The woman provided her husband's derailment when the divorce, and the court ruled that there was no wrong party to get 60 % of the property

When the divorce is divided by the property of the husband and wife, the court can judge the principles of taking care of the children, the woman, and the non -wrong party; if one of the husband and wife bear more housework, the divorce has the right to request compensation from the other party. The true willingness of children at the age of 8; what is unilaterally borrowed during the marriage and exceeds the needs of the family's daily life, it does not belong to common debts ...

The Civil Code has been implemented since January 1, 2021. It has been one and a half years. What is the effect of the new rules of the above -mentioned cases?

On June 28, the Beijing First Intermediate Court released 8 typical households to introduce how to properly resolve the contradiction between family affairs during the era of the Civil Code and realize the integration of personal, property, and emotional benefits to family and family members.

The court's decision is not allowed to divorce

The two sides should be separated for one year for divorce

The case reported by the court showed that Liu and Zhu registered for marriage in December 2005, and both children were adults. Liu had sued him to divorce with Zhu, and the court ruled Liu's divorce request in May 2019. Since then, Liu once again prosecuted to ask for divorce and made it clear that he did not advocate the division of the common property of the husband and wife. After mediation by the court, the two sides could not reach an agreement.

The court held that after the first prosecution of the court was not allowed to divorce, the two sides have been separated so far. It has been over a year. The relationship between the husband and wife has not been fixed, and the marriage relationship has not improved. At present, Liu once again sued the court to divorce, and continued to filed a lawsuit to show that Liu's will to lift the marriage resolutely, and he should determine that the relationship between the husband and wife was broken. I wish the husband and wife's feelings have not ruptured, but did not provide sufficient evidence. In accordance with the law, the Civil Code should be applied to Article 1079, paragraph 5, paragraph 5, and the verdict should be given to Liu and Zhu to divorce.

The typical significance of the case is that the court's decision was not allowed to divorce the two parties after the divorce, and once again sued the divorce, the divorce should be sentenced according to law. The legal facts before the implementation of the Civil Code continued until the implementation of the Civil Code, and civil disputes caused by the facts of the legal facts were applied to the provisions of the Civil Code. After the people's court's decision was not allowed to divorce, the two sides were separated for another year. If one of them filed a divorce lawsuit again, divorce shall be allowed.

When the divorce, the woman provides her husband's derailment

The court ruled that there was no wrong party to get 60 % of the property

Li and Zhang registered in March 2001. Li sued the court to divorce Zhang. Zhang agreed to divorce, thinking that Li had a fault, and asked to divide more husband and wife's common property. Zhang submitted Li Mou's WeChat collection clip with an indecent photo of a woman and a closer daily photo.

Regarding Zhang's argument in the marriage in the marriage, the court believes that the photos provided by Zhang, because Li did not make a reasonable explanation, the above evidence can prove that Li Mou had a fault in marriage, so the division of the joint property of the husband and wife should deal with the common property of the husband and wife cope. Zhang took care of it, Zhang got 60%, and Li was divided into 40%.

The typical significance of this case is that when judging the common property of the husband and wife, the principle of taking care of the rights and interests of the wrong faulty party is fully reflected. Article 1077 of the "Civil Code" stipulates that "Divorce, the joint property of the husband and wife shall be handled by the two parties by the agreement; if the agreement is not, the people's court shall be based on the specific situation of the property and in accordance with the principle of taking care of the children, women, and non -wrong party rights. "Judgment", the increase in the principle of taking care of the right of the wrong party to divide the common property of the husband and wife, which reflects the legislative purpose of punishing the wrong party and protecting the wrong party.

Considering that one party undertakes more housework labor

Determine the other party to pay for the divorce economy compensation

Anmou and Ma registered in January 2016 and had a daughter in the marriage. Ma said that An Mou did not fulfill his family obligations, which led to Ma Mou had to take care of his children alone after he resigned. He could not work for many years. He had a devaluation of his personal work ability.

