The evidence is not enough to prove that the house funded by parents is still recognized as the same property.
Linlin and Li Jian got married in 2004. After marriage, Li Jian became violent and had a bad habit of gambling. Finally, Linlin decided to file a divorce lawsuit with the court.
After their marriage, they bought a house in Fangcun, Liwan District and registered it under the name of Li Jian. During the trial, Linlin provided the property search list and the purchase contract, which proved that the property was the same property of both husband and wife. However, Li Jian claimed that the house was funded by his parents, and Li Jian provided the bank transfer records in his parents' names (2010120 15). However, Linlin claimed that this transfer was only a bank voucher for Li Jian's parents to withdraw money, which was inconsistent with the total purchase amount.
The court ruled that because only the parents' transfer records were recorded and transferred to the account under Li Jian's name, the transfer amount of Li Jian's parents was inconsistent with the total purchase price, and the evidence was insufficient to prove that Li Jian's parents contributed to the purchase. Because the purchase and property registration of the property occurred during the marriage relationship between the two parties, and Linlin decorated and bought furniture for the property, it can be considered that both husband and wife are the same property. Li Jian's parents' contribution to the real estate can be settled as a creditor through another lawsuit. The two sides agreed to bid for real estate. In the end, Li Jian offered 850,000 yuan to acquire property rights, and Li Jian should compensate Linlin 425,000 yuan at one time.
Judge's statement: Parents contribute capital and register it as personal property.
The judge said that Article 7 of the Court's Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates: "If the property right of the property purchased by parents for their children after marriage is registered in the name of the investor's children, according to the provisions of Article 18, paragraph 3, of the Marriage Law, it can be recognized as a gift to only one of their children, and the property should be recognized as the personal property of the husband and wife." In this case, Li Jian hoped to apply the above provisions to claim that the house belongs to personal property, but the investor did not pay the house money directly to the developer, and the transfer records could not be one-to-one. Therefore, the lawsuit requested the court not to accept it and determined that the house was owned by the husband and wife.
The property given to the son by parents after notarization is still personal property at the time of divorce.
Hong Liang and Jason got married in July 2000. Hongliang claimed that the husband and wife had been separated for several years and their feelings had broken down, so he appealed to the court for divorce.
It is understood that Jason's parents own a house. In 2004, Jason's parents notarized the gift and voluntarily gave all the property rights of the house involved to his son Jason. Jason accepted the gift and the property right was registered in Jason's personal name. Jason's parents died one after another. The house involved is occupied by Jason's family of three, Hongliang and her daughter live in one room, and Jason lives in another room. Hong Liang said that this house was a gift from Jason's parents during the marriage relationship, which belongs to the joint property of husband and wife, so she asked for an equal share of the house.
The court held that regarding the property involved, judging from the transcripts of conversations made by Jason's parents and their notaries, the contents of the gift contract and the owner of the property registered in the real estate license, Jason's parents clearly stated that the property was only given to Jason, so it should be recognized as Jason's personal property. Hong Liang claimed that the property involved should be regarded as the property of husband and wife without factual basis, and the court did not support it. (All parties are pseudonyms)
The judge said: it is personal property that meets five conditions.
According to Article 18 of China's Marriage Law: "One of the following circumstances is the property of one of the spouses: (1) the pre-marital property of one of the spouses; (2) Medical expenses, living allowance for the disabled, etc. Obtained by one party due to physical injury; (3) Property determined to belong only to the husband or wife in the will or gift contract; (4) Daily necessities used exclusively by one party; (5) Other property that should be owned by one party. " Therefore, the third paragraph of this article applies to the above situation. Parents clearly stated in the gift contract that the property was given to Jason, and the gift contract was notarized and proved to be strong.
(The above answers were published on 20 17-03-24. Please refer to the actual situation for the current purchase policy. )
Comprehensive and timely real estate information, click to view.