Exploring The Housing Terms Of The Judicial Interpretation Of Marriage Law (3)

In 2011,the supreme people's court(SPC)has promulgated the Interpretation(III)on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China(hereinafter referred to as the "Judicial Interpretation(III)of Marriage Law"),which has provided a specific and operational basis for and played a positive and effective role in the solution to the dispute over property rights between a husband and wife.But because of the complexity of the daily life,in recent years,some new problems appeared frequently,this judicial interpretation also gradually exposed some flaws that we should face.In the face of the new problems,the protection of the weak rights and interests in the marriage relationship is strengthened,and the provisions in this judicial interpretation are more urgent.This paper aims to explore the house-related issues in“Judicial Interpretation(?)of Marriage Law”on the basis of interest protection of the disadvantaged party.This article aims at studying house-related issues in "Judicial Interpretation(?)of Marriage Law",which is divided into four parts.The first section is an overview of house-related issues in“Judicial Interpretation(?)of Marriage Law",including its basic content and the legal basis.The second part is the practical significance of house-related issues in "Judicial Interpretation(?)of Marriage Law".This section starts with the background of the housing provision,and focuses on the importance of the terms of the housing.The third part of the article discusses the shortcomings of house-related issues in“Judicial Interpretation(?)of Marriage Law".In this part,an analysis of its shortcomings is carried out,that is:for the article 6 concerning the revoking of the contract of house gift by a husband or wife,an applicable law based on the nature of the real estate donated,and the application of Article 19(2)of the Marriage Law give rise to mutual incompatibility,in addition to the inadequate protection of the recipient;for Article 7 concerning the parents' contribution to the purchase the real estate for their son or daughter after his or her marriage,it is not clear enough for the property of the incomplete funding as well as an unfair outcome for the property investors;for Article 10 concerning the title of real estate bought by one party of the couple through mortgage before marriage,it's considered as an inadequate protection of one party of the couple with non-property rights,and Article 10(2)concerning compensation is considered as a lack of operation;for Article 11 concerning a husband and wife selling their joint house without mutual agreement,it's considered as a lack of differential treatment towards the common house based on the common life requirements,and of a specific rule for distinguishing the behavior of selling the common property without mutual agreement.The fourth part is the idea of the improvement of the provisions of the article on the terms of the marriage law.This section begins by analyzing the necessity of improving the terms of the housing.Then the corresponding countermeasures are put forward in order to solve the shortcomings.Specifically speaking,for Article 6 of the house-related issues in“Judicial Interpretation(III)of Marriage Law”concerning the revoking of the house contract of gift by husband or wife,an applicable law based on the nature of the donation of the real estate and more protection for the interests of the recipient are advanced.For the shortcomings of article 7,it's suggested that investors should be explicitly included only the full amount invested,and the provisions with respect to the compensation related to the chattel shall be added,so as to balance the interests of husband and wife.In view of the shortcomings of the article 10,two countermeasures-strengthening the protection of the interests of non-property owner and refining the standards with respect to compensation are put forward.For the article 11,two measures for distinguishing whether the party sells the common house in good faith because the house cannot meet their life requirement or just sell it without mutual agreement are proposed.The third and fourth part is the focus of this article.