Second, the provisions of the new marriage law on the ownership of property after marriage:
1. After marriage, both husband and wife contribute (including loans) to acquire the property rights of the house, and the house will be divided after divorce.
First of all, it is clear that property rights, whether the names of one party or both parties, are common 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. In other words, the party who gets the house pays half of the house value to the party who doesn't get the house, and the party who gets 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, and the house is divided at the time of divorce.
According to the Supreme People's Court's Judicial Interpretation of Marriage Law (II), the house belongs to premarital property because one of the husband and wife paid all the house price and obtained the real estate license before marriage. Therefore, when divorcing, the other party has no right to ask for division.
3. One of the husband and wife bought a house through mortgage loan before marriage and obtained the real estate license. After marriage, the husband and wife jointly repay the loan and divide the house after divorce.
Although the house was purchased by one party before marriage, the value-added part of the house after marriage and the joint repayment of the loan should be regarded as common property, unless otherwise agreed by the husband and wife. It should be noted that the part of joint repayment, whether it is repaid by one party with personal salary or by both parties' salary, should be regarded as the joint property of husband and wife. Of course, if one party can prove that its repayment funds come from personal pre-marital property, then this part should not be recognized as the joint property of husband and wife.
4. If one of the husband and wife paid part of the house price before marriage, but obtained the real estate license after marriage, the house repaid by both parties after marriage and the house divided after divorce.
Although the real estate license is a title certificate and a legal document to prove the ownership relationship of the house, it does not mean that the house that obtains the real estate license after marriage should be the property after marriage, nor does it mean that the source of 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, and the house has not yet obtained the real estate license at the time of divorce.
According to "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Judicial Interpretation of Marriage Law (II)", when divorcing, if both parties have disputes over the house that has not yet obtained ownership or has not yet fully obtained ownership and cannot negotiate, the people's court should not judge the ownership of the house, but should judge the use of the house by the parties according to the actual situation. After obtaining the property right certificate, either party will bring a lawsuit to the court separately. In addition, the First People's Court of the Supreme People's Court has made it clear that it is not appropriate for the court to judge the ownership of the house, including: (1) buying welfare policy houses; 2. Buy commercial housing; ③ Purchase affordable housing. If you have purchased the above three houses and have not obtained the real estate license at the time of divorce, the court should not directly judge the ownership of the house.
6. Parents participate in the purchase of houses, children divorce and houses are divided.
According to Article 22 of the Supreme People's Court's Judicial Interpretation of Marriage Law (II), parents' investment before marriage is regarded as a gift 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 as evidence. 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 claiming to borrow money that it can file another lawsuit while dividing the house.
7. There is a third person's name on the real estate license, and the division of the house after divorce.
In addition to the names of husband and wife, there are also the names of children or parents on the real estate license. 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, and inform the parties to file another lawsuit for property analysis, and then divide the house jointly owned by 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 on the real estate license obtained before marriage, and the house was divided after divorce.
In the case of divorce under the above circumstances, if the party with the name on the real estate license does not admit that the other party has invested in the house, it is considered that the house belongs to its personal property before marriage and will not be divided. On the premise that it can't prove that it has invested and 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.