Second, several other situations about the ownership of property after marriage in the new Marriage Law: 1. After marriage, both husband and wife contribute (including loans) to obtain property rights. After divorce, we must first clarify the property rights, no matter under the name of one party or both parties, it is the same property. Secondly, it is clear that the output value, that is, the value of the house, is calculated according to the market price, not according to the original purchase contract amount. Third, distinguish the equity part from the debt part. If loans are involved, the loan part should be deleted first. That is to say, the party that obtains the house pays half of the house value to the party that does not obtain the house, and the party that obtains the house pays the remaining principal and interest separately. 2. One of the husband and wife pays off all the house payment before marriage and obtains the real estate license. In case of divorce, the house shall be divided according to the provisions of the Supreme People's Court Judicial Interpretation (II) of the Marriage Law. Since one of the husband and wife paid all the house price and obtained the real estate license before marriage, the house belongs to the property before marriage. Therefore, when divorcing, the other party has no right to ask for division.
3. One spouse buys a house with a mortgage loan before marriage and obtains a real estate license. After marriage, both husband and wife pay back the same house. After the divorce, although the house was purchased by one party before marriage, the value-added part of the house after marriage and the part jointly repaid by the husband and wife should be regarded as the same property, unless otherwise agreed by the husband and wife. It should be noted that the repayment part of * * *, whether it is repaid by one party's personal salary or by the wages of both parties, should be recognized as the property of husband and wife. Of course, if one party can really prove that its repayment funds come from personal premarital property, then this part should not be recognized as marital property.
4. If one of the husband and wife paid part of the house price before marriage, but obtained the real estate license after marriage, both parties will repay the loan together after marriage. Although the property right certificate after divorce is a property right certificate and a legal document to prove the ownership relationship of the house, it does not mean that the house that obtained the property right certificate after marriage should be the property after marriage, or the source of the property should be subdivided into two parts: pre-marriage and post-marriage.
5. One spouse pays part of the house payment before marriage and repays the loan together after marriage, or one spouse repays the loan with personal property but the house appreciates. In the case of divorce, the division of houses that have not yet obtained real estate licenses. According to the Supreme People's Court's "Judicial Interpretation of Marriage Law (II)", in divorce cases, if both parties have disputes over the house that has not yet obtained ownership or has not yet fully obtained ownership, and negotiation fails, the people's court should not judge the ownership of the house, but should judge that it belongs to both parties according to the actual situation. After obtaining the property right certificate, either party brings a lawsuit to the court alone. In addition, the First People's Court of the Supreme People's Court made it clear that it is not appropriate for the court to judge the ownership of the house, including: (1) buying welfare policy houses; (two) the purchase of commercial housing; (3) Purchase affordable housing. If the above three houses are purchased and the property ownership certificate has not been obtained at the time of divorce, the court should not directly make a judgment on the ownership of the house.
6. Houses invested and purchased by parents, after the children divorce, the division of houses According to the provisions of Article 22 of the judicial interpretation of the Marriage Law of the Supreme People's Court, if the parents of both parties invest before marriage, they shall be regarded as gifts to their children, unless otherwise agreed; Unless otherwise agreed, the contribution made by parents after marriage shall be regarded as a gift to both husband and wife. In practice, there is another situation: at the time of divorce, one party suddenly proposed that the money for buying a house was borrowed from parents, not donated by parents, and took out an iou certificate. In this regard, the general practice of the court is to look at the attitude of the other party first. If the other party does not admit it, the court will generally not conduct substantive examination on whether the creditor's rights and debts are established, because the creditor cannot participate in the litigation as a third party. Therefore, in this case, the court will tell the party who advocates borrowing that it can file another lawsuit while dividing the house.
7. There is a third person's name on the real estate license. In addition to the names of husband and wife, there are also the names of children or parents on the property certificate divided after divorce. In this regard, the court generally does not take the initiative to add a third person, but takes the following measures: (1) According to the application of the parties, the property division of the housing part will not be tried, and the parties will sue separately; (2) according to the application of the parties, suspend the trial of the case, inform the parties to sue separately for property analysis, and then divide some houses of the husband and wife according to the judgment result of property analysis.
8. Both parties invested in buying a house before marriage, but only one party's name was listed on the real estate license obtained before marriage. In the case of divorce under the above circumstances, the name of one party is listed on the real estate license. If the other party does not admit his contribution when buying a house, he thinks that the house belongs to personal property before marriage and will not be divided. On the premise that it can't prove that it has contributed capital and is not donated to one party, the court of the other party's rights and interests can't protect it. In other words, even if the other party gives money, it can't prove the investment behavior, and the court can't judge one party to give appropriate compensation.