Shenzhen Passionate Couples, How to Divide Jointly-Owned Property After Breakup? Dahuo Divorce Lawyer Combines Litigation and Mediation, Successfully Reach Agreement and Notarization, Settling

Introduction: Since 2020, Mr. Wang, the principal, and Ms. Chen have been in a passionate love affair. The two were inseparable and soon considered the marriage issues that would arise later in their relationship. Therefore, in 2022, they jointly invested in purchasing a property, registered in Ms. Chen's name. The two believed that they were about to embark on a beautiful marriage life. However, after purchasing the property, the two had constant disputes, and with their work-related issues leading to less frequent meetings, their feelings were no longer as intense as before. Ultimately, they inevitably reached the point of separation. Although the separation was simple, the issue of dividing the property purchased during the passionate love affair could not be agreed upon by the two. Multiple arguments and suspicions had made Mr. Wang increasingly exhausted. Therefore, in 2023, Mr. Wang sought the help of the Dao Hua Family Law Firm. After understanding the case, the Dao Hua lawyers quickly intervened, combined with their experience in handling similar cases, and adopted the "mediation as the main approach, litigation as the auxiliary approach" strategy. Ultimately, they successfully mediated a reconciliation between the two, confirming that the aforementioned property belongs to Ms. Chen, and accurately dividing the corresponding housing and renovation expenses. In the end, Mr. Wang and Ms. Chen ended their relationship with dignity, each facing a new life.

Keywords: Shenzhen marriage lawyer, cohabitation property division dispute, cohabitation property division, notarization of agreement

One, Case Review

In 2023, Mr. Wang, the principal, was introduced to the Daohua Family Law Firm by someone else. He sought legal assistance from the firm regarding the distribution of the property and other assets purchased during his relationship with Ms. Chen, as well as how to handle the division in the event of a breakup. During their romantic cohabitation, both Mr. Wang and Ms. Chen contributed half of the down payment for a house in Shenzhen. The house was registered in Ms. Chen's name, and the mortgage was jointly undertaken by both parties. Mr. Wang also personally funded the renovation of the house. After the couple broke up due to incompatibility, they were unable to reach an agreement on how to dispose of the target house. Ms. Chen believes that the down payment supported by Mr. Wang was a gift to her during the relationship, and Mr. Wang has no right to demand a refund. As for the renovation, it has been actually used for the target house, so it cannot be returned. After several unsuccessful communications, Mr. Wang sought help from the Daohua Family Law Firm. After the lawyers at Daohua received Mr. Wang, they summarized his legal consultation, created a timeline of their relationship, categorized the nature of the property, purchase time, corresponding contribution ratio, and registered right holder information, provided different solutions for different properties, and helped Mr. Wang solve the property distribution problem after cohabitation breakup.

Secondly, with the involvement of Dao Hua lawyer, the key issues of the dispute are fully sorted out as follows:

1. How should the relevant right holders correctly identify real estate purchased during cohabitation?

Although no marital relationship has been established between the two parties, how to correctly identify the rightful owner of the real estate purchased during the cohabitation period directly concerns whether the two can smoothly end this romantic and economic relationship. According to the past experience of the Daohua Family Law Firm,During the period of dating with the purpose of marriage, one party pays the full down payment for the house purchase, the property ownership is registered in the name of the other party, and the loan is taken out in the name of the other party. After the two parties broke up without getting married, in such cases, it is generally based on the facts ascertained in the case that it can be confirmed that although the property ownership is registered in the name of one party, both parties in the relationship have expressed the intention of jointly purchasing a house for the purpose of marriage. It is appropriate to identify it as joint property and divide the property according to the contributions of both parties.

Mr. Tang pointed out that how to differentiate the house purchased during cohabitation and dating when separating, different ways of purchasing a house and the registered right holder will play different roles in the final distribution of the property. Common situations include: (1) The house is fully funded by one party and registered in the name of the other party. In this case, the Daohua Marriage and Family Law Firm, based on past practical experience, analyzes that different courts will make different judgments according to the different claims of the parties. The relevant courts will consider that in this situation, the provisions of the legal regulations on betrothal gifts should be referred to. After one party pays the betrothal gift, both parties ultimately did not actually register for marriage and live together, so the registered right holder of the house should return the house to the other party. (2) Another common situation is that both parties co-fund the purchase of a house during the period of dating and cohabitation, and the house ownership is registered in both parties' names. In this case, the general court will recognize that the two parties in love co-fund the purchase of a house with the purpose of getting married, so it will be based on Article 308 of our "Civil Code": "If the co-owners do not agree on the joint ownership or common ownership of the immovable property or movable property, or the agreement is unclear, except when the co-owners have family relations, etc., it shall be deemed as joint ownership." and Article 309.The proportional co-owners shall enjoy their respective shares of the jointly-owned real property or movable property; if there is no agreement or the agreement is unclear, the shares shall be determined according to the amount of capital contribution; if the amount of capital contribution cannot be determined, it shall be deemed that they enjoy equal shares.In accordance with the provisions, in the absence of an agreement between the parties on the method of dividing the house, it is deemed that both parties have a joint tenancy in the house purchased with joint investment.

