Your parent died in New Zealand leaving assets and a home in China. Which estate has to be dealt with where?

Two estates, not one: how the split actually works

When someone dies leaving a home in New Zealand and assets in mainland China, the practical reality is that two administrations run in parallel. In New Zealand the executor named in the will, or an administrator appointed by the court on intestacy, collects the New Zealand assets of the deceased, pays the New Zealand debts and distributes what remains. In China the assets that were left there are dealt with under Chinese law, and where the heirs cannot agree, a Chinese court can determine entitlement and shares.

It follows that a New Zealand grant of probate carries a limited effect in China. Its usefulness is evidentiary: it establishes who holds the authority to represent the estate and confirms that the will has been accepted by a court that had jurisdiction in New Zealand. It does not make a Chinese property registry change a name, and it does not make a Chinese bank release an account to a person who has not produced the documents the bank requires.

The mirror point is equally worth stating. A Chinese court order determines the Chinese assets. It does not close the New Zealand estate, it does not release a New Zealand bank account, and it does not instruct a New Zealand solicitor. Clients who expect one order to settle everything are usually carrying an assumption into the wrong system.

Which law decides, and which court has jurisdiction in China

For movable assets Chinese legislation on the law applicable to civil relations with a foreign element points, for inheritance, in a way that turns on the deceased's habitual residence at death and on the identity of the parties, and for immovable property it points to the law of the place where the property sits. The 2023 amendments to the Civil Procedure Law, together with the Supreme People's Court interpretation, set out the jurisdictional bases for cases with a foreign element, including the identity-relationship jurisdiction rule that matters in family and succession matters and the provisions that deal with the estates of Chinese citizens who die abroad.

The practical question is not which rule sounds favourable, but which court can be approached without a jurisdictional challenge. In a succession matter with a Chinese flat, Chinese equity and a will made in New Zealand, the assets inside China ordinarily supply the anchor. If the only assets are in New Zealand and no party is connected to China, the Chinese court is simply the wrong forum, however convenient it might appear.

Where the deceased was a Chinese citizen who died abroad, Chinese law also provides a route for the estate of that citizen to be dealt with in China when there are assets here. That is the route most often used where the family cannot get the New Zealand estate to co-operate, or where the New Zealand estate has not yet produced a distribution that the Chinese side can rely on.

Documents: probate, Apostille and the China translation

New Zealand is a participant in the Apostille Convention, and the Convention has been in force for China since 7 November 2023. New Zealand public documents intended for use in China therefore normally take the Apostille route rather than full consular legalisation. In practice that means the death certificate, the probate or administration grant, the will where it was deposited or probated, and any court order about the estate are apostilled in New Zealand and then translated into Chinese for the Chinese filing.

Four things go wrong regularly. The death certificate is apostilled but the cause of the death is not established clearly enough for the purpose at hand, which is usually a Chinese registry or bank asking for certainty. The will is produced in translation only, without the authenticated original. A probate grant is provided in its initial form when a later variation, or a supplementary order, is what the estate is actually being administered under. And the documents are apostilled under the wrong signatory category, so the Chinese receiving authority returns them.

If the will was made in China and the death occurred in New Zealand, the reverse route applies: the Chinese notarial will or its certification has to be produced for the New Zealand administration, and the New Zealand practitioner will want a translation it can rely on. Where the deceased also held assets in a third jurisdiction, the number of parallel authentication chains grows quickly, and the sequencing between them needs to be planned rather than discovered.

Where the real disputes tend to be, and what a Chinese court will not touch

The disputes that reach a Chinese court in these matters cluster in a predictable way. A will executed in New Zealand that disposes of Chinese real estate may not operate as a Chinese recipient expects, because succession of immovable property follows the law of the situs. A spouse or a child omitted from the will raises the question of the reserved share that Chinese law gives to certain heirs. Assets transferred to one sibling shortly before death raise a claim in the Chinese estate rather than a challenge to the New Zealand administration. And a New Zealand estate that has not yet been distributed leaves the Chinese position dependent on events outside China.

What a Chinese court will not do is worth being precise about. It will not order a New Zealand executor to distribute, it will not vary a New Zealand will as a New Zealand court could, and it will not compel a New Zealand financial institution to act. Where a party's real complaint is about the conduct of the New Zealand administration, the remedy is in New Zealand.

The most useful sequencing in a matter with assets in both places is usually this: secure the New Zealand documentation first, because it is the evidentiary foundation; identify and freeze the China assets while the Chinese claim is prepared; then bring the Chinese case with a will that has already been accepted somewhere, and with a clear statement of what the Chinese order is being asked to achieve and what it will not affect.

The acceptance boundary this firm works to

We accept cross-border family and succession matters only where there is a genuine connection with mainland China: a party who is a Chinese national, or who holds Chinese domicile, habitual residence or identity documents; or property, company equity, evidence, documents or enforcement steps located in, to be completed in, or directed to China.

An estate confined to New Zealand, with no Chinese party and no Chinese asset, is outside the scope of what a team admitted in China can properly handle. A New Zealand solicitor or the New Zealand High Court is the right route, and we say so directly rather than keep the enquiry open.

Where the China element exists, the honest first deliverable is a short written view on three questions: which assets fall inside the Chinese estate, what New Zealand documents are needed and in what form, and what the Chinese order will and will not be able to achieve in New Zealand. That is a more useful starting document than a prediction of shares.

Frequently asked questions