In May 1991, a certain art shop signed a commissioned work creation contract with the famous painter Li. The contract stipulated that Li should deliver 10 new landscape paintings to the painting shop before October 1992, with a reward of 30,000 yuan. In September 1992, Li delivered his paintings to an art shop and received a reward of 30,000 yuan. In January 1993, the art store held a large-scale art exhibition, displaying all 10 of Li's works. The art exhibition was a great success. After learning about it, Li raised an objection, believing that the art shop had infringed his copyright by displaying his works without his consent. At the same time, the art shop published the 10 paintings together with other works.

　[[Question]1. Does the art shop’s exhibition of Li’s works without Li’s consent infringe on Li’s rights? Why? 2. The art shop displays the 10 paintings together with other works Is there any legal basis for collecting and publishing?

Case 46

Zhou Dawei and Liu Guoqing are designers at a design institute. In February 1997, the design institute was commissioned by a university to design a mural for the front lobby of a library building that was about to be put into use. After the design institute accepted this task, it appointed Zhou Dawei and Liu Guoqing to be responsible for this design task. In May 1997, Zhou Dawei, who had not yet completed the design, was transferred out of the city due to personal reasons, and Liu Guoqing was responsible for completing the remaining design tasks. At the end of 1997, Zhou Dawei published the sketches he participated in the design in his personal name in the magazine "Selected Design Works". In April 1998, after the design was completed, the university paid the design institute, and the design institute also awarded a certain amount of bonus to Liu Guoqing. The design institute included this design in the "Ten Years of Achievements of the Design Institute" in the name of the unit, so Liu Guoqing raised an objection to the design institute.

[Question] 1. Does Zhou Dawei have the right to publish design sketches in his own name? Why? 2. Is there any legal basis for Liu Guoqing’s objection to the design institute?

Case 47

There are two breweries A and B in Nanshan City. Factory A has a long history and relies on its unique brewing process to produce "Beihu" liquor that is pure in taste and of high quality and low price. After the wine was put on the market, it was deeply loved by local customers and exported to other provinces and cities. Seeing that "Beihu" liquor was so popular, Factory B also used the "Beihu" trademark on the liquor produced by its own factory. Sales immediately increased significantly, and it made a profit of 500,000 yuan that month. The leaders of Factory B were overjoyed when they heard that Factory A's "Beihu" liquor had not applied for registration with the Trademark Office, so they immediately applied for trademark registration to the Industrial and Commercial Bureau, and it was approved. After hearing the news, Factory A was extremely angry and applied to the Trademark Office to use "Nanshan" as the trademark for the liquor it produced. The application was rejected by the Industrial and Commercial Bureau.

　[[Question]1. Can Factory A claim that Factory B’s actions infringe its trademark rights? Why? 2. Is it reasonable for Factory A’s application for trademark registration to be rejected? What is the reason?

Case 48

Both factories A and B are manufacturers of cosmetics in a certain province. In August 1995, Factory A developed a new type of whitening product that could quickly lighten facial pigment and whiten the skin in a short period of time. After the product was put on the market, it was deeply loved by female friends. In May 1996, Factory A applied to the Trademark Office to register the "Meijing" trademark, but was informed that Factory B had applied to the Trademark Office to register the "Meijing" trademark for its whitening and body lotion 10 days ago. . Factory A claims that Factory B only started producing and selling the product in January 1996, and should grant Factory A the exclusive right to use the "Meijing" trademark.

[Question] 1. Which factory should the Trademark Office grant the exclusive right to use the trademark? 2. If Factory A and Factory B apply for trademark registration on the same day, who should the trademark right be granted to?

Case 49

In 1989, a research institute and a factory decided to develop a multi-functional household stove through verbal negotiation. For this purpose, the company sent two worker representatives to assist the researchers of the institute*** Complete design tasks together.

During the design process, factory worker representatives are mainly responsible for logistical work such as organizing drawings and maintaining facilities, while the research institute is mainly responsible for technical development and drawing drawings. In January 1991, through the joint efforts of personnel from both parties, the design of the stove was completed. In June 1991, the manufacturer unilaterally applied for a utility model patent to the China Patent Office. However, the institute believed that the invention was mainly done by the institute's designers and the institute should be the applicant. The manufacturer had no right to apply for a patent. Later, Zhao, an engineer from the factory, used his spare time to install one as it was and used it at home. After learning about it, the institute claimed that Zhao had infringed its patent rights. , u | u C9r y: T

[Question] 1. Who should own the patent application right in this case? 2. Does Zhao’s behavior constitute infringement? Why?

