Dao Hua Case Analysis | Divorce Agreement Remains Valid After Divorce

Summary of the Case

On August 3, 2005, the male party Xu Moumou and the female party Qiao Moumou registered their marriage; in May 2007, their son Xu Qing was born; on July 3, 2010, the couple, due to the breakdown of their relationship, divorced at the Civil Affairs Bureau of a district in Shenzhen, with custody of the son awarded to the female party. The Divorce Agreement stipulated that the property A purchased after marriage would belong to the male party, property B to the female party, and the male party would pay the female party a compensation of 1 million yuan for the house, to be settled by December of the same year.

In March 2011, three months after the original payment date stipulated in the Divorce Agreement, the female party had not received the payment. Despite repeated reminders, the male party delayed payment under various pretexts, including financial difficulties, and even verbally abused the female party, claiming that the female party was defrauding money under the guise of divorce and thereafter refused to answer the phone.

In April 2011, the female party received a lawsuit document from the People's Court of Bao'an District, Shenzhen, where the male party sued to revoke the content of the Divorce Agreement regarding the payment of 1 million yuan in compensation to the female party.

In May 2011, the female party sought the assistance of our team, hoping for a fair and just resolution of the matter, and demanded that the male party pay the corresponding amount as stipulated in the Divorce Agreement.

Case Focus

Can the terms of property division in the Divorce Agreement be amended or revoked after the divorce?

Case Outcome: Our side won the case

The court supported our claims in accordance with the law:

1. Order the male party to pay the female party 1 million yuan as stipulated in the Divorce Agreement;

2. Dismissed all the male party's claims.

Summary

1. When requesting to amend or revoke the terms of property division in the Divorce Agreement, or the agreement reached on property division due to divorce, one must be aware of the one-year limitation period. The limitation period refers to the period during which the right holder may legally exercise their rights, and this period generally does not interrupt, suspend, or extend for any reason. A request for amendment or revocation of the terms of property division should be made within one year after the divorce. Otherwise, if the limitation period is exceeded, the consequences of having the claim rejected may arise.

In this case, the male party sued within one year after the divorce, which did not exceed the limitation period; the court ultimately rejected the male party's claim because the male party failed to provide evidence to prove the existence of fraud, coercion, or other circumstances at the time of signing the Divorce Agreement. In practice, it is not easy to prove the existence of fraud or coercion at the time of divorce, so it is difficult to overturn the Divorce Agreement once it is signed.

The author solemnly warns all readers: Divorce is not a trivial matter; the agreement should be carefully reviewed, and signing should be done with caution, as it is difficult to change later.

2. For the joint property of the couple that was not divided at the time of divorce, if either party discovers that the other party has concealed, transferred, sold, destroyed, or forged debts to attempt to侵占 joint property, they may request a second division of the joint property.

3. The court generally does not support the division of marital assets during the marriage, but exceptions are made for certain legal reasons, such as when one party seriously damages the joint property of the couple through concealment or transfer, or when one party refuses to pay medical expenses for a person under their legal support obligation who is seriously ill, among other special circumstances.

Appendix: Relevant Laws and Regulations

1. The Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China (Explanation II)

Article 8: The terms of property division in the Divorce Agreement or the agreement reached on property division due to divorce have legal binding force on both parties.

Article 9: If the parties to the divorce agree to divorce and, within one year, regret the terms of property division and request to amend or revoke the agreement, the people's court shall accept the case.

After the people's court examines the case, if no fraud, coercion, or other circumstances are found at the time of the conclusion of the property division agreement, the people's court shall reject the party's lawsuit request in accordance with the law.

2. The Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China (Explanation III)

Article 4: During the marriage, if one party requests the division of joint property, the people's court shall not support it, except for the following major reasons that do not harm the interests of creditors:

(1) One party has concealed, transferred, sold, destroyed, or squandered joint property or forged joint debts, seriously damaging the interests of joint property;

(2) One party refuses to pay medical expenses for a person under their legal support obligation who is seriously ill.

Article 18: After the divorce, if one party sues the people's court for the division of joint property on the grounds that there are still joint properties not handled at the time of the divorce, and after review, the property is indeed joint property not involved in the divorce, the people's court shall divide the property in accordance with the law.