随着社会经济的不断发展、人民可支配财产的增加和法律意识的不断提高，用订立遗嘱的方式处分财产已经非常普遍。又因为历史和现实生活中我国家庭成员之间存在共同劳动、财产共有的习惯，夫妻共同遗嘱这种新型遗嘱逐渐被人们采用。但目前我国法律在解决这一问题上仍较为空白，《继承法》中没有可以直接援引的法律条文，《遗嘱公证细则》中提到的规则也过于单薄，这给司法裁判带来了极大的不便，甚至造成了同案不同判的问题。针对以上问题，本文通过比较法分析、文献综述和案例分析等方法进行了如下研究：对于夫妻共同遗嘱问题，比较法上有承认夫妻共同遗嘱的效力和否认夫妻共同遗嘱的效力两种不同的处理方式。采取承认态度的国家包括英美法系国家和德国、奥地利等大陆法系国家，其中又以德国最为典型，不仅在民法典中承认了夫妻共同遗嘱的效力，而且设专章进行了完善的规定；采取否认态度的国家主要包括法国、日本、意大利等。概括来讲，肯定夫妻共同遗嘱主要是基于对解决现实问题的考虑，而否定共同遗嘱主要是基于遗嘱的单方性、遗嘱自由应包括撤销的自由等法理问题的考虑。 我国学界目前对夫妻共同遗嘱的问题态度不一，主要观点有肯定说、否定说和折中说。从大趋势来讲，夫妻共同遗嘱因符合我国的历史传统、能够解决现实生活中继承相关的问题而逐渐得到大量学者的认可。在肯定夫妻共同遗嘱的基础上，学者又对夫妻共同遗嘱的撤销权问题进行了进一步的讨论，提出了共同遗嘱不可单方撤销、一定条件下可撤销和任何情况下后去世方都可以撤销等不同观点。在司法实践中，也存在夫妻共同遗嘱全部无效、部分无效和全部有效三种不同的判决。在已有的判决中，法官主流的观点是如果能证明夫妻共同遗嘱是基于双方真实意思表示订立的，就可以承认夫妻共同遗嘱的效力。在涉及到共同遗嘱撤销的问题时，一般撤销权仅及于生存方的份额，也有判决更加严格地限制了后去世一方的撤销权，即判决后去世一方仅能对夫妻共同遗嘱中限于个人财产的部分进行撤销。综上，笔者认为我国继承法应明文规定承认夫妻共同遗嘱的效力，并增加配套条文明确共同遗嘱的撤销权问题，如规定夫妻共同遗嘱在双方均未死亡前可以撤回，但是需要撤回的意思表示到达对方；一方死亡后，对于无关联性处分的共同遗嘱，后死亡一方可以撤销属于自己的财产份额，对于有关联性处分的共同遗嘱，后死亡一方仅可以因事先约定、再婚、错误认识、放弃继承和继承人的不当行为等原因撤销。

With the continuous development of the social economy, the increase of people's disposable assets, and the continuous improvement of legal awareness, disposing the property by means of a will has been widely accepted. Moreover, because of the common labor and property sharing habits among family members in history and real life, the Husband-wife Joint Will is gradually adopted. However, at present, Chinese laws still have flaws in solving this problem. There are no legal provisions that can be directly invoked in the Law of Succession. The rules mentioned in the Rules of Notarization of Wills are too simple, which brings great inconvenience, even causes different sentences in the similar cases. In view of the above problems, this paper has carried out the following research through comparative analysis, literature review, and case analysis:For the Husband-wife Joint Will, the comparative law has two different modes. Each mode is decided by a country's historical and social reality factors. The countries that adopt the attitude of recognition include the common law countries and the civil law countries such as Germany and Austria. Among them, Germany is the most typical. It not only recognizes the validity of Husband-wife Joint Will in the civil code, but also sets a special chapter for detailed regulations; Countries that adopt a denial attitude mainly include France, Japan, and Italy. In a nutshell, the German mode is mainly based on the consideration of solving real problems; while the French mode is mainly based on the theory of wills. At present, the academic circles in China have different attitudes toward the Husband-wife Joint Will. The main points of view are affirmative, negative and eclectic. Main reason given by affirmative view is that Husband-wife Joint Will can help protect the freedom of will and the maintenance of family relations. In particular, the life of a spouse and young children will not be affected by family changes. In the family business, it can prevent the dispersal of shares, etc.; The reason given by the negation mainly is that the Husband-wife Joint Will hinders the freedom of revocation and does not comply with the provisions of the current law on the form of will; The eclecticism combines the both theories. The point of view is that although it is possible to recognize the Husband-wife Joint Will, it is necessary to restrict the will from the aspects of object and content. In terms of the general trend, the Husband-wife Joint Will is gradually recognized by a large number of scholars since it conforms to the Chinese historical traditions and can solve problems related to inheritance in real life. On the basis of affirming the Husband-wife Joint Will, the scholars further discussed its revocation right, and proposed that the common will cannot be unilaterally revoked, can be revoked under certain conditions, or can be revoked in any cases. In the judicial practice, there are also three different judgments of Husband-wife Joint Will: all invalid, partially invalid and all valid. The core issue of the different judgments is the definition of the Husband-wife Joint Will, that is, whether the Husband-wife Joint Will is a new type of will or a special form of will. Since a will is a judicial act with formality, if the Husband-wife Joint Will is regarded as a special form of will, it will directly lead to the invalidity of the will. In the existing judgments, the judge's mainstream view is that if there is a complete chain of evidence to prove that the Husband-wife Joint Will is based on the true meaning of both parties, its validity can be recognized. When it comes to the issue of the revocation of the common will, the general view is that the right of revocation is restricted to the share of the surviving party. Some judgments close restraint the revocation right of the surviving party. That is, people can only withdraw the personal property of the husband and wife. In summary, Chinese inheritance law should clearly stipulate the validity of the Husband-wife Joint Will, and increase the supporting provisions to clarify the right of revocation of the common will. For example, the Husband-wife Joint Will can be revoked on the condition that one party inform the other party in writing before both parties have died. After the death of one party, for a common will without related disposal, the latter party can revoke its own share of the property. For a common will with related disposal, the latter party can only revoke the will because of pre-agreed, remarried, misunderstood, abandoning the inheritance and the heir’s misconduct and other reasons.