Whether the note has legal effect

This note is not a contract, of course, it does not need to be signed by both parties, this note represents a promise by your mother, a unilateral promise to voluntarily give up the inheritance of this part of the property, which is legally binding. As for whether your aunt can inherit it, it depends on your grandmother's heir.

Later, you explained the situation of the house, according to your statement, your grandmother does not have the property right to the house, it was your mother who bought the house and is the owner of the house, so the house is not an inheritance, it is your mother's property. Mother's property, even if she herself promises to give it to your aunt, is only a promise to give it away, and the gift is only effective when it is delivered, and the promise can be revoked before your mother delivers it to your aunt.

After going around in circles, your aunt still can't take the house, hehe.

Rest assured, this note is invalid. First, the house is the joint property of your parents, and the relevant property distribution must be agreed upon, which means that only your mother's pliers do not constitute a summary contractual relationship.

Second: There are no witnesses to prove that the so-called note was signed, which means that your mother may have been coerced into signing the note. As long as the person concerned does not say that your mother is voluntary, the note can be considered as coerced, i.e. invalid.

So the right to use the house** or the right to use it belongs to your parents, and the inheritance belongs to you. If someone else asks your family or you for the benefit they will receive from the house, you can ignore it or appeal to the court for extortion.

This note has no legal effect, because you didn't take it to the notary office for notarization when you wrote it, and there was no legal lawyer to witness it, so it won't have any legal effect, even if you go to court, you don't have to worry, and that note is just your mother's signature, it's useless at all, as long as you have a legal deed to buy and sell the house, what are you worried about? But it's best not to make your relatives too stiff, family affection is precious!

If it was really written under duress, it can be revoked, but there is a one-year exclusion period, and after a year, there is no way to remedy it.

In addition, depending on who owns the property of the house, if it is the joint property of the husband and wife or the inheritance inheritance, and there is another joint owner, the content of the note is partially invalid.

1. Signatures on white paper have no legal effect.

2. According to the provisions of Article 470 of the Civil Code, the content of the contract shall be determined by the parties, and generally include the following clauses: the names or titles and addresses of the parties; Target; Quantity; Quality; price or remuneration; the period, place and manner of performance; liability for breach of contract; Methods of Dispute Resolution.

Yes, the carrier of the protocol can be a piece of paper. As long as both parties have the corresponding capacity for civil conduct, the content of the agreement is the embodiment of the true intentions of both parties, and the content is legal, and it is legal and valid after being signed and confirmed by both parties, and has legal effect.

Article 490 of the Civil Code: Where the parties conclude a contract in the form of a written contract, the contract shall be formed when both parties sign, affix their seals or press their fingerprints. The contract is formed when one of the parties has fulfilled its primary obligations and the other party has accepted it before signing, stamping or fingerprinting.

When laws or administrative regulations stipulate or the parties agree that a contract shall be concluded in written form, and the parties do not use the written form but one party has performed its main obligations and the other party accepts it, the contract shall be established.

Legal analysis: 1. If the content of the contract is legal and the signing of the contract is the true intention of both parties, the paper contract is valid;

2. If the content of the contract is illegal, and the signing of the contract is not the true intention of both parties, the paper contract is invalid.

Article 146 of the Civil Code: Civil juristic acts carried out by the actor and the counterpart with false expressions of intent are invalid. The effectiveness of civil juristic acts concealed by false expressions of intent is to be handled in accordance with the relevant legal provisions.

Legal basis: "Civil Code of the People's Republic of China" Article 146 A civil juristic act carried out by the actor and the counterpart with a false expression of intent is invalid. The effectiveness of civil juristic acts concealed by false expressions of intent shall be handled in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations.

It's a bit vague.

Article 52 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that: "A contract shall be invalid under any of the following circumstances: (1) one party concludes a contract by means of fraud or coercion, which damages the interests of the state; (2) Malicious collusion or damage to the interests of the state, the collective or a third party; (3) concealing an illegal purpose in a lawful form; (4) Harming the public interest; (5) Violating the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations.

All in all, as long as both parties have civil capacity, do not endanger national interests, and do not carry fraud and coercion, they are basically legal.

As long as it is an expression of the intention of the parties to the agreement, it has legal effect.