Viewpoint | If a divorce is filed after signing a "divorce property division agreement", how is the validity of the agreement determined in divorce proceedings?
Published:
2023-02-09
Basic case Mr. Wang and Ms. Zhang registered for marriage in August 2006 and had a daughter after marriage. In April 2019, Mr. Wang and Ms. Zhang signed a "property division agreement" under the witness of witnesses, which made arrangements for the division of common property and debts in the future divorce. At the same time, it was agreed that "in the future, whether it is a divorce by agreement or a divorce by litigation, the division of property and debts shall be carried out in accordance with this agreement". Mr. Wang filed a lawsuit for divorce in July 2019, and the court ruled that divorce was not allowed. In March 2020, Mr. Wang again sued the court for divorce, demanding the division of joint property and debts after marriage. Ms. Zhang believes that it should be handled in accordance with the "Property Division Agreement" signed by both parties. Judgment of first instance The court of first instance held that the property division agreement signed by both parties based on the principle of voluntariness and based on the true intention was legal and valid. Both parties clearly agreed that both parties should divide property and debts according to the contents of the agreement, and both parties should perform their respective obligations according to the contents of the agreement. Therefore, the court of first instance decided to divide the common property and debts of both parties in accordance with the contents of the Property Division Agreement. Appeal Opinion Mr. Wang believes that the "Property Division Agreement" is not an expression of its true intention, but was signed after making compromises and concessions to Ms. Zhang in order to end the marriage as soon as possible. According to the Supreme People's Court on the application<中华人民共和国婚姻法>The Interpretation of Certain Issues (III) the provisions of Article 14, "If the parties reach a property division agreement conditional on registering a divorce or going to the people's court to agree on a divorce, if the two parties fail to agree on a divorce, and one party repents in the divorce proceedings, the people The court shall determine that the property division agreement has not taken effect, and divide the joint property of the husband and wife according to the actual situation", the court of second instance shall determine that the Property Division Agreement has not entered into force. judgment of second instance The court of second instance held that the property division agreement was reached by both parties on the basis of equality and voluntariness, which was the true intention of both parties; the content of the agreement did not involve the identity relationship, but only made an agreement on the division of the common property and common debts of husband and wife, and the content did not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, did not infringe upon the interests of the state, the collective and the third party, and did not violate public order and good customs, the property division agreement shall be confirmed to be legal and valid. Mr. Wang's proposal should be in accordance with the Supreme People's Court on the application of<中华人民共和国婚姻法>Article 14 of the Interpretation of Certain Issues (III) that the "Property Division Agreement" is invalid. This court believes that the premise of applying the above judicial interpretation is that the parties reach a "property division agreement conditional on divorce by agreement". In this case, the "Property Division Agreement" is not conditional on divorce by agreement, but stipulates that no matter "divorce by agreement" or "divorce by litigation", both parties should comply with the agreement on the implementation of the property division agreement, and both parties did not choose to divorce by agreement, but filed a lawsuit for divorce. Therefore, the above judicial interpretation is not applicable to this case. Mr. Wang's appeal reason cannot be established, and this court will not support it. The appeal was rejected and the original sentence was upheld. Lawyer's statement The original Supreme People's Court on the application.<中华人民共和国婚姻法>The "Interpretation of Certain Issues" (III) has been repealed, and the "Supreme People's Court on the Application<中华人民共和国民法典>Article 69 of the (I) of Interpretation of Marriage and Family: "If the parties reach an agreement on the disposal of property and debts on the condition of divorce by agreement or divorce mediation in the people's court, if the divorce between the two parties fails and one party goes back on his word in the divorce proceedings, the people's court shall determine that the agreement on the disposal of property and debts has not taken effect, according to the actual situation, in accordance with the provisions of articles 1087 and 1089 of the civil code, the judgment" took over the original article 14 and made relevant amendments. Lawyers suggest that the parties should pay special attention when signing such divorce agreements. First, they should carefully consider the terms of the agreement involving their own rights and obligations, and then sign them. Secondly, for property agreements that are beneficial to one's own party, one can sign an internal property agreement without the word divorce and the meaning of divorce. Third, in this case, if the divorce property division agreement is also applicable to litigation divorce, it can be clearly agreed in the agreement, even if the agreement fails to divorce, the content of the agreement is still valid, and both parties shall not go back on their word, and the divorce agreement is also applicable in the litigation divorce; finally, the divorce dispute case seems simple, but actually involves all aspects, involving the identity of the husband and wife, the custody of the child, the determination and division of common property, the distribution of claims and debts and other legal professional issues, the parties had better draft the relevant divorce agreement after consulting a lawyer, ensure that their legitimate rights and interests are maximized.</中华人民共和国民法典></中华人民共和国婚姻法></中华人民共和国婚姻法></中华人民共和国婚姻法>
Basic case
Mr. Wang and Ms. Zhang registered for marriage in August 2006 and had a daughter after marriage. In April 2019, Mr. Wang and Ms. Zhang signed a "property division agreement" under the witness of witnesses, which made arrangements for the division of common property and debts in the future divorce. At the same time, it was agreed that "in the future, whether it is a divorce by agreement or a divorce by litigation, the division of property and debts shall be carried out in accordance with this agreement". Mr. Wang filed a lawsuit for divorce in July 2019, and the court ruled that divorce was not allowed. In March 2020, Mr. Wang again sued the court for divorce, demanding the division of joint property and debts after marriage. Ms. Zhang believes that it should be handled in accordance with the "Property Division Agreement" signed by both parties.