How to correctly distinguish the nature of "general expenses" and "large expenses" during the period of romance?

For ordinary couples, during the course of their relationship, expenses incurred for daily life or leisure and entertainment are necessary expenditures for maintaining and developing their feelings, and cannot be proven to be expenditures conditional on marriage. After the couple breaks up, even if one party claims a refund, the People's Court will not support this claim based on the aforementioned reasons. However, it needs to be clarified that large assets spent for the purpose of marriage are conditional gifts on the condition of marriage. When the condition of marriage cannot be realized, the gift is invalidated, and the giver has the right to demand a refund. In this case, Mr. Wang and Ms. Chen purchased the relevant house in 2023, and the subsequent chat records can also prove that the two had the intention to marry (planning the wedding, choosing the wedding hotel, etc.), indicating that at this stage, the two had reached an agreement to marry in the future. Therefore, in this case, Mr. Wang's investment in purchasing the house, repaying the mortgage, and paying for the house renovation are all conditional gifts on the premise of marriage. Now, under the final breakup of the two, Mr. Wang has the right to demand that Ms. Chen return the large expenditures made for the purpose of marriage.

Three, through comprehensive analysis and judgment, Da Hua Marriage and Family Law Firm seeks breakthrough points in cases.

1. Create a timeline of the case, sorting out the expenses and real estate investment amounts during the two individuals' romantic cohabitation. Based on the practical experience from a large number of past cases, the lawyer Dao Hua first lists and analyzes the financial expenditures of Mr. Wang and Ms. Chen during their romantic cohabitation, especially the down payment, loan repayment, and renovation costs related to the immovable property involved in this case. Secondly, according to the background of the aforementioned amount of expenditure and the payment conditions, the lawyer verifies each item with Mr. Wang one by one, combines past case experience, and distinguishes the expenditures during Mr. Wang's romantic period into general expenditures and expenditures aimed at marriage, fundamentally confirming the final return amount and return ratio. Finally, according to the dispute between Mr. Wang and Ms. Chen regarding the purchase price of the target house, a payment amount table is created to clarify the actual expenditures of all parties, while summarizing the focal points of the dispute between the two sides, facilitating subsequent mediation and litigation procedures.

2. Clarify the claims, customize a "mediation-first" plan, and intervene in mediation during the process of organizing materials. The Dahuo lawyer keenly sensed Mr. Wang's desire for an dignified breakup and, after thorough argumentation, decided to adopt a "mediation-first" approach to handling the case. After completing all expenses, the property expenditures during the romantic cohabitation between Mr. Wang and Ms. Chen were ultimately focused on the case-related property and the renovation expenses for that property. Regarding the renovation part, the Dahuo lawyer accurately judged that Mr. Wang made the renovation investment with the purpose of marriage, and the value of his investment was attached to the house through the renovation, forming an accessory phenomenon. Therefore, the renovation part has become a part of the immovable property of the house, and the value form of the house has changed, increasing new economic value. Therefore, in the case of their final breakup, the renovation expenses should be returned by Ms. Chen. Based on this, the Dahuo lawyer completed a comprehensive mediation negotiation plan.

Four, Dao Hua lawyer engaged in talks with the other party, focusing on negotiation with litigation as a supplement, and implemented a variety of legal measures, successfully promoting a peaceful separation between the two.

After the division and confirmation of all the property involved in the case, Daohua lawyer, after the relevant mediation plan was confirmed by Mr. Wang, arranged a meeting with Ms. Chen for communication. In the communication, Daohua lawyer also confirmed that Ms. Chen's true intention was to continue holding the property registered in her name, and Ms. Chen also wanted to resolve this difficult issue through a reasonable and legal means.

After listing real team operational cases and detailed case materials, Dao Hua lawyer formulated a targeted communication and negotiation plan for the case. By enumerating the team's previous successful cases and precisely controlling the property division methods during the cohabitation and dating period, the lawyer divided the expenses of both parties during their dating period in detail. After completing all the materials, Dao Hua lawyer met with Ms. Chen, and through a heart-to-heart communication, Ms. Chen also expressed a strong desire for a clear separation of this relationship. However, for Mr. Wang's early investments, Ms. Chen was initially unwilling to return them, stating that she wanted them as compensation.

