Helping son buy a house then reneging, gift contract can be revoked

[2] Compiled from: Wuxi Intermediate Court, Jiangsu High Court
 
In modern society, young people face immense pressure when it comes to marriage and homeownership, and parents typically provide some degree of financial assistance. However, many young people regard parental contributions to home purchases, down payments, or monthly mortgage payments as a “standard” or even an “obligation” of parents. Such a mindset finds no support, whether morally or legally.

 
 

Case review
Chen, a 50-year-old man working in sales, has recently encountered some troubles. Because he failed to buy a house for his son as promised, Chen was unexpectedly sued by his son in court. Three years ago, Chen completed his divorce procedures and later remarried, which created a rift between him and his only son, Xiao Chen.
 
Later, Xiao Chen fell in love and began discussing marriage with his girlfriend. In April of this year, he asked his father to contribute funds to purchase a marital home for him. Upon hearing that his son was starting a family, Lao Chen was overjoyed and promised on the spot to provide the funds, and soon went with his son to the sales office to start viewing properties. After returning home, Lao Chen did some calculations and realized he actually could not afford such a large sum, so he told his son he would no longer contribute. Xiao Chen hung up the phone and rushed to Lao Chen’s home, where they had a heated argument. After police officers from the local station came to mediate, Lao Chen wrote a written agreement promising to contribute 1 million yuan toward the purchase of the home.
 
[6] Later, Lao Chen failed to pay within the agreed time and repeatedly made excuses. In anger, Xiao Chen sued Lao Chen in court, demanding that his father fulfill the promise. During the trial, Lao Chen stated that he was facing business difficulties and owed significant bank loans, making him unable to provide the funds, and sought to revoke the gift. Xiao Chen insisted that the agreement was a contract for house purchase funding, not a gift contract, and thus could not be revoked.
 
The court, after trial, held that the agreement signed by Old Chen and his son was in fact a gift contract. A gift contract is a contract whereby the donor gives his own property to the donee free of charge, and the donee expresses acceptance of the gift. The donor may revoke the gift before the transfer of rights to the gifted property. Both parties now confirm that the house purchase payment of 1 million yuan has not been delivered, so Old Chen enjoys the right of arbitrary revocation in accordance with the law, and as the donor, he has the right to revoke the gift before the transfer of rights to the gifted property. Old Chen failed to pay the amount within the time limit agreed upon in the agreement, indicating by his actual conduct his refusal to perform the agreement, and again expressed revocation of the gift during the trial of the case. Therefore, the agreement involved in the case has been revoked, and Little Chen has no right to demand continued performance from Old Chen.
 
Ultimately, the court legally dismissed Xiao Chen's lawsuit.
 
 
The [1] The People's Republic of China Civil Code
Article 658
The donor's right of arbitrary revocation and its limitations. The donor may revoke the gift before the rights to the gifted property have been transferred.
Notarized gift contracts or those that cannot be revoked due to public welfare or moral obligations, such as disaster relief, poverty alleviation, or disability assistance, are not subject to the preceding provision.
 
[1] The author's perspective
When engaging in civil activities, civil subjects shall not violate the law or offend public order and good morals. Although most parents, driven by emotion, morality, and custom, still provide assistance to their adult children in purchasing homes and regard it as their own responsibility, this is a moral choice of the parents rather than a legal obligation. In today’s era of rapid economic and social development, many young people, when confronted with housing prices, marriage, and childbearing, directly choose to “lie flat” and “leech off their parents,” while behind them their parents bear the burden and “pay the bill” for their happiness. As adults with full civil capacity and the ability to work, they should not take their parents’ love and support for granted as “only natural and right.”