China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

SPC Issues Judicial Interpretation on Betrothal Gift Disputes

Wed, 12 Jun 2024
Categories: China Legal Trends

In November 2023, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued a judicial interpretation regarding betrothal gift disputes titled “Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases Involving Betrothal Gift Disputes” (Fa Shi [2024] No. 1) (关于审理涉彩礼纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的规定(法释[2024]1号)), which took effect on 1 Feb. 2024.

Betrothal gifts are a traditional custom in Chinese weddings. In recent years, the amount of betrothal gifts has escalated in many regions, leading to a trend of comparison. At the same time, betrothal gifts that exceed the normal family expenditure have become a heavy burden for many families. In cases of short marriages, this has led to an imbalance of interests and an increase in betrothal gift disputes.

The SPC issued this judicial interpretation to provide clear rules and guidance to courts nationwide in handling betrothal gift disputes.

The highlights of the judicial interpretation are as follows.

  • Demand for property by marriage shall be prohibited. If a party, under the guise of a betrothal gift, demands property through marriage, and the other party requests its return, the courts shall uphold the request.
  • If both parties have registered their marriage and are living together, and, at the time of divorce, one party files a claim for the return of the betrothal gift offered according to customs, the courts shall generally not uphold the claim. However, if the period of living together is short and the amount of the betrothal gift is excessive, the courts may, taking into account local customs, decide whether to grant the return and the percentage of the return, based on the use of the betrothal gift and the dowry, considering the amount of the betrothal gift, the period of living together, pregnancy, the fault of both parties, and other factors.

 

 

Photo by sj on Unsplash

 

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

You might also like

China Revises Anti-Money Laundering Law

China's newly revised Anti-Money Laundering Law, effective January 1, 2025, strengthens regulations on financial institutions, enhances AML obligations, and includes measures to prevent terrorist financing.

Chinese Supreme Court Judgment Enforced by Court of NSW Australia

In October 2024, the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Australia ruled to enforce a Chinese monetary judgment (Fujian Rongtaiyuan Industrial Co Ltd v Zhan [2024] NSWSC 1318). The Chinese judgment was made by the Fujian High People’s Court, which was affirmed by a judgment of China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) in 2021.

China Enacts Preschool Education Law

Effective June 1, 2025, China's newly passed Preschool Education Law emphasizes inclusivity and government-led development, and prohibits primary school-style teaching in kindergartens to promote the well-being and development of preschool children.

China Revises Cultural Relics Protection Law

China's revised Cultural Relics Protection Law, effective March 1, 2025, strengthens preservation measures, introduces pre-construction surveys, and promotes international cooperation in the restitution and return of cultural relics.

SPC Regulates Online Judicial Auctions

In November 2024, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued new guidelines to regulate online judicial auctions, emphasizing transparency in property disclosures, enhanced mechanisms for judgment debtors to self-dispose of auctioned assets, and improved supervision across all auction stages to protect parties' rights and streamline enforcement procedures.

China’s First Tribunal-Ordered Interim Measure Issued in Beijing

In October 2024, an arbitral tribunal at the Beijing Arbitration Commission (BAC/BIAC) issued an interim measure based on the applicant’s request, which was later confirmed and enforced by the court through a preservation order. This is the first of its kind in China, confirming the validity of tribunal-issued interim measures and highlighting the pro-arbitration stance of Chinese courts.