for Mrs. G; she attended the family meeting held by Mrs. B, which Mr. U did not attend. The house on the land was built by their parents because, at that time, all the children were living with them. The land currently managed and used by Mr. U, about 6 hectares in Hamlet I, Commune T, was partly sold to Mrs. B by the seventh sibling and partly given by the sixth sibling to support the parents, but Mr. U did not take care of the parents. Regarding the disputed land and assets on it, she does not request an inheritance division; she requests that the disputed land be allocated to Mrs. G according to their parents’ will.
2. Mr. Nguyễn Văn L stated: The house was built by their parents and siblings, not by Mr. U. When their parents were alive, they made a will and held a family meeting to allocate the disputed land to Mrs. G. As for the land currently managed and used by Mr. U, part of it was sold to Mr. U by him, and part was given by the sixth sibling to support their parents. He requests the Court to allocate the disputed land to Mrs. G according to their parents’ will.
3. Mrs. Nguyễn Thị P stated: When their parents were alive, she heard their father say he would give Mrs. G 5,000m²of land. She does not request an inheritance division but only asks to keep the 5,000m² of cemetery land undivided.
4. Mrs. Nguyễn Thị H stated: When their parents were alive, they said they would leave the disputed land to Mrs. G in a will, but she does not remember when the will was made because it was a long time ago. Mrs. G has lived on the disputed land since childhood and took care of their parents when they were alive. After their parents died, Mrs. G has been the one worshipping them. Mr. U does not manage the disputed land because he has his own land.
5. Mr. Nguyễn Văn V stated: He requests the inheritance division of the estate that his father, Mr. C, is entitled to.
6. Mr. Nguyễn Văn T:He agreed with Mr. V’s statement.
7. Mrs. Nguyễn Thúy H requested the Court to resolve the matter according to the law.

In the First-instance Civil Judgment No. 04/2019/DS-ST dated April 16^th, 2019, the People’s Court of Cà Mau Province decided:

– To accept Mrs. Nguyễn Thị G’s lawsuit for the inheritance division against Mr. Nguyễn Văn U.

– Mrs. G is entitled to inherit the estate of Mr. Nguyễn Văn M and Mrs. Nguyễn Thị B, including the land with an actual measured area of 35,180.7m² located in Hamlet N, Commune T, District P, Cà Mau Province (with boundaries specified), and the assets attached to the land, including:

– One main house with dimensions of 6.7m x 8.7m, an area of 58.29m², constructed with a wooden frame, wooden walls, a corrugated iron roof, and a dirt floor, built in 1993 and repaired by Mrs. G in 2016;

– One auxiliary house with dimensions of 11.4m x 21.3m, an area of 242.82m², constructed with brick, steel frame, reinforced concrete columns, tin walls, zinc-coated iron roof, and dirt floor, built in 2012;

– One well and planted trees on the land.

– To revoke the Land Use Rights Certificate No. R202211 issued on November 15^th, 2000, by the People’s Committee of District C, Cà Mau Province, to Mr. Nguyễn Văn U.

– To reject Mr. Nguyễn Văn U’s counterclaim requesting Mrs. G, Mrs. H, and Mr. T1 to return the entire disputed land area and the house on it to him.

Additionally, the first-instance court also decided on court fees, litigation costs, and the litigants’ rights to appeal according to the law.

On April 26^th, 2019, the defendant, Mr. Nguyễn Văn U, filed an appeal against the entire First-instance Civil Judgment.

In the Appellate Civil Judgment No. 646/2019/DS-PT dated December 13^th, 2019, the High People’s Court in Hồ Chí Minh City decided:

– To reject the appeal of the defendant, Mr. Nguyễn Văn U, and uphold the FirstiInstance Civil Judgment No. 04/2019/DS-ST dated April 16^th, 2019, of the People’s Court of Cà Mau Province.

The appellate court also decided on court fees, valuation, and expert assessment costs, and the obligation to enforce the judgment.