After the first negotiation, Dao Hua lawyer conducted a targeted review of Ms. Chen's statements and intentions, and quickly executed litigation strategies, drafting comprehensive litigation materials, and used the team's previous successful cases as reference. After communicating with Mr. Wang, Mr. Wang expressed a desire for another round of communication and was not inclined to directly file a lawsuit. After capturing the two parties' statements, Tang lawyer quickly formulated strategies, on one hand, arranging another meeting with Ms. Chen for communication, and on the other hand, fully preparing and perfecting the case's litigation materials for submission to the court. During the second communication, Dao Hua lawyer again communicated Mr. Wang's latest communication intentions with Ms. Chen and also gave targeted litigation materials for negotiation with Ms. Chen, ultimately prompting Ms. Chen to state her willingness to return part of Mr. Wang's housing expenses. Regarding decoration expenses, she also expressed willingness to return them. Based on this, Dao Hua lawyer customized a "break-up agreement" for the two parties, finally confirming the immovable property purchased during the dating period. Mr. Wang's down payment and decoration expenses were to be fully returned by Ms. Chen. The 6 months of mortgage payments Mr. Wang had already repaid would no longer be pursued, and the subsequent mortgage loan repayments would be solely responsible by Ms. Chen. After both parties signed all the agreements, Dao Hua lawyer led both parties to complete notarization at the notary office, successfully concluding the case. The two parties peacefully separated, finally reaching an agreement on large expenses such as property, smoothly concluding the economic relationship involved in this romance, and maximizing the fastest realization of the parties' claims.

Chapter V: The Tang Code's Interpretation

Although romantic relationships are different from formal marriage, how to correctly handle the division of property during cohabitation still requires accurate operation. In this case, it is recommended that there be a clear agreement between the parties regarding the ownership of the property acquired during the cohabitation period. If there is a clear agreement, it should be handled according to the agreement of both parties. Of course, most people have not made an agreement, and when dealing with this situation, various factors should be comprehensively considered, such as whether the property was purchased with the purpose of marriage in mind during the cohabitation period, whether there is a case of one party gifting the property to the other, the payment ratio of the down payment in the housing purchase expenses, the repayment ratio and subject of the mortgage loan, and who is responsible for the renovation expenses of the house, etc., to make a comprehensive judgment on whether the property belongs to the joint property or personal property, and the final issue of the division of shares.

Mr. Tang pointed out that when it comes to the issue of returning bride price, it is necessary to comprehensively consider local public order and good customs as well as the relevant provisions of our "Civil Code", especially after the issuance of the "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Disputes over Bride Price" in February 2024, which clarifies the situations and principles for returning the bride price. Article 5, Paragraph 1 stipulates, "Where both parties have registered their marriage and lived together, and one party requests the return of the bride price given according to local customs at the time of divorce, the people's court generally does not support such a request. However, if the period of cohabitation is short and the amount of the bride price is high, the people's court may, based on the actual use of the bride price and the situation of dowry, comprehensively consider the amount of the bride price, the period of cohabitation and the situation of childbearing, the faults of both parties, and local customs, determine whether to return the bride price and the specific proportion of the return. Where, during the course of the relationship, although the marriage registration procedures have not been completed, there are clear expenditures for the bride price and related expenditures for the purpose of marriage, the above provisions may be applied for reference, and the actual situation of the case shall be considered for discretionary determination and the final return."

In summary, regarding the issue of how to divide property during the cohabitation period of a romantic relationship, Tang Lawyer suggests:

1. During the period of cohabitation in a romantic relationship, clarify the ownership of each party's property to avoid unnecessary disputes.

2. During the period of cohabitation, maintain the independence and transparency of property, such as retaining relevant payment vouchers and consulting parents and relatives for opinions on large expenditures, to avoid the mingling of personal property with jointly owned property by the two individuals.

3. During the cohabitation period of the romantic relationship, it is recommended to sign a "Cohabitation Agreement." Through the agreement, clarify the main payer and the amount of expenses, property division and shares during the romantic relationship, clearly define the economic relationship and identity relationship, and even if there are disputes between the two parties later, the rights and obligations of both parties and the ownership of the cohabitation property can be confirmed based on this agreement.

Chapter 6, Index of Relevant Laws and Regulations

Article 5 of the "Interpretation (I) on the Application of the Marriage and Family Article of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China" by the Supreme People's Court: "If a party requests the return of the betrothal gifts paid according to custom, and it is found to be in the following situations, the people's court shall support it: (1) Both parties have not registered their marriage."

Article 308 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China states: "If the co-owners of a jointly-owned immovable or movable property have not agreed on a proportional or joint ownership, or the agreement is unclear, except when the co-owners have family relationships, etc., it shall be deemed as proportional ownership."

Article 309 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China states: "The proportionate co-owners shall enjoy their respective shares in the jointly-owned real property or movable property; if there is no agreement or the agreement is unclear, the shares shall be determined according to the amount of capital contribution; if the amount of capital contribution cannot be determined, it shall be deemed that they enjoy equal shares."

Article 657 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China states, "A gift contract is a contract where the donor gratuitously transfers his property to the donee, and the donee expresses acceptance of the gift."

Article 661 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China states, "Donations may be subject to obligations. Where a donation is subject to obligations, the donee shall perform the obligations as agreed."

Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases Involving Bridal Dowry Disputes": "If both parties have registered their marriage and lived together, and one party requests the return of the dowry given according to custom at the time of divorce, the people's court generally does not support it. However, if the period of cohabitation is short and the amount of the dowry is excessive, the people's court may, based on the actual use of the dowry and the situation of the dowry, comprehensively consider the amount of the dowry, the situation of cohabitation and childbearing, and the faults of both parties, in combination with local customs, determine whether to return the dowry and the specific proportion of the return."