Case 50

Li Mingda is a retired cadre of a certain agency. His wife died young and his only son Li Lijun got married in 1990 and lived with his father. In January 1992, Li Mingda was introduced by someone and registered his marriage with Liu Liying, a widowed female worker. After the marriage, he moved to Liu Liying's place to live together. Liu Liying has no children, only one sister Liu Lina (divorced) lives with her. On January 2, 1999, when Liu Lina returned home, she found that Li Mingda and his wife were poisoned by gas. On the way to the hospital, Li Mingda died, and Liu Liying died in the early morning of the next day due to ineffective rescue efforts. When sorting out the belongings, it was discovered that Li Mingda and his wife had left a deposit of 30,000 yuan. Now Li Lijun requested to inherit the entire inheritance, and Liu Lina raised objections.

[Question] 1. How should the inheritance in this case be distributed? Why? 2. If both Li Mingda and his wife were dead when Liu Lina returned home, and the time of their death cannot be determined, how should the inheritance be distributed? ?

Case 51

Zhao Weiguang is a manager of a company. His wife, Wang, has been ill at home for a long time. The couple has a son and a daughter. His son Zhao Hong married Wang Ying, an employee of the factory, in 1990, and they had a son, Zhao Xiaogang. Zhao Hong died in a car accident in 1992. The daughter Zhao Juan is unmarried and lives with her parents. Zhao Weiguang often traveled for work, so he met Qian, a local young woman, in a southern city in 1995. The following year, Qian gave birth to Zhao Weiguang's son, Zhao Yang, who has been living with his mother. In May 1999, Zhao Weiguang died in a car accident. It was found that he had 100,000 yuan in cash and 100,000 yuan in bank deposits. Zhao Weiguang did not have a will during his lifetime, and now his family is having a dispute over the inheritance share.

[Question] 1. Qian proposed that Zhao Yang is Zhao Weiguang’s biological son and has the right to inherit Zhao Weiguang’s share of the estate. Is her claim valid? Why? 2. Zhao Hong’s wife claims to inherit Zhao by substitution. Hong’s inheritance share, is her claim tenable?

Case 52

Liu Ziying is a retired cadre of a state-owned enterprise. Her husband died young, and the couple had two deaths. Both girls were raised by Liu Ziying. The eldest son Zhou Jin married Wang Yue in 1991 and gave birth to a son, Zhou Yu. Zhou Jin died of illness in 1993. Wang Yue was heartbroken and decided not to remarry and focus on taking care of his son and his sick mother-in-law. The second son Zhou Feng suffered from mental illness due to an accident and was sent to a mental hospital for treatment. Daughter Zhou Hong is loved by her mother and is currently studying in the United States. In February 1998, Liu Ziying suffered from a sudden heart disease and was taken to the hospital by Wang Yue. Despite several months of careful care and treatment, Liu Ziying could not control her condition and died four months later. Regarding the inheritance of her inheritance, Zhou Hong called her from far away in the United States and said that Liu Ziying had called her before her death and told her that all her inheritance would be inherited by Zhou Hong after her death.

[Question] 1. Is the will made by Liu Ziying valid? 2. Wang Yuexian requests to inherit Liu Ziying’s estate as an heir. Is her request reasonable? 3. Does Zhou Yu have the right to inherit in this case? Why?

Case 53

Ye Guangsheng is a villager in a certain village. His wife died early and he raised his two sons alone. After graduating from high school, the eldest son Ye Jun went to the south to work and got married there, and had little contact with his family. The younger son Ye Wei works as a farmer at home and lives with his elderly father after getting married.

Taking into account that his eldest son had better economic conditions and that his younger son and his wife were so filial, Mr. Ye wrote a will in 1995. All his three tile-roofed houses and a deposit of 5,000 yuan would be inherited by his younger son Ye Wei after his death. By 1997, Ye Wei and his wife were introduced by friends to work as temporary workers in the provincial capital and temporarily settled in the provincial capital. After a stroke, Old Ye was unable to take care of his daily life, so he signed an agreement with the village committee: the village would be responsible for Old Ye's life, death and burial. After Old Ye's death, all three of his tile-roofed houses would be owned by the village committee. After that, the village specially sent people to take care of him until his death two years later, and took care of his funeral arrangements. When handling funeral arrangements, I discovered Old Man Ye's bankbook worth RMB 10,000. Later, the village committee took possession of his three houses as agreed. Ye Laohan's two sons raised objections to this.

