Dahua Case Analysis | Unit welfare housing purchased during marriage, not divided at divorce

Case Summary:

The plaintiff and defendant were registered as married in 1996 and gave birth to a son, Gu Mouyi, in 1997. In June 2003, the plaintiff filed a divorce lawsuit with this court. This court issued the Civil Judgment No. (2003) Shenfu Fa Min Yi Chu Zi No. 2208, granting the divorce between the plaintiff and defendant, with the son Gu Mouyi being under the custody of the plaintiff, and the defendant paying child support of 800 yuan per month. In April 1997, the plaintiff purchased the property at XX building, XX village, Fu Rong Road from the Shenzhen Housing Bureau for a price of 97307.3 yuan. The ownership certificate provided by the plaintiff indicates that the registered share is 1/2 for both the plaintiff and defendant, and it is non-market commercial housing.

Trial process:

In this case, the plaintiff explicitly demands the confirmation that the ownership of the property in Building XXX, XX Village, belongs to them, and disagrees with the handling of the property's ownership. The plaintiff claims that the property is a welfare house allocated by their unit, the purchase price was paid off by the plaintiff, and during the marriage, the family expenses were borne by the plaintiff. The defendant has been negligent in taking care of the family and raising the child, and based on this, the plaintiff asserts the ownership of the property. The defendant does not recognize this, stating that the property is joint marital property. If the plaintiff wants to obtain the usage rights of the property, the defendant requires the plaintiff to make a one-time compensation of 2,225 yuan per month for a period of 30 years. The plaintiff disagrees with the defendant's claim.

The plaintiff claims that ten years ago, the plaintiff and the defendant filed for divorce at Futian Court. Due to the inability to contact the defendant at that time, Futian Court ruled by default to dissolve the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant. At the time of divorce, the property at XX building, XX village, XXX was not divided. Now, the defendant has returned to Shenzhen to forcibly enter the property at XX building, XX village, XXX. The plaintiff now requests the following judgments: 1. The property at XX building, XX village, XXX shall be owned by the plaintiff; 2. The defendant shall bear the litigation costs of this case.

The defendant argues that the defendant and the plaintiff have equal rights to the XX building of the XX property in XX village. If the plaintiff demands full ownership of the property rights, the defendant should be compensated with an amount equivalent to half the value of the full property rights, and the compensation funds should meet the defendant's needs for renting or purchasing a house.

Judgment result:

The right to use the property located at XX building, XX village, Shenzhen (Shen real estate No.××) before the transfer of ownership belongs to the plaintiff Li Mou. The plaintiff Li Mou compensates the defendant Guo Moujia 2000 yuan per month (compensation starts from November 2013 and ends when the property ownership is transferred, payment to be made before the 15th of each month); the case handling fee is 2233 yuan (already pre-paid by the plaintiff), with the plaintiff bearing 1116.5 yuan and the defendant bearing 1116.5 yuan.

Lawyer analysis:

In light of the circumstances of this case, the property involved in this case, XX building XXX in XX village, was purchased during the marriage of the original and defendant parties. The registered share of the property is 1/2 for each party, and the property should be considered as the joint property of the husband and wife. This property was purchased by the plaintiff through their unit as a welfare house, with a "green book" property certificate, and it should be recognized that the original and defendant parties have acquired ownership of the property.

In this case, the plaintiff does not agree to the disposition of the property ownership, therefore, the court does not handle the ownership of the property. Although the ownership has not been handled, as for the use of the house, the plaintiff claims that the use of the involved property belongs to him. Since the property has been used by the plaintiff all along, the court, based on the specific use of the house, determines that the use right before the disposition of the property ownership belongs to the plaintiff. Moreover, as the involved property is a jointly-owned property of the couple, the plaintiff should compensate the defendant accordingly for using the property. Regarding the standard of compensation, the court refers to the current market rental price of the area where the property is located and decides that the plaintiff should compensate the defendant 2,000 yuan per month until the property ownership is disposed of. In divorce litigation, property is a common target for property division, and the specific nature, ownership, and use of the house will affect the final division result.