The judgment of the court also reminds people in love: as a person with full capacity for civil conduct, you should be responsible for your words and deeds, and life is like chess, with no regrets!
The incident was "generously handed over" before marriage and "brought to court" when divorced.
It turns out that Xiao Gang and Xiao Duo used to be a pair of sweet lovers. Later, they decided to get married. Before getting married, the two signed a prenuptial property agreement, stipulating that all personal property under Xiaogang's name would be owned by the husband and wife after marriage.
However, after marriage, the two gradually found each other "inappropriate" and their personalities were too different to continue living together, so they decided to divorce.
When a husband and wife divorce, who will raise the children and how will the property be divided? In view of these problems, the two sides have great disputes. To this end, Xiaogang sued Xiaoduo to the court.
Above the court, both sides hold their own words. The focus of their dispute is how to deal with Xiaogang's personal property before marriage.
Regarding the question of who owns Xiaogang's pre-marital property, Xiaogang claimed that the pre-marital property agreement between the two parties stipulated that the pre-marital property under Xiaogang's name belongs to the joint property of married couples. In fact, half of Xiaogang's property rights were given to Xiaoduo. However, the gift has not been registered for the change of ownership, and there has been no transfer of rights, so Xiaogang has the right to revoke the gift. Xiao Gang also said that he had revoked the gift in the first instance and informed Xiao Duo, so the gift had been revoked.
Xiao Gang believes that there is no "statutory revocation condition" for the gift contract. As long as it is not a public welfare gift or a notarized gift, it can be unconditionally revoked before the transfer of rights.
However, Xiaoduo retorted that the prenuptial property agreement is not a gift agreement, and its agreement on real estate is closely related to the marriage relationship between the two parties and has a strong identity dependence. Once it is made, it will have the effect of real right change immediately, and there is no need to go through the formalities of real right change separately.
Decide that the prenuptial agreement is irrevocable and the house should be the same property.
The second instance of Xiamen Intermediate People's Court held that the prenuptial property agreement in this case was not a gift contract. Xiaogang claimed that he had issued a notice to Xiaoduo to cancel the property gift, demanding the cancellation of the prenuptial property agreement, and there was no legal basis. The property in this case should be the joint property of husband and wife.
Therefore, the court ruled that, according to Article 8 of the Supreme People's Court's Several Specific Opinions on People's Courts Handling Divorce Cases, "the joint property of husband and wife shall be divided equally in principle. According to the actual needs of production and life and the source of property, the specific treatment methods can also be different. In this case, the property involved comes from Xiaogang's personal property before marriage, and he bought the disputed property in full before marriage. In the specific division and handling of disputed property, we should give due consideration to Xiaogang's rights and interests, which is also in line with the principle of fairness.
Combined with Xiaogang's capital contribution, the court decided to divide the disputed property according to the ratio of 7:3, that is, Xiaogang got 70% and Xiaoduo got 30%. The disputed property belongs to Xiao Gang, who should compensate Xiao Duo at 30% of the existing value of the disputed property.
The judge's statement
A prenuptial property agreement is not a gift contract.
The judge analyzed that the prenuptial property agreement in this case is not a gift contract. Article 6 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates: "Before marriage or during the marriage relationship, if the parties agree to give the property owned by one party to the other party, and the donor cancels the gift before the registration of the change of the donated property, and the other party requests the order to continue the performance, the people's court may handle it in accordance with the provisions of Article 186 of the Contract Law." This article is only applicable to the case where one spouse gives his or her own property to the other (i.e. 100% of the property rights to the other), and it is not applicable in this case.
The judge also stated that the prenuptial property agreement is binding on both parties. Paragraph 1 of Article 19 of the Marriage Law stipulates that there are three kinds of marital property systems: separate property system, joint property system and mixed property system, which can be chosen by both spouses through agreement. The second paragraph of Article 19 of the Marriage Law stipulates: "The agreement between husband and wife on the property acquired during the marriage relationship and the property before marriage is binding on both parties." This is the stipulation of the internal legal effect of the agreed property system. According to the regulations, the written agreement signed by both husband and wife based on the principle of autonomy of will is binding on both husband and wife as long as it stipulates the ownership of the property under their respective names, and does not require both husband and wife to go through the formalities of property right change, nor does it give one party the right to arbitrarily terminate the gift contract.