[Question] 1. Is the will made by Mr. Ye during his lifetime valid? Who should own the three houses of Mr. Ye? 2. What should be done with Mr. Ye’s 10,000 yuan deposit?

Case 54

Zhang Fu and his wife are farming in the countryside. His only son Zhang Lizhi is married. He lives with his wife Yang Jing and his grandson Xiao Bao lives in the city. In February 1998, it was the slack season for farmers. After discussion, Zhang Lizhi and his wife decided to drive their parents from the countryside to live there for a few months and help take care of their son Xiaobao. Unexpectedly, on the way back home, Zhang Lizhi, who had just obtained his driver's license, was inexperienced and accidentally drove his car off a cliff. When discovered, all three people were killed. After Zhang Fu and his wife heard the news, they were heartbroken, so they hastily sold all the property left by Zhang Lizhi and his wife plus their deposits, totaling 40,000 yuan. Now Yang Jing's only sister, Yang Ning, has proposed that she is also Yang Jing's heir and wants to inherit part of the inheritance.

[Question] 1. How to determine the order of death of the parties in this case? 2. How should the inheritance of this case be handled?

Case 55

Liu Tianshun’s wife He died early and had no children. Due to his poor health, his brother Liu Tiande often asked his son Liu Er and daughter Liu Lan to take care of Liu Tianshun's life. Liu Tianshun was so moved that he made a will in his own handwriting, dividing all his property among his nephews and nieces after his death. In 1996, after Liu Tiande died of liver cancer, Liu Er rarely came to take care of Liu Tianshun, but Liu Lan always cared about his life, doing laundry and cooking for him. Liu Tianshun felt that Liu Lan had paid so much for him and should be given more property, so he went to the notary office in person to make a notarized will, making it clear that except for the TV set at home that would be owned by Liu Er after his death, all other properties would be inherited by Liu Lan. . After Liu Er learned about it, he never came to visit him again. He ignored Liu Tianshun when he saw her, and even glared angrily when he saw Liu Lan. Later, Liu Tianshun was critically ill and hospitalized, and Liu Er never visited him. When he was dying, Liu Tianshun stated in front of doctors and nurses that all his inheritance would be inherited by Liu Lan. When Liu Er learned about this, he dismissed it and instead took his wife and children to play in other places. He returned three months later and asked for the TV set that belonged to him.

[Question] 1. Which will is the valid will in this case? Which will should be executed? 2. Does Liu Er have the right to take back the TV?

Case Analysis

Case 45 Copyright Ownership of Art Works

1. The art store’s exhibition of Li’s works did not infringe Li’s rights. Because in this case the painting shop commissioned Li to paint and the painting shop paid the remuneration, the ownership of the painting should belong to the painting shop. According to Article 18 of the Copyright Law, the transfer of ownership of the original work of art is not regarded as a transfer of copyright, but the right to exhibition the work of art is enjoyed by the owner of the original work. Therefore, the art shop as the owner has the right to decide whether to display the work. 2. The art shop’s act of publishing the 10 paintings together with other works has no legal basis and is an infringement. Article 17 of the Copyright Law stipulates: The ownership of the copyright of a commissioned work shall be agreed upon by the client and the trustee through a contract. If there is no express agreement in the contract or no contract has been concluded, the copyright belongs to the trustee. ?In this case, the painting shop did not agree on the ownership of the copyright when signing the contract with Mr. Li, so the copyright of the painting should belong to Mr. Li. The collection and publication of the collection by the painting shop did not obtain Li's consent and should be regarded as an infringement of Li's copyright.

Case 46 Copyright of Works for Work

1. There is no legal basis for Zhou Dawei to publish the mural sketches he participated in the design in his own name. Because the mural design work carried out by Zhou Dawei was created under the assignment of the Design Institute, and was designed jointly by him and Liu Guoqing. Therefore, the design sketches completed before his transfer were cooperative duties. The design sketch is both a collaborative work with Liu Guoqing and a professional work. As a collaborative work, publishing this sketch in one's own name infringes upon the copyright of other collaborators. As a work of employment, if it is published by others without the permission of the unit within two years after the work is delivered, it also infringes the unit's right to use the work of employment and the right to receive remuneration. 2. Article 16 of the Copyright Law stipulates that works created by citizens to complete the work tasks of a legal person or an unincorporated unit are service works. Unless otherwise provided in this law, the copyright is enjoyed by the author, but the legal person or unincorporated unit has the right to The right to use priority within the scope of its business. Within two years after the work is completed, the author shall not allow a third party to use the work in the same manner as the work is used by the unit without the consent of the unit. That is to say, the unit has priority over the author’s right to use and receive remuneration for the creative work and design work within two years from the creation and delivery. The author shall not claim that the right to use the work and the right to receive remuneration within two years belongs to him.

