The issue of the return of love benefits Part 2
Q3: Does it constitute unjust enrichment?
Unjust enrichment refers to the acquisition of benefits without legal basis. In a romantic relationship, in order to cultivate affection, the payment that does not exceed the scope of daily interaction is mostly regarded as an act of gifting, rather than an act without legal basis.
If the gift is invalid, then the legal basis for obtaining the property is lost, and it is considered unjust enrichment.
The main reasons that lead to the invalidity of the gift are:1The donor is a person with no capacity for civil conduct, for rough example: the donor is under the age of eight or a mentally ill person;
2.Violation of mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, for example: the deceived payment of love fraud is invalid;
3.Violation of public order and good order, for example: extramarital affair payment.
Among them, extramarital affair benefits have different return rules according to different circumstances.
Hypothesis 1A is married, and a is in love with B outside of marriage, and A gives B property. Because A disposes of marital property without authorization, A's spouse has the right to demand that B return the portion that A has no right to gift to A's spouse, usually half of the share. For A's own half share, (2023) Yun 05 Min Zhong No. 163 believes that the distribution of the disposition of the jointly owned property should extend to the property as a whole, and the husband and wife should jointly negotiate it. The gift is invalid if it violates public order and good customs, and the donor is to be judged to return part of it, considering that the donor is at fault. (2023) E 07 Min Zhong No. 416 Judgment held that the gift to the donee for the purpose of having an improper relationship between men and women exceeded the scope of daily life needs, and his act of donating the joint property of the husband and wife to the donee not only violated the provisions of the law, but also harmed the property rights and interests of one of the spouses, and the gift was invalid in accordance with the law. In this case, the donee acquired the property free of charge, which did not meet the statutory constitutive requirements for bona fide acquisition, and the judgment was made to return all of it.
Hypothesis 2A is married, A is in love with B outside of marriage, B gives A property, and B is unknowing. Because A conceals her marital situation and associates with B, she may be suspected of fraud. According to the relevant regulations of Zhejiang Province, it is a crime to have an illegal amount of more than 6,000 yuan. In the case (2020) E Min Shen No. 4184, it was held that there was a fact that the donor and the donee gave each other's property in the course of their relationship, but the donor gave the donee property during the period of love with the donee for the purpose of marrying the donee when the donee concealed the fact that he was married, and the donee had no legal basis for receiving the donor's property and should be returned. This is actually a return of a conditional gift.
Hypothesis 3Case (2022) Yun 05 Min Zhong No. 1744 held that the donor clearly knew that the donee was not divorced, and the purpose of the transfer was to request the donee to divorce, so as to achieve the purpose of marrying the donee, which violated public order and good customs and was invalid from the beginning. Since both the plaintiff and the defendant were at fault, and the degree of fault could not be difficult to determine the size of the responsibility, both parties shared the fault equally and returned 50% of the amount.
Wen Ying Kelly lawyer.
One person's private opinion, for reference only, welcome to send a private message**.