In modern society, young people are under pressure to get married and buy a house, and their parents will generally give more or less financial help. However, there are also many young people who regard their parents' help to fund a house, pay a down payment, and repay monthly payments as a "standard", or even a "natural obligation" of parents. There is no moral or legal support for this idea.
Brief facts of the case
Chen, 50, is engaged in sales and recently encountered an annoying incident. Because he did not buy a house for his son as promised, Lao Chen was sued by his only son Xiao Chen.
Three years ago, Lao Chen went through the divorce procedures and restarted his family. Because of this, there was some estrangement between Lao Chen and his only son, Xiao Chen.
Later, Xiao Chen met the girl he liked and began to talk about marriage. In April this year, he asked his father to pay for the purchase of a wedding house for him. Hearing that his son was going to start a family, Lao Chen was very happy and promised on the spot that he would contribute funds to help his son buy a house.
After returning home, Lao Chen carefully calculated and found that he couldn't come up with so much money, so he told his son that he couldn't afford to buy a house. Xiao Chen was very angry when he heard the news and rushed to Lao Chen's house and had a fierce quarrel with him. Under the mediation of the police at the police station, Lao Chen signed a written agreement, promising to invest 1 million yuan to buy a wedding house for his son.
However, Lao Chen did not pay the amount within the agreed time and shirked it several times. Xiao Chen couldn't bear it anymore and sued Lao Chen to the court, asking him to fulfill his promise.
During the trial, Lao Chen said that he had encountered difficulties in his business and owed a lot of bank loans, so he could not afford to help his son buy a house. Xiao Chen insisted that the agreement was a contract for the purchase of a house and not a gift, and was therefore irrevocable. Finally, after the trial, the court found that the agreement between Lao Chen and Xiao Chen was a contract for the purchase of a house by capital and not a gift contract.
Heard by the courts
After the trial, the court held that according to the agreement signed by the two parties, the agreement between Lao Chen's father and son was actually a gift contract. According to the law, a gift contract is a contract in which the donor gives his property to the donee free of charge, and the donee expresses his acceptance of the gift. The donor may revoke the gift before the transfer of rights to the gifted property.
In this case, both parties unanimously confirmed that the purchase price of RMB 1 million had not been paid, so Lao Chen enjoyed the right of revocation at will in accordance with the law. As the donor, Lao Chen has the right to revoke the gift before the right to the donated property is transferred. Since Lao Chen failed to pay the money within the time limit agreed in the agreement, and expressed his refusal to perform the agreement by his actual behavior, and at the same time again stated that he would revoke the gift during the trial of the case, the agreement involved in the case has been revoked.
According to the law, once a contract is revoked, the parties no longer enjoy the agreed rights and obligations. Therefore, Xiao Chen had no right to request Lao Chen to continue to perform the contract.
In summary, the court ruled to reject Xiao Chen's claim in accordance with the law.
What the judge said
1. Legal perspective.
Nature of Agreement: According to the description, a written agreement was signed between Lao Chen and his son, promising to contribute to the purchase of a matrimonial house for his son. The nature of this agreement can be legally recognized as a gift contract or a loan contract. The gift contract stated that Lao Chen was willing to transfer the funds or property to his son free of charge, while the loan contract stated that Lao Chen was willing to give his son a sum of money, but the son needed to return the money to Lao Chen in the future. The crux of the matter lies in the specifics of the agreement, and how both parties understand it.
Revocation of agreement: If the agreement is recognized as a gift contract, then the donor, Lao Chen, has the right to revoke the gift before the transfer of property rights. According to the description, Lao Chen did not make the payment as agreed in the agreement, which may indicate that Lao Chen has revoked the gift agreement with actual actions.
Outcome of the lawsuit: If Xiao Chen insists on taking Lao Chen to court, the court will judge the nature of the agreement based on the evidence provided by both parties and the specific content of the agreement, and whether Lao Chen has the right to revoke the agreement.
Second, the practical operation angle.
Communication and mediation: In legal disputes, the lawyer's priority is to resolve the dispute through communication and mediation as much as possible. If the communication between Xiao Chen and Lao Chen can solve the problem, then the lawyer can assist them in reaching a settlement agreement.
Evidence collection: If a dispute needs to be resolved through legal means, the lawyer needs to collect all relevant evidence, including the text of the agreement, the correspondence records of the parties, bank transfer records, etc. This evidence will help the court to understand the cause and course of the dispute.
Legal defense: In court, the lawyer needs to represent Xiao Chen or Lao Chen in legal defense. This may include defending the understanding of the agreement, the legality of Lao Chen's revocation of the gift, etc.