but between co-owners unless otherwise agreed.

DavidCadogan.ca Forums » DavidCadogan.ca

but between co-owners unless otherwise agreed.

(1 post)

Started 10 years ago by nlahl16291

Tags:

nlahl16291
Member

 Court that, without the consent of the wife of the man, the gifts of the matrimonial property, the behavior is not valid because the recipient has the transfer of real estate again, the plaintiff can not actually recover the property, so the recipient according to the judgment of the market value of the property half liability Shenzhen Special Zone Daily reporter Wu Tao correspondent Tan Xiaopeng [Playback] case Without telling his wife the free gifts of real estate Recipient, who in turn resell the property Plaintiff: A (female, co-owner) Defendant: B (Female recipient) Defendant: C (M, co-owner) October 12, 1995, the plaintiff armor (his wife) and the defendant propionate (husband) in Longgang District Civil Affairs Bureau registration of marriage. March 27, 1996, the plaintiff and the defendant methyl propionate during the marriage relationship continues to exist bought in the Futian District, Shenzhen flowers Road of flowers apartment buildings × × room number, but the prop room only one person is registered in the name of the defendant, the nature of the purchase as domestic sales of commercial housing, the transfer mode is the sale, registration transfer price of 795,870 yuan. July 28, 2006, without the consent of methyl propionate under the consent of the above property free gift of their female subordinates B, and for the transfer of property rights registration. September 13, 2006, B will be sold to the outsider Wang said property, and for the transfer of property rights registration. December 15,babyliss pro perfect curl, 2006, the plaintiff sued A court that the two defendants violated the plaintiff's legal rights, requesting the court to: 1, found the defendant prop flowers apartment will be located in Futian District, Shenzhen flowers Road. × × Building Room Number gift accused B acts invalid; 2, B defendant compensation to the plaintiff's property value above 1.0867 million yuan; 3,http://www.alzbrain.org/family_caregiver.cgi, the defendant shall pay the cost of litigation. Course of the proceedings,http://store.shopping.yahoo.co.jp/cio/m0802700003.html, the plaintiff apply to the court commissioned to assess the value of real estate agencies involved in assessment. Accordingly, the court determined through a public agency involved in the assessment Yao Zhu assessed value of the property. Followed by assessment agencies issued a "Real Estate Appraisal Report" finds property involved in July 28, 2006 (ie the date of the gift behavior) the open market value of 1.0654 million yuan. [] The focus of controversy Property gift legality of acts A plaintiff believes connotation and property relations between husband and wife by the marriage law clearly stipulates that the couple's joint property, especially large property, which must be approved by both spouses disposition common consent, partial interest in any case because one can not enjoy the common property the husband or the wife is entitled to recognition of their separate dispose part of its interest, if the husband or the wife alone deal with their own partial interest, as long as the other party a corresponding request, it should restore the original state of the jointly owned property. In this case, can be returned in kind on the return in kind, can not be returned in kind, it must compensate the original value of the jointly owned property. B. The defendant believes that in an interview with the defendant C's gift, the rights of people to see clearly written on real estate license is a person accused propylene, propylene enjoy one hundred percent of the property rights, in this case, the donation notarized before get involved in a real estate property, this behavior is perfectly legal gift. Moreover, its prop and not to claim compensation, have no right to claim compensation armor. [Ref] grounds Common property right disposition gift unilateral acts shall be void Futian District People's Court, after hearing that, according to the identified facts, the plaintiff and the defendant A prop on October 12, 1995, registration of marriage, the establishment of legitimate and effective marital relationship; involved in real estate in March 27, 1996 transferred by way of purchase registered to the defendant prop name, according to the law belong to jointly owned property a plaintiff and the defendant C's. In accordance with relevant laws and regulations, the total disposition of real estate must be approved by the consent of all joint owners, the defendant without the plaintiff agreed to prop belonging to the couple jointly owned property as a gift accused B, shall be void behavior. At the same time, though involved in real estate has been registered to the defendant under the name of B, but B defendant accepted the gift of the property-based approach is not for sale at a reasonable price, regardless of whether it is aware of the marital relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, and their behavior do not meet Real estate acquired in good faith the provisions of the system, the plaintiff is entitled to recover such property. Since the defendant has been involved in real estate re-acetic transfer, the outsider Wang has acquired through purchase at a reasonable price and handled the transfer of ownership of real estate registration, the plaintiff has been unable to recover the original real estate, so the plaintiff requested the defendant to B according to the market value of the property liability, legal and reasonable, the court