Analysis of the case of Li v. Wu on dissolving an illegal cohabitation relationship.
[Lead Counsel: Zhiming Law Firm]
I. Case Review
Plaintiff Li XX (male) and Defendant Wu XX (female) met in May 1997, began a relationship, and cohabited, subsequently giving birth to a non-marital child at Shenzhen People's Hospital on September 28, 1999. After more than two years of relationship, due to significant personality differences between the two parties, they were unable to continue living together. After multiple negotiations, on June 1, 2000, both parties voluntarily signed an "Agreement." It stipulated that they would terminate their relationship and refrain from interfering in each other's work and personal lives; the plaintiff would have full custody of the child; and the plaintiff would pay a one-time living expense of RMB 500,000 to the defendant, and also purchase insurance for the defendant for a term of 20 years, with an annual premium of RMB 27,000, to secure her future livelihood. However, at noon on June 15, 2000, the defendant, under the pretext of taking the child to visit a friend, took the child away from the plaintiff's residence. It was originally agreed that the child would be returned at 4:00 PM that afternoon. When the plaintiff attempted to contact the defendant shortly before 4:00 PM, the defendant's phone had already been turned off, and all subsequent contact attempts failed. The plaintiff has filed a lawsuit against the defendant with the Luohu District People's Court of Shenzhen, applying for property preservation against the defendant, and requesting the court to render a judgment in accordance with the law:
(1) Dissolve the cohabitation relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant;
(2) The court rules that the non-marital child Li XX shall be raised solely by the plaintiff.
II. Judgment
The Luohu District Court of Shenzhen rendered the following first-instance judgment [(2000) Shen Luo Fa Min Er Zi No. 324]:
The court holds that the plaintiff and defendant, having cohabited without marriage registration, have violated relevant legal provisions, and their cohabitation relationship should be dissolved. The agreement reached by both parties concerning the custody of their non-marital son and the defendant's future livelihood complies with relevant legal provisions and is hereby confirmed by the court. Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 7 and 19 of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China, the judgment is as follows:
1. Dissolve the illegal cohabitation relationship between the plaintiff, Li XX, and the defendant, Wu XX.
2. The non-marital child Li XX shall be raised by the plaintiff Li XX. The defendant Wu XX shall have the right to visit the child at any time, and may take the child back to Sichuan once during the annual holidays.
3. Plaintiff Li XX shall pay Defendant Wu XX a lump-sum living expense of RMB 500,000 (this amount has been fully paid). The insurance premiums for the commercial insurance with a coverage amount of RMB 600,000 originally procured by Plaintiff Li XX for Defendant Wu XX shall continue to be paid by Li XX (once a year, amounting to over RMB 27,000).
The litigation preservation fee of RMB 3,030 and the acceptance fee of RMB 50 in this case shall be borne by the plaintiff Li XX.
III. Case Analysis
This case is not an ordinary cohabitation relationship. The parties were not married but had a child together, and their voluntary signing of the "Agreement" through equal negotiation to dissolve the de facto marriage relationship is permitted by law. It should be said that the "Agreement" is lawful, reasonable, and sensible, thoroughly considered, and highly humane, and it was also affirmed by the judgment of the court of first instance. The plaintiff has long been engaged in business in Shenzhen, with a stable source of income and a good living environment, which is conducive to the child's growth. Therefore, custody of the child was awarded to the plaintiff. Because the defendant had no job and no marketable skills, the plaintiff also provided the defendant with considerable financial support and allowed the defendant to visit the child at any time, and to take the child back to the defendant's hometown in Sichuan during annual holidays, enabling the child to enjoy the love of both parents and ensuring the child's physical and mental health. However, merely half a month after signing the agreement, the defendant breached it by taking the child away and not returning, which not only harmed the plaintiff but also was detrimental to the child's healthy growth. The key to the defendant ultimately returning the child and accepting the judgment lay in the Zhiming Law Firm's timely adoption of forceful measures after accepting the entrustment of the plaintiff, Li XX: on June 16, 2000, the very day the case was accepted, the Zhiming lawyers immediately applied to the court for property preservation of the funds in the two accounts through which the defendant had received RMB 500,000 from the plaintiff. After accepting the application, the court sealed the two accounts and found that only RMB 190,000 remained, with more than RMB 300,000 having already been withdrawn by the defendant. The Zhiming lawyers immediately submitted a second "Property Preservation Application" to the court, requesting that the court seal the defendant's real estate property in her hometown in Sichuan. A series of strong legal measures prompted the defendant to calmly reconsider the serious consequences that her breach might bring. After weighing the pros and cons, she ultimately chose the sensible course of returning the child and accepting the judgment, resulting in an outcome that could be described as satisfactory for both the plaintiff, the defendant, and the child.
(Wu Xuan compiled and commented)
Zhiming Office
June 29, 2000
