News
Can a divorced and remarried wife take back 300000 yuan gifted by her husband to her lover？
Time:2025-08-28 Views:1000
case introduction
Plaintiff: Dong, female, residing in a certain district of Beijing.
Defendant: Zhang, female, residing in a certain district of Beijing.
Defendant: Huang, male, residing in a certain district of Beijing.
Huang and Dong got married in 1987 and have two children after marriage. In 2002, Huang resigned from his job and started his own business. In May 2004, his wife Dong discovered that Huang had been in an improper relationship with a female employee of his former employer, Zhang, for a long time, and therefore divorced him. Two months later, both parties felt sorry for their child who was still studying, so they remarried. But later, Dong learned that Huang had given Zhang 300000 yuan through various means during their marriage. After a conflict arose between the two parties, Dong demanded that Huang retrieve the 300000 yuan, but Huang naturally refused to ask Zhang for it. Therefore, Dong approached Zhang to resolve the issue. On November 23, 2005, Dong had a dispute with Huang and Zhang over 300000 yuan in the office of the company. Dong recorded the entire conversation on MP3, but in the recording, Zhang always claimed to have only received the 200000 yuan gifted by Huang. On November 29, 2005, Dong filed a lawsuit with the court, demanding that Zhang return 300000 yuan. And provided MP3 recording materials as evidence to the court in court.
The defendant Zhang believes that Dong's unauthorized recording has infringed upon his legitimate rights and interests, and the evidence obtained cannot be used as evidence. But Dong also provided a bank voucher for the remittance from Huang's account to Zhang's account, with a total amount of 320000. With this evidence, the court ultimately did not accept Zhang's defense. Afterwards, Zhang claimed that the gift of 300000 yuan in property to himself was a voluntary act of Huang. The gift had already been completed and the money had been used for daily expenses and outings with Huang. He was now unable to repay the money and requested the court to dismiss the plaintiff's lawsuit.
Trial results
The court believes that according to the rules of evidence, the defendant Zhang has objections to the audio evidence submitted by the plaintiff Dong. However, the court has confirmed through commissioned appraisal that the audio recording has not been edited. At the same time, the court believes that the evidence does not infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of others, so it is accepted by the court. In addition, Dong also provided the court with relevant bank vouchers to prove the monetary relationship between Huang and Zhang, which was recognized by the court. Zhang claimed that the money had already been used for daily life and shared expenses with Huang, but because no corresponding evidence was provided to the court to explain the reasonable destination of the money, the court did not support the defendant's defense. Because the 300000 yuan in dispute is the joint property of Huang and Dong, without Dong's consent, Huang privately gifted the money to Zhang, violating Dong's right to dispose of the joint property of the couple. Therefore, the court believes that Dong has the right to reclaim the property.
After the judgment of the first instance court, Zhang appealed to the higher court if he was dissatisfied. Final judgment of the second instance court: Reject the appeal and uphold the original verdict.
Key points of dispute and legal application in the case
The focus of the dispute in this case is whether the wife has the right to demand the return of the property gifted by the husband to Zhang during the existence of the marriage relationship?
Firstly, it is necessary to clarify the nature of the property gifted by Huang to Zhang. According to the provisions of the Marriage Law, the wages, bonuses, and other income obtained during the existence of the marriage relationship should usually be recognized as joint property of the couple, and the deposits made during this period should also be considered joint property of the couple. Unless Huang has evidence to prove that the 300000 yuan given to Zhang was transferred from his personal pre marital account, it should be recognized as joint property of the couple, which means that the ownership of this 300000 yuan is jointly owned by Dong and Huang. Without the consent of another co owner, Mr. Dong, Huang illegally gifted this large sum of property to a third party, which infringed upon the legitimate rights and interests of Mr. Dong. According to the Supreme People's Court's "On Implementing Enforcement<民法通则>According to the "Opinions on Several Issues (Trial)", during the existence of a joint ownership relationship, if some co owners dispose of joint property without authorization, it is generally deemed invalid. However, if a third party acquires the property in good faith and for compensation, the legitimate rights and interests of the third party should be protected. At the same time, the Supreme People's Court's decision on the application<婚姻法>The Interpretation of Several Issues (1) stipulates that "the rights of husband and wife in dealing with joint property of husband and wife are equal. If the handling of joint property of husband and wife is necessary for daily life, either party has the right to make a decision. If the husband or wife makes an important decision on the handling of joint property of husband and wife other than for daily life needs, both parties should negotiate equally and reach a consensus. If others have reason to believe that it is a joint expression of the will of both parties of husband and wife, the other party shall not oppose a third party with good faith on the grounds of disagreement or ignorance
These regulations contain two layers of information. Firstly, both spouses have equal rights to dispose of large amounts of jointly owned property, and the disposal of such property must be agreed upon by both parties. Otherwise, it would infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of the other party; Secondly, if the third party is in good faith, the concealed party cannot claim rights from the third party, but can only recover from the spouse. Based on this case, regarding the first point, there is no dispute between the two parties, which means that there is no dispute between the two parties regarding the recognition of the 300000 yuan as joint property of the couple. In the absence of evidence from the defendant to prove that the plaintiff was aware of Huang's behavior, the law determines that Huang's behavior violated the legitimate rights and interests of the co owner, Dong. As for the second point, due to the special relationship between the three parties, the matter between Zhang and Huang was originally not made public. This special situation indicates that the defendant Zhang must have known that Huang gave her money, and Dong could not have known about it. Therefore, Zhang is not a third party with good intentions. That is to say, when receiving this money, Zhang was aware that this behavior violated Dong's legitimate rights and interests (at least presumed from a legal perspective). In this case, the law grants Dong the right to pursue the third party Zhang, and she can demand that Zhang return the money. Zhang should return the money because he has no legitimate reason to possess it. Sichuan Faneng Law Firm is dedicated to serving you.