support. But the plaintiff as one person, the only part of its interest was entitled to exercise its right to request. A view of marriage the plaintiff and the defendant C's subsisting total relationship does not end, unable to share specific division, it is processed according to the law with reference to the principle of equal portions, estimating the plaintiff a 50% interest in the property, it is entitled to an adequate compensation for 50% of the value of the property, that is 532,700 yuan. Please tell the full equivalent of the original value of the property compensation,karen millen dress, lack of legal basis for the court not support more than some. The defendant prop legally summoned by the court without good reason, refuses to appear in the proceedings, deemed a waiver of the rights of the defense, which should bear their own adverse legal consequences. [Ref] Results Donee compensate the plaintiff 530,000 yuan For these reasons, the Futian District People's Court in accordance with the "Civil Law" Article 130, "Civil Law" Article 78, "Property Law" Article 97, Article 106, "Marriage" Article VIII, 17, "Supreme Court opinion on the implementation of <People's Republic of China Civil Law> number of issues" Article 90 of the regulations,karen millen sale, ruling as follows: First, that the accused agreed to methyl propionate without the plaintiff is located flowers apartment Futian District, Shenzhen flowers Road of Dong × × grant the defendant's behavior B room number is invalid; Second, the defendant B should be the date of entry into force of the decision within ten days 532,700 yuan compensation for loss of property to the plaintiff armor; Third, dismissed the plaintiff armor the remaining claims; such as the payment of money to fulfill the obligations specified in the judgment by the defendant Yi Wei period, in conformity with the provisions of Article thirty-two of the "People's Republic of China Civil Procedure law," pay double interest on the debt during the delay in performance. After the first trial, both sides appeal. Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court, after hearing that the second trial of first instance to ascertain the facts clearly, correctly applies the law verdict: dismissed the appeal and upheld the original verdict. 【Related Links】 "People's Republic of China Civil Law" Article 78 Property may share by two or more citizens or legal persons. A total divided by shares and co-ownership. By shares in accordance with their respective shares of the total share of property rights and assume obligations. Common owners shall enjoy the right to joint property, obligations. Press the parts of the common property of each co-owner is entitled to withdraw his own share or transfer its ownership. However, when sold to any other person under the same conditions, priority purchase rights. "People's Republic of China Property Law" Article 97 of the disposition of real or personal property as well as a total of total real estate or chattel for major repairs, and shall be approved by more than two thirds of the share by shares or all joint tenants agree, but between co-owners unless otherwise agreed. Article 106 No person shall dispose of real estate or movable property assigned to the assignee, the owner is entitled to recover; except otherwise provided by law, the following circumstances, the assignee shall acquire ownership of the realty or chattel : (A) the assignee or transferee of the immovable good faith when movable property; (B) the transfer at a reasonable price,karen millen sale; (3) The transfer of immovable or movable property should be registered in accordance with the law have been registered, registration is not required have been delivered to the transferee. Transferee of the immovable or movable property in accordance with the preceding paragraph, the original owner is entitled to no right person making the request for damages. Property rights of other parties acquired in good faith, before referring to two provisions. "People's Republic of China Marriage Law" Article XVII couple in marriage acquired during the existence of the following property, jointly owned by all: (A) wages and bonuses; (Ii) production and business income; Income (c) intellectual property rights; (D) property obtained from inheritance or gift, except as provided for in Article 18 of this third term; (V) other jointly owned property. Husband and wife jointly owned property, the right to equal treatment. "Supreme Court opinion on the implementation of <People's Republic of China Civil Law> number of issues" in Article 90 of the co-ownership relationship ends, the division of common property, there is an agreement, according to the protocol processing; no agreement should be based on aliquots treatment principle, and considering co-owner of the common property of the contribution, appropriate care total production, the actual needs of life and so on. But division of matrimonial property should be dealt with in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Marriage Law. [Notes] judge Real estate acquired in good faith are protected by law In recent years, as housing prices rise, real estate has become a staple in people's lives property disputes arising from real estate to generate increasing. This case was one of a total of unauthorized disposal of property disputes caused total property, correctly handle the case, there must be a correct understanding of the following issues: Not yet obtained no right to dispose of the property of another person, the right holder shall not be ratified without a contract entered into after the disposition of the disposition, the act is invalid Is generally