Same-sex lover cheats, seeks to fight for inheritance; Zhiming lawyer skillfully avoids losses
Case details:
By chance, in 2008, a Hong Kong woman named Zhou XX met a Sichuan woman named Yang X in Shenzhen, and by the end of the year, the two began living together as a same-sex couple, addressing each other as spouses. By June 2014, when Yang X went to the United States to study, Zhou XX fell for someone else and unilaterally proposed a breakup to Yang X. During this period, Zhou XX transferred a total of over 1 million yuan to Yang X's account on multiple occasions and also paid for a property purchased in Shenzhen under Yang X's name.
In August 2015, Zhou XX, as the plaintiff, filed another lawsuit in a district court in Shenzhen on the grounds of "unjust enrichment," demanding that the defendant, Yang X, return over one million yuan in "unjust enrichment" funds. Previously, Zhou XX had already sued Yang X to return a substantial amount of unjustly enriched property, but due to a strategic error in that case, Yang X lost both trials, and the property was seized and auctioned to repay debts. Now, Zhou XX resorted to the same tactic again, seeking to recover over one million yuan from Yang X that was not pursued in the previous case. In despair, Yang X and his mother sought out the Zhiming lawyer team at Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm by reputation, tearfully pleading for help.
After accepting the case and listening to the case briefing, the Zhiming Law Firm team analyzed that the two parties had lived together for a long time, and their finances were naturally highly commingled in daily life, making their legal relationship akin to both marriage and partnership. Therefore, the opposing party's claim of "unjust enrichment" should not stand, and the client was instructed to collect and provide evidence in this direction. Through the client's efforts, a large amount of evidence was gathered regarding the joint living and consumption of Zhou XX and Yang X, such as joint shopping receipts, joint travel tickets, joint movie tickets, bank transaction records and statements, as well as text messages and WeChat communication records between the two parties. Based on this, in court, the defense counsel vigorously rebutted the plaintiff's claim of "unjust enrichment" on the grounds that the parties' property was commingled during their cohabitation, with long-term and substantial joint living expenses. With skilled litigation techniques, the defense also secured during the evidentiary phase of the trial the key fact that the fund transfers claimed by the plaintiff Zhou XX as "unjust enrichment" all occurred during the period of their cohabitation.
Accordingly, a district court determined that the disputed funds claimed by Zhou XX arose during the period of cohabitation when the parties' accounts were commingled, and that there was a valid reason for the transfer, which did not meet the statutory requirements for unjust enrichment. In January 2016, the court issued a judgment dismissing all of Zhou XX's claims. After Zhou XX appealed, the Zhiming lawyer team continued to represent the appellee. The intermediate court at second instance ultimately adopted the appellee's legal arguments, holding that the parties had cohabited for over six years and that the disputed funds claimed by Zhou XX had been paid in multiple installments over several years, making it impossible to confirm that Zhou XX had suffered a loss while Yang X had obtained unjust benefits. In August 2016, the court issued a final judgment dismissing Zhou XX's appeal and upholding the original ruling, which was recently served on our client. Upon learning of the favorable final judgment, the client repeatedly expressed heartfelt gratitude to the attorneys of Zhiming Law Firm.
Post-case reminder:
This case involves a property dispute between same-sex partners during cohabitation, which is a relatively complex civil litigation. From the plaintiff's perspective, this case is neither a typical divorce property dispute between spouses nor a standard partnership property dispute among private individuals. From the defendant's perspective, it is likewise not a conventional unjust enrichment property dispute. To handle this litigation, it is essential to carefully analyze the facts of the case, make an accurate determination and grasp of the legal relationship attributes, and respond flexibly and precisely during court proceedings, providing the adjudicators with sound judicial reasoning. Otherwise, both the plaintiff and the defendant may face adverse judgments. (All names in this article are pseudonyms.)