The court believes that if one of the couple has more obligations due to the breeding of children, taking care of the elderly, and assisting the other party's work, they have the right to request compensation from the other party when they divorce, and the other party shall give compensation. The specific measures shall be approved by both parties; if the agreement does not, the people's court will be judged.

In this case, when the two sides were separated, the marriage and daughter were not full of one year old, and then lived together with Ma. In the past five years, the support obligations of marriage and daughter were mainly completed by Ma. Ma ’s take the initiative to take care of the child, which aggravated the burden of raising his children alone. The court recognizes the value of Ma's housework, and comprehensively considers the time of Ma Mou's time to increase marriage and childhood, and judge that An must pay a certain amount of divorce economy compensation to pay Ma.

The typical significance of this case lies in the basis and treatment of economic compensation during divorce. The Civil Code cares about women's weak positions in the family and society and is corrected at the legal level. The compensation for the divorce economy is necessary to undertake more housework labor. The purpose is to take care of the rights and children's rights and interests during the divorce, so as to fully reflect the basic principles of the marriage law, and then realize the substantial equality of the sexes. The amount of specific compensation can be determined in conjunction with the time of raising the children alone, the income and economic conditions of both parties, and the local basic living standards.

According to the principles that are most conducive to minor children

The court respects the willingness to support the child

Li Mou and Ding Mou gave birth to Li Xiaomou. Both sides agreed to divorce, but there was controversy on the right to custody. The judge sought Li Xiaomou alone during the trial. Li Xiaomou expressed his willingness to live with his father Li.

In the second trial, Ding submitted a note written by Li Xiaomou, which was "you can also live with his mother." The court believed that although Ding Mou advocated the choice of the child as Li Mou's persecution and instability, according to the first instance, according to the first instance, he was based on the first instance. When the conversation records, when the judge talked with Li Xiaomou, his parents were not present. The entire conversation process could reflect Li Xiaomou's emotional exposure and natural expression, and there was no persecution. The court believes that although Ding Mou submitted the stripes written by Li Xiaomou in the second instance, combined with the specific situation of the case and considering factors such as the status of the unborn and the child's family status, the court accepted and respected Li Xiaomou and the judge to talk to the judge. The willingness to support was finally judged that Li Xiaomou was directly raised by Li.

The typical significance of this case is that if the divorce is to treat the children's custody right, the child should be eight years old, and they should respect their true will. In terms of the treatment of children's support after the divorce, the "Civil Code" has added the provisions of the true will in accordance with the principles that are most conducive to minor children and their children are eight years old.

Since minor children over eight years old are already people with limited civil behavior capabilities and have certain expression ability and judgment ability, when the parents of both parents over eight years old cannot reach an agreement, they should consider their children's opinions. Respect the true wishes of children. It is particularly explained that the child's opinion is not the only basis for the referee of custody rights, and it should still determine the ownership of the child custody of the child's custody according to the principle of the most conducive to adult children.

When divorcing, it will be shared with 480,000 debt together

Unilateral bonds exceed the needs of life and do not belong to the common debt

Renmou and Hou Mou broke up after marriage, and Renmou sued the court to divorce. Hou agreed to divorce and advocated Renmou to bear 480,000 yuan in debt with him.

The court believes that the husband and wife should exceed the debt of the family's daily life during the marriage relationship, and it does not belong to the joint debt of the husband and wife. In this case, the debt claimed by Hou Mou was loaned to the bank in his personal name, and the amount exceeded the daily needs of the family. The money was not used for a common life and the production and operation. The debt is not a co -debt of the husband and wife, and it should be repaid by a person of Hou.

The typical significance of this case is that in the marriage, the debt of the person who exceeds the needs of the family's daily life in the personal name is not the co -debt of the husband and wife. Article 1044 of the Civil Code of the Civil Code has added the scope of the joint debt of the husband and wife. This article clarifies the standard of identification of the joint debt of the husband and wife. Husband and wife's personal debt. While balanced protection of the interests of the creditors, it has carried out legislative protection of the interests of the unburdened side, and has a positive effect on maintaining the harmony and stability of the family, standardizing the order of transactions, and social order.

not

Recommended in the future

not

not

Source: Red Star News

- END -