Effectiveness Of Marital Property Agreement And Changes In Property Rights

This article focuses on the confrontation between the marriage law that regulates the internal relations of marriage and the property right law that regulates the general property relations in the market triggered by the property and creditor effectiveness of the marital property agreement.At present,the laws and regulations of marital property agreements and marital agreement property system are very simple and vague.As a result,it leads to misunderstandings about the interpretation and application,which also causes greater difficulties in application in judicial trials.There are three different trial views on the effectiveness of marital property agreements in judicial practice.It can be seen that the reason for the differentiation of their judgment views lies mainly in the different recognition of the nature of marital property agreements and the value benefits in the field of property law entering into the area of marriage law.Therefore,it is necessary to make a correct understanding and characterization of the nature of marital property agreements before clarifying the legal effect of marital property agreements.Before analyzing the nature of marital property agreements,it shall be noted the importance of discussing the theoretical basis of marital property agreements——marital agreement property system first.We should adopt the original contractual mode that is different from the selective contractual mode.Thereason is that original contractual mode focuses more on the manifestation of the principle of autonomy of the civil subject.Also,it is hard to put the article of partially owned by each party into practice.The law may lose its practical function if we choose to adopt the selective contractual mode.The particularity of husband and wife property relations lies in the special function of configuring the benefits of marriage,and it is different from the partnership in the contract law and the common communities in the property law.As a result,the general property law cannot fully meet the needs of the fair distribution of the property interests of marriage.The marital property system in which husband and wife's property relations are the subject of its adjustment shall therefore be separated from the general property laws and become a special adjustment rule for the family law.Because marital property relationship has strong personal attributes,the nature of marital property agreements should be attached to identity behavior.This view not only reflects the necessary prerequisite for the effective existence of the marriage relationship,but also implies the substance of the change in the ownership of the property in the agreement.This article discusses in depth the applicable dilemma in the juridical practice concerning the difference of marital property agreements and gift contracts.The purpose of marital property agreements for maintaining the joint life relationship of the couple is different from gift agreements concerning the traders in the general market based on economic considerations.Therefore,marital property agreements are not unpaid as a matter of fact.The significance of such difference is whether the person deciding to give the property shall have the right of revoking such promise.As for how to recognize such difference,this article holds the idea that the Article 6 of the Judicial Interpretation of Marriage Law(III)shall be strictly restricted understood and interpreted.Unless the spouse has made a clear expression of the meaning of the gift,it should be presumed in principle to be marital property agreements in order to maintain the stability of the relationship between husband and wife.The core point of this article is to discuss the effectiveness of marital propertyagreements.The core purpose of property right publicity principle is to secure transaction security,but the changes of the property between husband and wife are not a simple transactional behavior.By contrast,the economic interest considerations in the trading of market transactions are more complex and economic compared with marital property agreements.The demand for publicity between husband and wife regarding the common property disposition is not so necessary and no substantial breakthrough will be made to the realization of the principle of disclosure of property rights.Based on the presumption of entitlement of registration or possession,the de facto property rights resulting from marital property agreements can also be opposed to the appearance of the property right.Furthermore,once the property changes are involved in the market transactions and an unspecified third person,the property law should actively intervene and regulate it.Therefore,marital property agreements will also not hinder the realization of the principle of disclosure of real rights for the purpose of protecting the subsequent transactions of the legal entity and the potential third party.The criticism of the consensualism model lies in the fact that the changes of property rights under this model cannot guarantee the security of potential market transactions in all aspects.However,it should be insisted that the restrictions of consensualism model in market transactions cannot deny the effect of the change of property rights between husband and wife within the marriage and family field.In the absence of an unspecified third party,the property law should maintain at a certain level of restraint and shall not excessively infiltrate the interior of the marriage and family.