In the Cassation Appeal Decision No. 01/QĐ-VKS-DS dated March 4^th, 2022, the Chief Procurator of the Supreme People’s Procuracy appealed against the Appellate Civil Judgment No. 646/2019/DS-PT dated December 13^th, 2019, of the High People’s Court in Hồ Chí Minh City; requesting the Judges’ Council of the Supreme People’s Court to conduct an cassation trial, vacate the aforementioned Appellate Civil Judgment and the First-instance Civil Judgment No. 04/2019/DS-ST dated April 16, 2019, of the People’s Court of Cà Mau Province, and remand the case file to the People’s Court of Cà Mau Province for a new first-instance trial according to the law.

At the cassation hearing, the representative of the Supreme People’s Procuracy proposed that the Judges’ Council of the Supreme People’s Court accept the appeal of the Chief Procurator of the Supreme People’s Procuracy.

COURT’S OPINION:

[1] The disputed land, with an actual measured area of 35,180.7m², is identified as belonging to plots No. 809 and 810 on Map Sheet No. 10D according to the 1993 cadastral records. It is now identified as plots No. 135 and 136 on Map Sheet No. 10 according to the 2006 cadastral records. This land is located in Hamlet N, Commune T, District P, Cà Mau Province.

Originally, the land belonged to Mr. Nguyễn Văn M, who passed away in 1998, and Mrs. Nguyễn Thị B, who passed away in 2010. The current state of the land includes one main house with an area of 58.29 square meters, constructed in 1993, a well, various plants, and a cemetery containing three graves.

[2] M and Mrs. B had eight children: Mrs. Nguyễn Thị H, Mrs. Nguyễn Thị M1, Mr. Nguyễn Văn C (deceased, year unknown), Mrs. Nguyễn Thị G, Mr. Nguyễn Văn K (deceased in 2016), Mr. Nguyễn Văn L, Mrs. Nguyễn Thị P, and Mr. Nguyễn Văn U.

[3] During the case proceedings, Mrs. Nguyễn Thị G asserted that Mr. M and Mrs. B had gifted her the aforementioned land in 1998. She contended that since receiving the land, she had continuously managed and utilized it, including undertaking repairs to the house situated on the property.

Conversely, Mr. Nguyễn Văn U denied that their parents had executed a will bequeathing the land to Mrs. G. Instead, he claimed that their parents had given him the land in 1998 and that he had been issued a Land Use Rights Certificate by the People’s Committee of District C in 2000.

[4] According to the will dated May 16^th, 1998, Mr. M and Mrs. B bequeathed approximately 15,000m² of land to Mrs. G. Although the will did not specify the exact area, it delineated the land’s boundaries as follows: the front facing Canal N, the eastern (rear) boundary adjoining Nguyễn Văn L1, the northern boundary adjoining Lý Tùng H1, and the western boundary adjoining Quách Văn M2. Thus, the land given to Mrs. G by her parents was within a defined area, bordered by Canal N and the properties of other residents, with no current disputes regarding its boundaries.

Following Mr. M’s death, in the family meeting minutes dated June 15^th, 2004, and in the will dated September 9^th, 2006, Mrs. B reiterated her intention to bequeath the entire 32,500m² of land to Mrs. G. This intention was consistent with the 1998 will made by Mr. M and Mrs. B, which provided for the land to be given to Mrs. G.

[5] The will dated May 16, 1998, created by Mr. M and Mrs. B, bore the signatures of their children, including Mr. U, and was confirmed by the local authorities. The family meeting minutes dated June 15^th, 2004, also bore the signatures of the children, excluding Mr. U, and local authority confirmation. The will dated September 9^th, 2006, was likewise confirmed by local authorities.

This demonstrates that at the time of making the wills and holding family meetings, none of Mr. M and Mrs. B’s children objected to their decision to give the disputed land to Mrs. G. They all confirmed that since Mrs. G had lived with their parents from a young age, it was agreed by their parents and siblings that she should manage the land to worship their parents.

Mr. U claimed that he was given the land by Mr. M and Mrs. B in 1998 and that on November 15^th, 2000, he was issued a Land Use Rights Certificate by the People’s Committee of District C. However, he could not provide evidence to prove that his parents had given him the land.

[6] Regarding the declaration, registration, and issuance of the Land Use Rights Certificate for the disputed land: The cadastral information declaration form No. 32/PCCTT dated December 29^th, 2016, from the Branch Office of Land Registration in District P, indicated that Mr. M registered and declared the land in 1993 and was subsequently issued a Land Use Rights Certificate by the People’s Committee of District C.

