The grandmother who lived in the same time caused her marriage to blow, and the grandson was angry and asked her to move away.

my country's law stipulates that adult children have the obligation to support, assist and protect their parents. What about the elderly to the elderly? Recently, the People's Court of Baoshan District, Shanghai, concluded a case of exclusion disputes. As a house property owner required his grandmother to move away from the house based on property rights, the grandson rejected the complaint after he tried.

Since 2002, Mrs. Qiu came to Shanghai from the hometown of Hubei to help her daughter Wen's life in order to help her daughter Wen. In addition to returning to her hometown from 2010 to 2012, Mrs. Qiu has always lived with Ms. Wen and grandson Cao. In 2012, Ms. Wen purchased a house in a community in Baoshan to consider her son in the future. Ms. Wen gave Mr. Cao as her wedding room in 2019. The three generations of grandchildren live together, and there will be some small contradictions. By 2021, the three generations of the ancestors and grandchildren who had lived together for nearly 20 years seemed to be very fierce. Mr. Cao complained to his grandmother Qiu to the court and asked him to move away from the house immediately.

Mr. Cao described himself, and the contradiction broke out in May 2021. At that time, he took his girlfriend and his girlfriend's parents to discuss marriage at home, but his grandmother had a fierce quarrel with himself and accused himself in front of everyone. With such a toss, his girlfriend broke up with herself, and the marriage was yellow. In Mr. Cao's opinion, her grandmother's behavior has seriously hurt her relationship with Ms. Wen, Ms. Wen.

Mrs. Qiu said that in the past 20 years, she has been helping her daughter to take care of her family affairs, and Ms. Wen has promised to be responsible for pension. Therefore, he has sold his hometown in his hometown and has no other residence, so he does not agree to move away.

In this regard, Mr. Cao believes that Mrs. Qiu's hukou is in Hubei and should return to her hometown for pensions. Ms. Wen Ms. Wen can provide Hubei houses for her living. And the maintenance problem should be shared by the children, which has nothing to do with the grandchildren.

One of the focus of the controversy in this case is whether Mr. Cao, as a property owner, can move the old Mrs. Qiu based on real rights. The judge of the trial believes that the house involved was purchased by Ms. Wen. Mr. Cao was transferred to the property rights and was not obtained through market transactions. Prior to this, Ms. Wen had promised and arranged for Mrs. Qiu to live in the house for a long time and fulfill her support for her mother. Considering that the above -mentioned background in this case, when Mrs. Qiu and her children had not properly found another residence for her, Mr. Cao asked Mrs. Qiu to move away immediately, and it was inappropriate for the law.

The judge also pointed out that although Mr. Cao did not have a direct support obligation to Mrs. Qiu, and the family contradiction between the two was difficult to reconcile, as a junior who had lived for many years, he should also communicate with Mrs. Qiu and her children. Properly arrange Mrs. Qiu's subsequent residence, resolve disputes in a more gentle way, and eliminate disputes, rather than so ruthless.

According to the principles of public order and customs, Baoshan Court did not support the request of Mr. Cao. Mr. Cao refused to accept the judgment of the first instance and appealed to the Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court. After the second trial, the case was maintained.

Liberation Daily · Shangguan News Original manuscript, reprinting without permission

Author: Wang Xianle Hu Mingdong

WeChat editor: nano

School counterpart: Jia Simin

- END -