Case 47: Whether the first-used trademark enjoys exclusive rights?

1. Factory A has no right to claim that Factory B’s actions infringed its trademark rights. Because the "Trademark Law" clearly stipulates that enterprises, institutions and individual industrial and commercial individuals who need to obtain the exclusive right to use trademarks for the goods they produce, manufacture, process or distribute shall apply to the Trademark Office for commodity trademark registration. In other words, trademark registration is an important basis for determining the exclusive right to use a trademark. Only registered trademarks can be protected by law. Although Factory A first used the trademark "Beihu", it did not register it and did not enjoy exclusive rights. Therefore, Factory B could not claim infringement. 2. The Trademark Office’s rejection of Factory A’s trademark registration application has a legal basis. The Trademark Law clearly stipulates that place names of administrative divisions at or above the county level or foreign place names known to the public shall not be used as trademarks. However, registered trademarks using place names will continue to be valid. This is due to the lack of distinctiveness of place names, which is not conducive to consumers identifying products and can easily cause market confusion. In this case, the "Nanshan" trademark applied for registration by Factory A is a city name and cannot be used as a trademark for goods.

Case 48 The principle of first-to-application and first-to-use of trademarks

1. The Trademark Office should grant the exclusive right to use the trademark to Factory B. Because my country's Trademark Law adopts the "first to file" principle for trademark registration, that is, if an identical or similar trademark is applied for registration on the same or similar goods, the trademark that was applied for first will be initially reviewed and announced. . The trademark rights will be granted to whoever files the application first, regardless of the order of use. 2. If Factory B and Factory A apply on the same day, then the Trademark Office should grant the trademark right to Factory A. According to the "prior to use" principle stipulated in the Trademark Law, if two or more parties submit registration applications for the same trademark to the Trademark Office on the same day, the one with earlier use will be determined. In this case, Factory A started producing and selling the product in August 1995, while Factory B only started producing and selling the product in 1996. Factory A used it first and should be granted the exclusive right to use the trademark.

Case 49 Ownership of patent application rights for joint development

1. The patent application rights in this case should belong to the research institute. Because this case does not belong to an independent invention and creation, the workers sent by the factory only played a supporting role in the design process and cannot be regarded as independent inventors. To be determined as a joint inventor, he must have made a creative contribution to the completed design. The factory worker representatives were only responsible for some logistical work and were not involved in specific creative activities. Therefore, the factory cannot apply for a patent as a joint designer, let alone an independent designer. 2. Zhao’s behavior does not constitute infringement. According to the provisions of the Patent Law, patent infringement has the following characteristics: first, without the permission of the patentee; second, for the purpose of production and business; third, the implementation of a patent protected by law.

In this case, Zhao’s behavior was not the use of patented methods for profit, but general household use, so it did not constitute infringement. If such a patent is mass-produced for profit, it will constitute infringement.

Case 50 Determination and Presumption of the Time of Death of the Deceased

1. Of the 30,000 yuan inheritance in this case, Li Lijun should inherit 7,500 yuan and Liu Lina should inherit 22,500 yuan. The "Inheritance Law" stipulates that when dividing inheritance, the personal property of the decedent's spouse should be divided first from the joint property of the couple, and the rest shall be the inheritance of the decedent. In this case, Li Mingda died first, and 30,000 yuan was the joint property of the couple. Therefore, only 15,000 yuan of it belonged to Li Mingda's inheritance, and the other 15,000 yuan belonged to Liu Liying. Li Mingda's 15,000 yuan inheritance will be inherited jointly by his son Li Lijun and his wife Liu Liying, and each of them should inherit 7,500 yuan. Half of Liu Liying's share of the couple's property, plus the 7,500 yuan she inherited, was inherited by her sister Liu Lina. 2. If Li Mingda and his wife are both dead when Liu Lina returns home, the inheritance of 30,000 yuan should be inherited by Li Lijun and Liu Lina, with 15,000 yuan each. According to the Supreme People's Court's "Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the (Succession Law)", if several people die in the same event and are of the same generation, they are presumed to have died at the same time and will not inherit from each other, but will be inherited by their respective heirs. Therefore, since the time of death of the two persons cannot be determined with certainty, it should be presumed that Li Mingda and his wife died at the same time. After the 30,000 yuan private property of Li Mingda and Liu Liying was divided, Li Lijun inherited his father's 15,000 yuan inheritance, and Liu Lina inherited Liu Liying's 15,000 yuan inheritance.

