[Case Summary]This case involves a family property dispute involving division of family assets and inheritance. Liu Dahai and Wang Huiqin were a couple with four children. Wang Huiqin died in 2000, and Liu Dahai died in 2016. In 2013, they received two resettlement housing units (a 57.05-square-meter one-bedroom apartment at 1002 and a 38.29-square-meter zero-bedroom apartment at 1502) and compensation of 125,136.6 yuan from the housing demolition. In 2013, Liu Dahai signed a handwritten agreement to gift the one-bedroom apartment to Liu Dashan or his granddaughter, and the four children verbally agreed that the zero-bedroom apartment would be given to Liu Zhiqiang, with the three of them compensating Liu Shufen 500,000 yuan (which has been fulfilled). In 2022, Liu Shufen refused to cooperate with the registration, leading to a lawsuit. The plaintiffs, including Liu Dashan, have entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Yu DaweiAttorney representation. The court ruled that the 2013 agreement was a legally valid agreement on family division and property distribution, and awarded 1002 to Liu Dashan and 1502 to Liu Zhiqiang. Liu Shufen was required to cooperate in the registration process and bear the acceptance fee of 46,800 yuan. The core dispute: the validity of the family division and property distribution agreement and the determination of property rights disposal. Applicable laws: Articles 464, 509, and 1121 of the Civil Code, etc., and Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Law.

I. Review of the Case Facts

"Is the family partition agreement legally binding?", "Can the ownership of the resettlement housing be confirmed without obtaining a certificate?", and "Is the oral division of housing among family members legally valid?" are frequently searched questions related to family partition in demolition cases. Liu Dahai and his wife, Wang Huqin, had four children: Liu Zhiqiang, Liu Dashan, Liu Zhifeng, and Liu Shufen. Wang Huqin died without a will in 2000. Liu Dahai resided in House No. 54 in Haidian District, Beijing (some parts were jointly leased, and some were leased by his children).

In 2013, the house was included in the demolition program. Liu Dahai signed the "House Demolition and Relocation Compensation Agreement", and received two resettlement houses and a compensation of 125,136.6 yuan. In July 2013, Liu Dahai wrote an agreement to donate a one-bedroom apartment to his second son, Liu Dashan, or his granddaughter, Liu Hongmei (with signatures and three witnesses); the four children agreed orally that the zero-bedroom apartment would belong to Liu Zhiqiang, and Liu Dashan, Liu Zhifeng, and Liu Shufen would compensate Liu Shufen 500,000 yuan. The transfer was completed in January 2014. In 2016, Liu Dahai passed away. In 2022, when Liu Zhiqiang contacted Liu Shufen to handle the registration, he was rejected and a lawsuit was initiated. The plaintiff entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Yu DaweiAttorney representation.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Is the plan for dividing family assets and splitting property truly legal and effective?Can a handwritten agreement named "Gift" and an oral agreement be recognized as a division of family property?
  • Focus 2: Does "gift" only refer to the right of residence?Is the description of the "house ownership certificate" in the agreement a transfer of ownership rights?
  • Focus Three: Is the compensation of 500,000 yuan reasonable, and are the defendant's defenses valid?Can the fact that no claims have been made in the past ten years be used to verify the partition plan?

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The plaintiffs (Liu Dashan and others) allege that:Claim that the ownership of the two resettlement houses be confirmed according to the 2013 family division and property distribution plan, and that the defendant cooperate in the registration process to safeguard their own property rights and interests.

The defendant (Liu Shufen) argued that:Only Liu Dahai was evicted from the public housing, so it should be his personal inheritance and be divided equally according to the statutory inheritance; the "gift" in the 2013 agreement only refers to the right of residence, not the ownership; the transfer of 500,000 yuan is the compensation for the right of residence and has nothing to do with the ownership of the property.

Hengluo Lawyer's Agency Opinion:Yu DayiThe lawyer proceeds with the following actions:

  • Thoroughly sort out the evidence chain: submit the eviction agreement, the handwritten gift agreement, the transfer receipt, and the kinship certificate to form a complete evidence chain
  • Clarify the nature of the agreement: Although the 2013 agreement was called a "gift", it was actually an agreement on the division of the demolition benefits within the family. The content of the agreement was clear, and the signatures were genuine
  • Refuting the claim of the right of residence: The agreement clearly states "gift of the house title", and considering the background of the family division, it should be determined that the property right has been disposed of; the defendant failed to provide evidence to support his claim
  • Demonstrating the reasonableness of the compensation: The total compensation for the zero-bedroom apartment and the remaining compensation is 431,456.6 yuan, of which the defendant only received one-fourth. The actual amount received is far more than 500,000 yuan. Moreover, the defendant has not claimed the authenticity of the family division plan for nearly ten years

IV. Outcome of the case

The court determined that the 2013 agreement was a legally valid property division agreement, and the parties' expressions of intent were genuine and the content of the agreement was lawful. The agreement's combination of "gift" and "house ownership certificate" with the nature of property division and common social language conventions should be interpreted as a disposition of house ownership rights. The defendant's claim of only residential rights was not supported due to lack of evidence. The oral agreement of a zero-bedroom house and the 500,000 yuan compensation were valid (total amount: 431,456.6 yuan, of which the defendant should only receive 1/4; the actual receipt of 500,000 yuan far exceeded this amount; the defendant did not occupy the house or claim it for nearly a decade, so the court highly likely accepted this evidence as valid). The judgment is as follows: House No. 1002 in Haidian District, Beijing shall be owned by Liu Dashan, and House No. 1502 shall be owned by Liu Zhiqiang. Liu Shufen shall cooperate in handling the real estate registration procedures within three days. The case acceptance fee of 46,800 yuan shall be borne entirely by Liu Shufen and paid to Liu Dashan.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

It is recommended to first negotiate and reach a written agreement on family property disputes, clarifying the ownership and the method of performance. This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Yu DayiThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101201010292290, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acted on behalf of the client, clarified the nature of the family partition agreement, and helped the client retain two resettlement houses.

VI. Common Questions and Answers about Disputes over the Division of Family Property

  1. Q: Is the family separation agreement legally binding?
    A:The agreement that the family members truly expressed their intention, the content of which is legal, and the signatures are authentic, is legally binding. In this case, the handwritten agreement was recognized as a valid agreement on family division and property distribution.
  2. Q: Can the ownership of the public housing be confirmed if the ownership certificate has not been issued yet?
    A:Yes. The court can confirm the ownership of the house based on the separation agreement and order the parties to cooperate in the registration process, without making the registration of the certificate a prerequisite.
  3. Q: Is it valid for family members to verbally divide the rooms among themselves?
    A:A verbal agreement combined with performance (such as the payment of compensation or the long-term failure to assert rights) can establish a high degree of plausibility, and the court may accept it. However, a written agreement is more reliable.
  4. Q: Can a gift agreement be considered as a division of family property?
    A:The so-called "gift" is actually the division of demolition benefits within the family. According to its nature and social customs, it should be regarded as a disposition of property rights, not just a right of residence.
  5. Q: What should one do if one party changes their mind after the family division?
    A:The defendant shall perform the contract in accordance with the principle of good faith. If the defendant's withdrawal of the contract lacks factual or legal basis, the court will not support it, and the defendant's defense in this case is rejected.