Is the loyalty agreement signed by Ningbo husband and wife valid?

The validity of the conjugal loyalty agreement cannot be generalized. Provisions relating to the relationship between personal freedom and identity, such as restrictions on divorce, restrictions on remarriage, waiver of custody or agreement on ways of visiting, are usually invalid because they violate public order and good morals or violate legal rights. In contrast, purely on the ownership of property and reasonable compensation of the agreement, if it does not violate the mandatory provisions of the law, the amount is not too unbalanced, some courts will deal with as a property agreement. To judge whether an agreement can be used, you must first take the terms apart.

It should also be understood that the duty of loyalty between husband and wife itself mainly belongs to the advocacy norms of morality and family style. The law does not force the parties to sign loyalty agreements, nor does it directly stipulate the enforcement power of such agreements. Therefore, signing an agreement does not mean getting a judgment that can be directly fulfilled in the future. Whether it can be realized in the end depends on the content of the terms and the evidence.

1. legal basis: the duty of loyalty is an advocacy norm, property agreement has another channel.

Article 1043 of the Civil Code stipulates that husband and wife should be faithful to each other, respect each other and care for each other. This is an advocacy norm and establishes value guidelines for the relationship between husband and wife, but it is not the basis of the right of claim. Courts may not support a claim for performance of an indemnity clause in a loyalty agreement solely on the grounds that the other party has breached a duty of loyalty.

Article 1065 of the Civil Code provides another channel: men and women may agree that the property acquired during the marriage and the pre-marital property shall be owned by each, jointly or partly owned by each or partly jointly owned. This kind of marital property agreement has a clear legal basis and relatively stable effect, which is a better carrier to implement the effect of loyalty agreement. In addition, Article 153 of the Civil Code stipulates that civil legal acts that violate public order and good customs are invalid. This is the most commonly used yardstick for reviewing the terms of loyalty agreements.

2. which clauses have been written in vain

the first type of invalid clause is to restrict the freedom of person and identity, such as the agreement to file a divorce on the loss of all property, remarriage must pay a large amount of breach of contract, the initiative to give up child support or visitation rights. These contents touch on the freedom of marriage, personal rights and the protection of the interests of minor children, and are usually not recognized.

The second category that is easily denied is overly punitive provisions, typically such as a clean exit. An agreement to deprive a party of all its property is often considered to be unfair or punitive in nature, and the court generally does not support it in full, but more commonly deals with it by reference to the degree of fault and the actual loss to support reasonable compensation as appropriate. The third category is vague clauses, which only write loyalty to marriage, no more mistakes and no specific property direction. Due to the lack of executable content, it is difficult to produce practical results.

3. want the agreement to fall to the ground and change the marital property agreement to be more stable.

If the purpose is to protect property rights, rather than signing an instrument called a loyalty agreement, it is better to sign the marital property agreement directly. Which properties, deposits, equity to whom, and how to compensate under certain circumstances, are written clearly, specifically, and accountable, with a more solid foundation of effectiveness and easier proof in the future.

The writing suggests avoiding moral expressions and not using words such as derailment and loyalty as triggers for rights and obligations, but rather making arrangements around the attribution of property and the amount of compensation itself. At the same time, it is important to retain evidence of the signing process to prove that the parties signed voluntarily and expressed their true intentions, so as to avoid future claims of revocation on the grounds of coercion or fraud.

4. you really encounter a major mistake, divorce damages are more direct.

If the other party has major faults such as bigamy, cohabitation with others, domestic violence, abuse and abandonment of family members, the compensation for divorce damages stipulated in Article 1091 of the Civil Code is a more direct relief path. This path has a clear legal basis, and as long as the evidence is in place, the basis of the claim is much more solid than the loyalty agreement.

From the general practice reflected in the public judgment of the Ningbo court, when the parties in a family case claim multiple requests at the same time, the court usually gives priority to the review around the statutory situation, and is cautious about the agreed part outside the agreement. It is therefore more efficient to focus primarily on the evidence of a statutory situation than to dwell repeatedly on an agreement whose validity is in doubt.

5. Ningbo Regional Practice: How to Use Such Agreements in Mediation

in practice in Ningbo, pre-litigation mediation is generally appointed for family cases, and mechanisms such as Zhejiang shared courts also provide channels for the parties to resolve disputes nearby. Although the loyalty agreement may not be directly enforced in litigation, it may still be used as a reference for both parties at the mediation stage, and play a practical role in facilitating the compensation scheme and promoting a one-time settlement.

There are also family investigators and psychological counseling mechanisms in the family trials in Ningbo. The court can entrust family investigators to visit and verify the situation in cases involving domestic violence or fierce conflicts. The existence of such mechanisms reminds the parties to provide objective and verifiable materials when claiming rights, rather than staying on emotional statements.

6. operational steps

the first step is to split the existing agreement one by one according to the status clause and the property clause to judge which may be recognized. The second step is to rewrite the marital property agreement for the purpose of protection and clarify the scope of property and compensation standard. The third step is to delete the expressions restricting divorce, remarriage, custody and visitation rights, and to eliminate the punishment clause of leaving the house clean. The fourth step is to sort out the records of the signing process to prove that both parties are voluntary; the fifth step, if the other party has a major fault, priority to prepare evidence of divorce damages, if necessary, together with the claim.

Finally, a loyalty agreement is not a substitute for a divorce agreement. Even if any form of agreement has been signed, the formal divorce still requires a new agreement on the division of property, child support, debt settlement, or a settlement in the lawsuit. Treat the agreement as part of the arrangement rather than the whole, so that the train of thought will not deviate.

Practical Experience of 7. Lawyers

to judge whether a loyalty agreement can be used, one should not only look at its name, but also look at the content one by one. The part involving identity, such as restricting divorce, restricting remarriage and childbirth, agreeing to give up custody or visiting methods, is usually not recognized because it touches on personal rights and the protection of minors. Some courts will treat the part that favors property ownership and compensation as a property agreement if the terms are clear and the amount is not outrageous. Therefore, in the face of an agreement full of clean bodies and leaving the house, the first step is to take it apart, distinguish which ones are written for nothing and which ones can still be used, and then decide how to advocate.

If the original intention of signing a loyalty agreement is to let the other party really pay for the breach of contract, it is safer to change the purpose to a carrier to achieve, change the marital property agreement. The law originally allows husband and wife to agree in writing that the property before and after marriage shall be owned by each other, jointly owned or partially shared. Such agreements have clear basis and relatively stable effect. It is much more reliable to write clearly the attribution of real estate, deposit and equity in case of default than to let the court judge whether a loyalty agreement can be implemented. The right way to put the agreement into practice is to retain the desired effect and change the expression into a format recognized by the law.

If you really encounter a major mistake, there is still a more direct way to go. If one party has more obligations to raise children, care for the elderly, assist the other party in work, etc., he may claim financial compensation in the event of divorce; if the other party has a legal fault, he may claim damages at the time of divorce; and when dividing common property, he may also request to take care of the innocent party. These are all requests that can be made together and have a clear basis in the lawsuit, which is more realistic than taking a separate loyalty agreement to sue. No matter which way you go, you should pay attention to the legality of the evidence and the sources that can be explained, and put the materials together before talking about the agreement or going to court, and you will often be disappointed if you expect an agreement to be fulfilled automatically.