Judgment of first instance
The court of first instance held that the property division agreement signed by both parties based on the principle of voluntariness and based on the true intention was legal and valid. Both parties clearly agreed that both parties should divide property and debts according to the contents of the agreement, and both parties should perform their respective obligations according to the contents of the agreement. Therefore, the court of first instance decided to divide the common property and debts of both parties in accordance with the contents of the Property Division Agreement.
Appeal Opinion
Mr. Wang believes that the "Property Division Agreement" is not an expression of its true intention, but was signed after making compromises and concessions to Ms. Zhang in order to end the marriage as soon as possible. According to the Supreme People's Court on the application<中华人民共和国婚姻法>The Interpretation of Certain Issues (III) the provisions of Article 14, "If the parties reach a property division agreement conditional on registering a divorce or going to the people's court to agree on a divorce, if the two parties fail to agree on a divorce, and one party repents in the divorce proceedings, the people The court shall determine that the property division agreement has not taken effect, and divide the joint property of the husband and wife according to the actual situation", the court of second instance shall determine that the Property Division Agreement has not entered into force.
judgment of second instance
The court of second instance held that the property division agreement was reached by both parties on the basis of equality and voluntariness, which was the true intention of both parties; the content of the agreement did not involve the identity relationship, but only made an agreement on the division of the common property and common debts of husband and wife, and the content did not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, did not infringe upon the interests of the state, the collective and the third party, and did not violate public order and good customs, the property division agreement shall be confirmed to be legal and valid. Mr. Wang's proposal should be in accordance with the Supreme People's Court on the application of<中华人民共和国婚姻法>Article 14 of the Interpretation of Certain Issues (III) that the "Property Division Agreement" is invalid. This court believes that the premise of applying the above judicial interpretation is that the parties reach a "property division agreement conditional on divorce by agreement". In this case, the "Property Division Agreement" is not conditional on divorce by agreement, but stipulates that no matter "divorce by agreement" or "divorce by litigation", both parties should comply with the agreement on the implementation of the property division agreement, and both parties did not choose to divorce by agreement, but filed a lawsuit for divorce. Therefore, the above judicial interpretation is not applicable to this case. Mr. Wang's appeal reason cannot be established, and this court will not support it. The appeal was rejected and the original sentence was upheld.
Lawyer's statement
The original Supreme People's Court on the application.<中华人民共和国婚姻法>The "Interpretation of Certain Issues" (III) has been repealed, and the "Supreme People's Court on the Application<中华人民共和国民法典>Article 69 of the (I) of Interpretation of Marriage and Family: "If the parties reach an agreement on the disposal of property and debts on the condition of divorce by agreement or divorce mediation in the people's court, if the divorce between the two parties fails and one party goes back on his word in the divorce proceedings, the people's court shall determine that the agreement on the disposal of property and debts has not taken effect, according to the actual situation, in accordance with the provisions of articles 1087 and 1089 of the civil code, the judgment" took over the original article 14 and made relevant amendments.
Lawyers suggest that the parties should pay special attention when signing such divorce agreements. First, they should carefully consider the terms of the agreement involving their own rights and obligations, and then sign them. Secondly, for property agreements that are beneficial to one's own party, one can sign an internal property agreement without the word divorce and the meaning of divorce. Third, in this case, if the divorce property division agreement is also applicable to litigation divorce, it can be clearly agreed in the agreement, even if the agreement fails to divorce, the content of the agreement is still valid, and both parties shall not go back on their word, and the divorce agreement is also applicable in the litigation divorce; finally, the divorce dispute case seems simple, but actually involves all aspects, involving the identity of the husband and wife, the custody of the child, the determination and division of common property, the distribution of claims and debts and other legal professional issues, the parties had better draft the relevant divorce agreement after consulting a lawyer, ensure that their legitimate rights and interests are maximized.
Key words:
Related News
Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Region
Address: Floor 55-57, Jinan China Resources Center, 11111 Jingshi Road, Lixia District, Jinan City, Shandong Province
