Extramarital affairs big data | How the Legal Spouse Can Recover Assets: Insights from the Big Data Report
1.For a claim to be supported by the court, the choice of cause of action must first be appropriate.
According to the data presented in the report, the causes of action selected by the plaintiffs were highly diverse. While some cases involved "post-divorce property disputes" because the original spouse and the infidelity party had already divorced at the time of filing, other choices included "recovery of property," "return of possessed property," "unjust enrichment," "tort disputes," and so on.
While the choice of case category does not substantially affect the final outcome based on the judgment's content, the underlying logical framework appears flawed. Using' gift contract dispute' as the case category effectively resolves this issue, aligning with the findings revealed by big data.
2. Regarding the selection of the litigating party, it is appropriate for the original spouse to act as the plaintiff; the key issue lies in determining the defendant.
Based on the findings reflected in the big data report, the identification of plaintiffs and defendants in such cases typically follows these patterns:
1. The original spouse and the infidelity partner form a joint defense alliance and jointly act as plaintiffs.
The original spouse and the infidelity partner may reach an agreement to recover the property and jointly file a lawsuit against the extramarital partner as the defendant. However, statistical data indicate that such cases constitute a very small proportion.
2. The unfaithful party confronts the mistress and demands the return of assets under the name of the legitimate spouse.
The series of cases involving Mr.Lang Xianping and the flight attendant represent a classic example of resolving such disputes. After losing his lawsuit against the flight attendant in his own name for demanding the return of the purchase price, Mr.Lang reached an agreement with his ex-wife and filed the lawsuit against her, ultimately obtaining judicial support.
3. In most cases, the primary spouse typically files joint lawsuits against both the infidelity partner and the mistress. However, in some instances, the plaintiff may not sue the infidelity partner but instead sue only the mistress.
3. The key lies in the evidence presented regarding whether the property can be recovered and, if so, the amount thereof.
The evidence presentation in such cases primarily focuses on the following aspects:
1. The property was transferred from the name of the unfaithful spouse to that of the mistress during the marriage.
The issue of restitution discussed in this article arises only when the party who committed infidelity transfers property without authorization during the marriage. During data analysis, we observed that in some cases, the couple divorced and remarried during the extramarital affair. When determining the restitution amount, the court excluded the assets transferred to the mistress by the infidel during the divorce period.
2. Evidence requirements regarding the extramarital relationship between the unfaithful party and the mistress.
The so-called "extramarital affair" relationship can be legally categorized into four distinct levels based on severity: ambiguity, infidelity, cohabitation, and bigamy. When discussing the "standards for determining the breakdown of marital affection" or the "basis for claiming compensation for emotional distress," claims may only be supported by the court if the severity of the extramarital affair reaches the level of cohabitation or bigamy. However, for the topic under discussion today, the burden of proof is less stringent; it suffices to demonstrate the existence of infidelity or even ambiguity between the parties. Notably, in some cases, evidence provided by the plaintiff to prove the extramarital affair was insufficient and not admitted by the court, yet the court still ordered the return of funds on the grounds that the defendant "obtained the money without legal justification."
3. Generally speaking, the specific use of funds does not affect the court's decision to order restitution, but it does influence the final property value obtained through litigation.
For example, when the infidel party improperly uses the couple's joint property to purchase a house for the mistress, if the full payment is made and the property is subsequently registered under the mistress's name, the plaintiff may claim that the defendant must return the property. However, if the payment was made in cash to the mistress, who then purchased the property and registered it under her own name, the court typically only orders the return of the cash used for the purchase.
4. When the aforementioned evidentiary requirements are met and there is evidence proving the specific amount and flow of the funds, the court generally supports the claim for property restitution.
4. Should one claim back half of the amount or demand full restitution? How should the claimed amount be determined?
China implements a system of joint ownership of marital property, and such property is generally not divided while the marriage remains in effect. Therefore, if the plaintiff files the lawsuit while the marriage is still valid, they may rightfully claim full restitution of their property share; if the marriage has been dissolved at the time of filing, the plaintiff has two options: either demand full restitution or claim only their respective share (typically half). Data shows that courts overwhelmingly grant full restitution in such cases.
In summary, the key points for the primary spouse to sue for property recovery are now clear. Based on the practical experience of the Wumei Law Firm team led by the author, the main challenge in handling such cases often lies in providing evidence that the assets were transferred from the unfaithful spouse to the mistress. If the primary spouse can reach an agreement with the unfaithful spouse, creating a 2:1 situation, the problem is easily resolved. Otherwise, the primary spouse must act as a vigilant observer in daily life, skillfully identifying all relevant clues and accumulating sufficient evidence to prevail in this battle where no clear winner emerges.