Recently, Beijing King&Capital Law Firm Ye Jing, Cai Kangmiao lawyers jointly represented by the “borrowed name to buy a house” caused by the tort liability dispute, ushered in the final judgment. King&Capital Law Firm's two lawyers on behalf of the defendant, the final first instance judgment rejected all of the plaintiff's appeal request, the second instance to maintain the original judgment of the first instance. Thus, this trial, which lasted for more than a year, involved three generations and traced back more than twenty years of historical legacy of family real estate disputes, and the lawyers helped the client to achieve a comprehensive victory and the dust has settled.
A set of real estate, twenty-five years under the calm family undercurrent
The core of the dispute was a set of purchased public housing (hereinafter referred to as “Room A”) located in a certain district of Beijing. The client's grandfather through the unit for housing, including A room, including the right to use two sets of public housing. 2000, the relevant units to start the housing reform, under the authorization of the client's grandfather, A room in the name of the client and the property rights of the unit signed the “contract for the purchase and sale of housing”, and in 2001, the official registration to the name of the client, the client was more than twenty years old. In the following twenty years of time, the property right status of the A room has been registered in the name of the principal, during the period of time, no other people have claimed the ownership of the property. The client's parents and the client have been living in Room A for a long time, until the client got married and moved out, while the client's parents are still living in Room A. At the beginning of 2024, the internal conflict within the family intensified and almost reached an irreconcilable point, and the client's parents, in total disregard of the situation of family love, did a lot of things that harmed the client's family love, which led to the client's extreme mental depression. In this context, the client based on the internal arrangements for the family will be transferred to the name of the client's mother-in-law, and at this time, the client's parents learned that the property rights of the A room for the change of registration, which is strongly opposed. The two then to the client, the client's wife, the client's mother-in-law as a co-defendant, to tort liability disputes to the court, that the three defendants constitute a joint infringement.
Drawing out the silk cocoon, build an impeccable three-dimensional line of defense
This is not a very good case to deal with, because the parties in court are the closest people in the family. The plaintiff, as a parent, sued his only son, as well as daughter-in-law and in-laws, and the trial to avoid the need to expose the family's contradictions one by one. If all parties may appear in court, how to ensure that the conflict is not intensified, properly handle family disputes, is the case lawyer in addition to protect the rights and interests of the parties should also consider the important things. After accepting the client's commission, combined with the background of the case, the lawyer quickly formulated a systematic strategy to respond to the lawsuit.
First of all, the plaintiff put forward the “borrowed name to buy a house” and “our infringement” of the claim, the lawyer focused on the legal elements, directly hit the root. For “buy a house in borrowed name”, the lawyer did not dwell on the details of the debate, but the first elevated to the level of the effectiveness of the legal act. a house belongs to the nature of the welfare has been purchased public housing, according to the relevant policies and regulations and judicial practice, this kind of policy housing qualification has the personal exclusivity, aiming to help a particular family to solve the problem of housing difficulties, strictly prohibit the “borrowed name”, and strictly prohibit the “borrowed name” and “our infringement” claim. The plaintiffs claimed that they were not allowed to buy the house under a borrowed name. Therefore, even if the plaintiff claimed that there is “borrowed name” agreement, the agreement is also in violation of the national policy housing mandatory provisions and social public interest is invalid, which fundamentally shakes the plaintiff's claim of the basis of the right. Whether we constitute infringement, we need to be clear whether we infringe on other people's civil rights and interests explicitly protected by law. In this case, A room on the real estate rights registry of the legal rights of the principal, and in the entire trial process, the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove that it has legal ownership, and even can not directly prove that the plaintiff and the principal on the existence of A room “to buy a house in the name of the consent,” the principal as a registered rights of the A room Dispose of the property in his own name, subjectively no fault, objectively no violation of the law, does not constitute infringement.
After the client's wife as the client's spouse, acceptance of the gift of property between husband and wife, and after the transfer of the A room registered in the name of his mother, the exercise of the right to legal disposition of property, its own does not infringe on the rights and interests of others of the subjective intent or objective behavioral basis, the attorney will be the client's wife from the “infringement” of the accusation of stripping, efforts to The attorney in charge of the case removed the client's wife from the allegation of “infringement”, and tried to make the court focus more on the dispute over the ownership of the core of the house.
In addition, the case attorney also skillfully used life experience and common sense to argue. The lawyer argued that from 2001, when the house was registered in the name of the client, to 2024, when the plaintiff filed the lawsuit, the plaintiff had never claimed the right of the house to the client in any form in a period of more than twenty years, which was seriously inconsistent with the potentially unstable state of the borrowed person who might be asked to return the property at any time in the “borrowing name to buy a house” relationship. This is not consistent. Combined with the plaintiff in the weibo chat records had stated that “the house is yours” and other expressions, further corroborate the family's long-standing knowledge of the ownership of the A house.
After a variety of arguments, the first instance judgment fully adopted the lawyer's advice, that the plaintiff's claim lacks factual and legal basis, so the judgment rejected all the plaintiff's claim.
Tactful response, the final defense of the success of the results
Unsurprisingly, the other party received a judgment of defeat, soon after the appeal. At the second trial stage, the two lawyers systematically sorted out and reiterated the core legal points in the first trial. In addition, the case lawyers keenly found that the appellant tried to change and increase the claims in the second trial. In this regard, the case lawyers based on the relevant provisions of the law to put forward the procedural defense, clearly pointed out that the newly added claims do not belong to the scope of the second trial, which effectively avoided the other side of the second trial raid, the focus of the trial is firmly locked in the review of the verdict of the first instance, disrupting the pace of the other side of the litigation.
After the second trial court hearing, still all adopt our opinion, and made a judgment: reject the appeal, maintain the original judgment. The case was then finalized and settled in our favor.
