Recently, there was a legal dispute in Beijing caused by the purchase of a house due to a "fake divorce".
Ms. Bai and Mr. Huang are a husband and wife, and in order to circumvent the commercial housing purchase restriction policy, Mr. Huang proposed a plan to buy a second house through a "fake divorce".
According to the plan, the property and vehicle after the divorce will all belong to Mr. Huang, so the two parties drafted a divorce agreement and completed the divorce registration and the registration of the change of related property.
Ms. Bai bought a new house in her own name as agreed and prepared to remarry Mr. Huang, but found that Mr. Huang refused to remarry and had started a new relationship.
After several unsuccessful communications, Ms. Bai took Mr. Huang to court to request that the divorce agreement be revoked.
However, after the trial, the court held that since Ms. Bai could not prove that there was fraud or coercion at the time of the signing of the divorce agreement, the divorce agreement should be found to be legal and valid.
The court pointed out that as a person with full capacity for civil conduct, Ms. Bai should bear corresponding responsibility for her own actions and their legal consequences.
The court stressed that there was no concept of "sham divorce" in law and that the marriage was dissolved once the divorce certificate had been obtained.
The court also reminded the public that there are many legal risks associated with "fake divorces" and that one should not try to exploit legal loopholes to achieve a certain goal, so as not to cause irreparable consequences.