Case 51 Subrogation and the inheritance rights of illegitimate children

1. Qian’s claim is established, and Zhao Yang has the right to inherit Zhao Weiguang’s inheritance. According to the provisions of the Succession Law, children include legitimate children, illegitimate children, adopted children and dependent stepchildren. Therefore, although Qian is not Zhao Weiguang's legal wife, Zhao Yang is the illegitimate child of Qian and Zhao Weiguang. He enjoys the same rights and obligations as legitimate children in inheritance and has the right to inherit his father's legal property. 2. Zhao Hong’s wife Wang Ying’s claim of subrogation has no legal basis and cannot be established, but Zhao Hong’s son Zhao Xiaogang has the right to inherit Zhao Hong’s share by subrogation. According to Article 11 of the "Succession Law", if the decedent's children die before the decedent, the descendants of the decedent's children will inherit by direct blood. A subrogated heir can generally only inherit the share of the estate to which his father or mother is entitled. Therefore, as Zhao Hong's wife, Wang Ying is not a direct blood relative of Zhao Hong's younger generation and does not meet the conditions for subrogation. Her son should inherit by subrogation. Wang Ying only enjoys the right of custody until Zhao Xiaogang comes of age.

Case 52 Inheritance rights of widowed daughter-in-law and persons lacking the ability to work

1. The will made by Liu Ziying is invalid. According to the provisions of the Succession Law, an oral will must be made under critical circumstances and must be witnessed by more than two witnesses to be legally effective. Since there were no witnesses to witness the will made by Liu Ziying, it was formally illegal. Moreover, Article 19 of the Succession Law stipulates that the will shall reserve the necessary share of the inheritance for heirs who lack the ability to work and have no source of income. Liu Ziying did not reserve the necessary share for her second son Zhou Feng in her will, so the content was also illegal. 2. Wang Yue can inherit the share of the estate that he is entitled to inherit as an heir. Article 12 of the "Succession Law" stipulates that a widowed daughter-in-law who has fulfilled her main support obligations to her parents-in-law and a widowed son-in-law to his father-in-law and mother-in-law shall be the first-order heirs. In this case, Wang Yue gave up the right to remarry and took the initiative to assume the responsibility of taking care of the family and her mother-in-law. Therefore, she fulfilled her obligation to support her mother-in-law and was entitled to inherit her mother-in-law's estate as the first-order heir. 3. Zhou Yu has the right to inherit the share of property that his father Zhou Jin should inherit by subrogation. Wang Yue's inheritance as a widowed daughter-in-law is a special right granted to her by the law. It is because she has fulfilled more support obligations that she is given the legal status of the first-order heir.

Zhou Yu's right of inheritance is based on the provisions of Article 11 of the "Succession Law". He inherits the inheritance that his father is entitled to inherit by subrogation. His right of inheritance by subrogation cannot be deprived of because of his mother's right of inheritance.

Case 53 Validity of legacy support agreement

1. The will made by Old Man Ye during his lifetime is partially valid. Article 5 of the "Succession Law" stipulates that after the inheritance begins, it shall be handled according to statutory inheritance; if there is a will, it shall be handled according to testamentary inheritance or legacy; if there is a legacy and support agreement, it shall be handled according to the agreement. Therefore, the legacy support agreement is more effective than the will. Ye Laohan’s two dispositions of the three houses owned by him should be based on the legacy support agreement signed between him and the village committee. In his lifetime will, Ye Wei inherited The three-house part is invalid, but this does not affect the legal validity of other parts, which are still valid. 2. The eldest son Ye Jun should inherit 2,500 yuan of Mr. Ye's 10,000 yuan deposit, and the younger son Ye Wei should inherit 7,500 yuan. Because the portion of Ye Wei’s inheritance of the 5,000 yuan deposit in Old Man Ye’s lifetime will is still valid, the 5,000 yuan should be inherited according to the will and inherited by Ye Wei. The 5,000 yuan not covered by the will or the legacy support agreement shall be treated as legal inheritance. Ye Jun and Ye Wei, as the legal heirs of Old Ye Ye, should share the inheritance equally, and their elder brother can only inherit as the second-order heir. That is, after Wang Zhongtang died, Wang Zhongyi inherited the 5,000 yuan that was not disposed of in the will, and then Wang Zhongyi died unexpectedly. In the event of subrogation, his wife will inherit the share he has inherited. The requirement of being a direct blood relative of the younger generation is not required here. 3. The debt of 2,000 yuan should be borne by Wang Zhongyi. Article 33 of the "Succession Law" stipulates that the inheritance of an estate must pay off the taxes and debts that the deceased should pay according to law. Moreover, Article 62 of the Supreme People's Court's "Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the (Succession Law)" stipulates that if there is both a legal heir and a testamentary heir, the legal heir shall first use his inheritance to pay off debts. In this case, Wang Zhongyi is the only legal heir of Wang Zhongtang. After paying off the debt from the 5,000 yuan he inherited, his wife should inherit 3,000 yuan.