In 2006, Mrs. G registered and declared the land use rights. According to Dispatch No. 1922/UBND dated October 23^rd, 2018, the People’s Committee of District P stated that the file for issuing the Land Use Rights Certificate to Mr. U was lost. Furthermore, in the mediation minutes dated February 23^rd, 2017, of the People’s Committee of Commune T, Mr. U stated that Mr. M had authorized him to obtain the Land Use Rights Certificate to mortgage the land for a loan from the bank.

[7] In 1998, Mr. U did not reside with his parents but instead lived in Hamlet I, Commune T, where he managed and used approximately 6 to 7 hectares of land. Mrs. G, Mrs. M, and Mr. L all confirmed that the land Mr. U used in Hamlet I was given to him by Mr. M and Mrs. B. This included a portion transferred by Mr. L to Mr. M and Mrs. B and a portion given by the sixth sibling to support their parents.

Mr. U asserted that the land he used in Hamlet I was partly allocated by the corporation and partly purchased. However, he could not provide evidence to support this claim.

[8] When resolving the case, the first-instance and appellate courts based their decisions on the contents of the will, family meeting minutes, testimonies of Mr. M and Mrs. B’s children, and Mrs. G’s continuous management and use of the land since 1998, as well as the land declaration and registration. Therefore, the courts accepted Mrs. G’s lawsuit, recognizing her inheritance of the land as the estate of Mr. M and Mrs. B, which was well-founded.

In light of the foregoing,

IT IS DECIDED:

Pursuant to Point a, Clause 2, Article 337, Clause 1, Article 343 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code:

1. To reject the Cassation Appeal Decision No. 01/QĐ-VKS-DS dated March 4^th, 2022, of the Chief Procurator of the Supreme People’s Procuracy.
2. To uphold the Appellate Civil Judgment No. 646/2019/DS-PT dated December 13^th, 2019, of the High People’s Court in Hồ Chí Minh City.

CONTENT OF THE CASE LAW:

“[4] According to the will dated May 16^th, 1998, Mr. M and Mrs. B bequeathed approximately 15,000m² of land to Mrs. G. Although the will did not specify the exact area, it delineated the land’s boundaries as follows: the front facing Canal N, the eastern (rear) boundary adjoining Nguyễn Văn L1, the northern boundary adjoining Lý Tùng H1, and the western boundary adjoining Quách Văn M2. Thus, the land given to Mrs. G by her parents was within a defined area, bordered by Canal N and the properties of other residents, with no current disputes regarding its boundaries.

Following Mr. M’s death, in the family meeting minutes dated June 15^th, 2004, and in the will dated September 9^th, 2006, Mrs. B reiterated her intention to bequeath the entire 32,500m² of land to Mrs. G. This intention was consistent with the 1998 will made by Mr. M and Mrs. B, which provided for the land to be given to Mrs. G.

[5] The will dated May 16, 1998, created by Mr. M and Mrs. B, bore the signatures of their children, including Mr. U, and was confirmed by the local authorities. The family meeting minutes dated June 15^th, 2004, also bore the signatures of the children, excluding Mr. U, and local authority confirmation. The will dated September 9^th, 2006, was likewise confirmed by local authorities.

This demonstrates that at the time of making the wills and holding family meetings, none of Mr. M and Mrs. B’s children objected to their decision to give the disputed land to Mrs. G. They all confirmed that since Mrs. G had lived with their parents from a young age, it was agreed by their parents and siblings that she should manage the land to worship their parents.

Mr. U claimed that he was given the land by Mr. M and Mrs. B in 1998 and that on November 15^th, 2000, he was issued a Land Use Rights Certificate by the People’s Committee of District C. However, he could not provide evidence to prove that his parents had given him the land.

…

[8] When resolving the case, the first-instance and appellate courts based their decisions on the contents of the will, family meeting minutes, testimonies of Mr. M and Mrs. B’s children, and Mrs. G’s continuous management and use of the land since 1998, as well as the land declaration and registration. Therefore, the courts accepted Mrs. G’s lawsuit, recognizing her inheritance of the land as the estate of Mr. M and Mrs. B, which was well-founded.”

If you need more consulting, please Contact Us at TNHH NT International Law Firm (ntpartnerlawfirm.com)

You can also download the .docx version here.