The Judge Said That The New Interpretation Of The Law Was A One-Sided Misinterpretation Of The Woman Being Cleared Out Of Household.

After the supreme law officially promulgated the judicial interpretation of marriage law (three), the issue of the distribution of property rights between husband and wife has aroused heated debate among the community. Many people doubt that the new regulations will reduce the cost of divorce, encourage men's divorce motivation and weaken the protection of women's rights and interests.

Yesterday, Chen Changyi, a judge of the court of Haidian, interpreted this view and suggested that women should be from the court.

Divorce property disposal depends on the agreement between the two parties first.

The misreading of the pre paid down payment marriage loan to the property owner is unfavorable to the woman.

Some people questioned that because the current marital status in China is usually paid by the man at the time of marriage, the house is ready to pay for the bride's room. After the marriage, the two people jointly repay the loan. This kind of regulation actually makes the room two empty after the divorce, which reduces the cost of the divorce of the man, and is not conducive to the protection of the property rights and interests of the women after marriage.

[interpretation] judge Chen said, in fact, this clause is not a simple mechanical way to deal with the situation of the first payment of the loan before marriage, but in accordance with the principle of respecting the agreement of the parties concerned.

Even if no agreement can be reached, the court can only "decide" the property.

In addition, in the division of common property, the principle of "taking care of children and women's rights and interests" is in accordance with the marriage law.

If the property belongs to the man, the woman may have housing difficulties or life difficulties when she divorces. The marriage law also stipulates that "if one side lives in difficulty, the other party shall give appropriate help from personal property such as housing".

Defining property relations is conducive to settling disputes.

After misreading, the parents' contribution to purchase their children's belongings is their personal property, which encourages the boy's affair and divorce impulse.

This provision in judicial interpretation has indeed changed the usual practice of parents' common property in the past when parents gave their children property after marriage.

Some people question that when our newly married couple are married, they usually invest their parents in preparing new houses. They should be donated to both sides. If they belong to the male only, the cost of the divorce will be reduced and the man's affair and divorce impulse will be encouraged. Even if the man makes a mistake, he will give the compensation to the property that has already appreciated, and the woman will not be protected.

[interpretation] judge Chen believes that in real life, parents buy money for their children to buy houses. They often pour all their savings into their homes. Generally, they will not sign written agreements with their children. If they are divorced, they will be identified as husband and wife common property, which will infringe upon the interests of parents who have contributed to the purchase of houses.

The registration of real estate in the name of the parents of the parents of the parents who purchase the house is reasonable and reasonable, taking into account China's national conditions and social norms.

This approach puts the property relationship in a clear way, avoiding the ambiguity of property rights and the complexity of disputes during divorce. In the long run, it is conducive to the rationality and stability of marriage.

In addition, the above provisions do not negate the principle of divorce fault compensation in the marriage law.

Want to revoke the principle of fairness before giving the gift

It is not conducive to protecting the rights and interests of women to make a mistake before reading a marriage or giving it away before marriage.

The sixth provision of the judicial interpretation stipulates that when the marriage is in existence or in the course of marriage, the other party will give the real estate property to the other side, and the court can return it in accordance with the provisions of the contract law before pferring the property.

Some voices believe that if the man had promised to give the woman the

[interpretation] Chen said that in fact, the contractual relationship between the parties should be handled in accordance with the provisions of our contract law, even between prospective couples and couples.

The protection of the right of revocation of the donor before the donation is in accordance with the principle of fairness. It is a common rule in the world and does not deliberately protect the rights and interests of the woman to obtain housing.

If the man agrees to grant the property to the woman and take the notarization formalities, the man can not revoke it arbitrarily, and the woman can apply for compulsory execution, which is protected by law.

It should be noted that for the donation contract which has been notarized, the man is not required to perform unconditionally.

The court will decide whether or not the donor has fulfilled the gift obligation according to the specific circumstances, according to whether the gift contract has the gift conditions, whether the donor is poor or whether the donor has a statutory cancellation right, which is also necessary for the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the man.