believed, though involved in real estate registered in the name of one prop, but because of the real estate department during the marriage relationship continues to exist later,karen millen outlet, according to the jointly owned property belonging to the plaintiff and the defendant methyl propionate, and methyl propionate without the consent of the husband and wife jointly owned property belonging gift to B, the behavior is not valid. Therefore, from a legal state, the rights of people not involved in the property B, have no right to transfer the property, in accordance with the relevant provisions of contract law, no right to dispose of the property of another person, the rights of people not to ratify without disposition concluding a contract after yet obtained the power of the act is invalid. Therefore, the defendant B will re-transfer of the property involved in the act itself is not valid behavior, however, as the assignee of the transferee of the property when Wang is well-intentioned, and is reasonably priced transfer, the two sides in accordance with the legal provisions of the Real Estate Transfer registration, such acts have been in full compliance with the provisions of the system of real estate acquired in good faith, and therefore the assignee Wang has lawfully acquired the ownership of the property. In this case, the original owner can not dispose of the person making the request for damages. However the present case, propionic and acetic same infringer, together against the interests of the plaintiff A, although not as a co-plaintiff prop, but armor as joint tenants, from the terms of the legal sense, may be separately to the owner's identity B request for damages. In joint tenancy relationship is terminated, the division of common property, there is an agreement, according to protocol processing; there is no agreement, it should be treated in accordance with the principle of equal portions Generally believed by the outsider Wang has been involved in real estate acquired in good faith by the institution legally acquired ownership as joint tenants of the A, C has lost the jointly owned property, the loss is due to common reason tenants prop unauthorized disposition, If we do not value the property is divided between the co-owners,http://wx.jazzsynth.com/wxcgi/kizai/sunkizai.cgi?mode=form&no=57&page=2/ay, unless the cause of divorce between two people or a total value of the property involved in the case did not carry out the agreement and compensation division, plaintiff suffered losses will never be able to get relief. According to Article 99 of the "People's Republic of China Property Law": "There can not be agreed upon by dividing total real or personal property in order to maintain a total relationship, it should be as agreed,http://llo3ll.s35.xrea.com/yza-dou/88club/apeboard_plus.cgi/apeboard_plus.cgi?command=read_message&msgnum=790/, but there are people there are serious grounds need to split, you can split request ; there is no agreement or the agreement is not clear, by shares may at any time request partition, joint tenants on the basis of a total loss or a major reason to split when divided by partition may request harm to any other person, should be given compensation. "As has been involved in real estate ownership legally acquired by a bona fide acquisition system by the outsider Wang, a, C has lost the property involved in the case of joint ownership, in respect of which a single property, both sides have lost a total basis, therefore, armor rights as the aggrieved party is entitled to request the value of the property is divided between the parties,http://www.clarityenglish.com/englishonline/index.php?item/create_form/1, the right to request compensation for their relative who has an interest portion. As its share of the rights enjoyed due only in respect of the property involved, the parties to the co-ownership of the property has been terminated in accordance with "the Supreme Court opinion on the implementation of <People's Republic of China Civil Law> number of issues" Article 90 provisions in the co-ownership relationship ends, the division of common property, there is an agreement,http://store.shopping.yahoo.co.jp/uchiyama-sports/yon-shwmc30-a.html, according to the protocol processing; there is no agreement, it should be treated in accordance with the principle of equal portions. Therefore, the court discretion A plaintiff involved in the case of real estate in accordance with a 50% share ownership. The plaintiffs believe that its response to the full value of the property involved in the ownership and enjoyment of recourse, this view is a misunderstanding of the relationship between the joint owners. Only in respect of the property involved in the case, the A,http://sportsfan.jpn.org/cgi-kban/sunbbs.cgi?mode=form&no=65&page=2, C sides have lost the foundation for the joint ownership of property, should be based on the principle of equal portions, divided between the co-owners share rights, so far, each of the joint owners may exercise their respective rights to be jointly exercise their rights,http://cdurable.info/spip.php?article2760, but human rights as a prop to the case proceedings, still did not advocate its grants act void or revoke the gift advocate behavior intention, nor the identity of the plaintiff to the common people and to the recipient B claim any rights. The plaintiff requested the defendant to the full value of the property in accordance with acetic Total compensation for all losses, it is actually its own behalf, advocating the rights of other co-owners, apparently no legal basis. (Wu Shuang) 

Posted 10 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.