Case 54 Inheritance of people of different generations who died in the same incident

l. According to Article 2 of the Supreme People's Court's "Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the (Succession Law)" It stipulates that if several people who have inheritance relations with each other die in the same event, if the time of death cannot be determined, the person who has no heirs is presumed to die first; if the deceased has an heir, if the deceased people are of different generations, the elder is presumed to die first. Death; several dead people of the same generation. If they die at the same time, they will not inherit from each other, but will be inherited by their respective heirs. In this case, the three people who died have their own heirs, but they are of different generations. It should be presumed that the elder died first, and people of the same generation died at the same time. That is, Zhang Lizhi and Yang Jing died at the same time, and there was no inheritance from each other. Xiaobao was the younger generation. Presumed to have died later.

2. Since Zhang Lizhi and Yang Jing are presumed to have died at the same time, there will be no inheritance from each other, and their inheritance should be inherited by their respective heirs. That is, Zhang Lizhi's inheritance is inherited by his parents and son Xiaobao as the first-order heirs. Yang Jing has no other first-order heirs, and her entire inheritance is inherited by her son Xiaobao. Although Xiaobao also died in the car accident, he was presumed to have died later. After his death, because there were no first-order heirs and no other second-order heirs, his estate was passed on to his grandparents as the second-order heirs. The sequential heirs all inherit. As for Yang Jing’s sister Yang Ning. Because she is only the second-order heir to Yang Jing, she is not eligible to inherit the inheritance when Yang Jing already has the first-order heir.

Case 55 The validity of the will and the conditions for the legatee to accept the legacy

1. The three wills are all valid wills in form and content. According to the "Succession Law" According to the provisions of the law, if the decedent has made several wills and the contents are conflicting, the last will shall prevail. However, it also stipulates that self-written, written on behalf of, recording, and oral wills may not change or revoke a notarized will. That is to say. The last notarized will shall prevail. If there is no notarized will, the last will shall prevail.

In this case, among the three wills made by the decedent Liu Tianshun, the notarized will should prevail, not the last oral will, because the notarized will has the strongest probative power and authenticity after being notarized by a notary office. Therefore, Liu Lan cannot advocate the execution of the last will.

2. Liu Er has no right to obtain the TV set that was owned by Liu Tianshun after his death in the notarized will. Because Liu Er and Liu Lan are Liu Tianshun's nephews and nieces, they are not legally Liu Tianshun's legal heirs, but are people other than the legal heirs. Therefore, their inheritance is not based on testamentary inheritance, but on the basis of legacy. According to the provisions on bequests in the Succession Law, the legatee shall, within two months after learning of the bequest, make an expression of acceptance or renunciation of the bequest. If no expression is made within the expiration date, the legatee shall be deemed to have given up the bequest. In this case, Liu Er only expressed his acceptance of the bequest three months after he learned about the bequest. This has exceeded the legal period and should be regarded as giving up the bequest. , and Liu Tianshun has no legal heir. The TV should be returned to the state or collective economic organization. I recommend reading: Summary of knowledge points for the 2012 Political and Legal Police Examination 2012 Henan Political and Legal Police Examination Preparation: Chinese Geography 2012 Henan Political and Legal Police Examination Preparation: Ancient Chinese History 2012 Henan Provincial Political and Legal Police Examination Review Outline: Civil Law 2012 Henan Provincial Political and Legal Police Examination Review Outline: Criminal Law 2012 Henan Provincial Political and Legal Police Examination Review Outline: Jurisprudence 2012 Administrative Professional Ability Test Questions: 10 Language Comprehension Questions and Answers Summary (www.LiuXue86.com) Exclusively produced