Being a person's name is not necessarily a private property
After nearly 30 years of living together, what made Mr. Minh and Ms. Hanh argue most fiercely when deciding to divorce was not the house they were living in but the 1.3 billion VND savings book only in Ms. Hanh's name.
Ms. Hanh said that she was the one who was in the book, directly deposited money for many years, and the money matured, so the money belonged to her. Mr. Minh again said that it included salary, bonuses and savings that the couple had saved for many years.
The money I earn every month is kept by my wife. Now that the book is in her name and it's said to be personal money, I don't agree," Mr. Minh said in a hypothetical situation.
A savings book only has one person's name, but when a marriage breaks down, the important question is where the money in it comes from. Normally, when there is no dispute, the person named in the savings book can carry out transactions with the bank alone according to regulations. Therefore, many people naturally assume that if the book is in their name, the money is also their own.
However, when husband and wife dispute property, determining whether the money is common or private property must consider the source of formation.
Article 33 of the 2014 Law on Marriage and Family stipulates that common property of husband and wife includes property created by husband and wife, income from labor, production and business activities and other legal incomes during the marriage period. In case there is no basis to prove that the disputed property is private property, it is considered common property.
Therefore, if the 1.3 billion VND of Mr. Minh and his wife were accumulated from salaries, bonuses and income of the two people during the marriage period, the fact that the book was only in Ms. Hanh's name would not automatically turn the entire amount into private property.
Another more complicated situation is that Mr. Phuc had 600 million VND saved before the wedding.
After getting married, he still kept the book in his name but paid more salaries, bonuses and savings together many times. More than 20 years later, the balance increased to 1.1 billion VND.
If divorced, the problem cannot be solved just by looking at the name on the book. Mr. Phuc must also prove the origin of the initial 600 million VND and the process of private money, money formed in marriage being put into the book.
In the opposite direction, Ms. Mai was given 800 million VND by her parents separately after getting married. She deposited this amount into the bank and kept all the gift papers and transfer documents.
If a dispute arises, the fact that the book is opened after the wedding day is not enough to conclude that it is common property. The source of money and evidence are important factors to determine the origin of the property.
Dividing in half doesn't always mean 50-50
According to Article 59 of the Law on Marriage and Family 2014, when the property regime of husband and wife as prescribed by law is applied, common property is in principle divided in half but takes into account many factors such as the circumstances of the family and each party, contributions, legitimate interests in production, business, occupation as well as the fault of each party in violating the rights and obligations of husband and wife.
The contribution of effort should not only be understood as whoever brings more money home. The law also stipulates that the labor of husband and wife in the family is considered income-generating labor.
This is especially noteworthy for divorces in the U70s. After decades of living together, one person can directly earn money, while the other spends more time taking care of children, managing the family or supporting their partner's work.
Is the accumulated pension money to be divided?
For older couples, another question that easily arises is pension.
Suppose Mr. Thanh retires while still in the marriage period. Each month, his pension is transferred to his account. The couple uses a part for living expenses, and Mr. Thanh regularly deposits the rest in savings. After four years, the accumulated amount is 350 million VND.
When divorcing, he said that this was his pension, so it should be kept separate. The wife again said that during those four years, many living expenses of the two were spent from other family sources, and the pension was kept as accumulation when the marriage still existed.
This is a case where you should not just look at the name "retirement" and then implicitly conclude that the entire amount of money belongs to one party. It is necessary to distinguish the right to enjoy retirement benefits of individuals from the amount of money that has been received, used or accumulated during the marriage period, and at the same time compare the source of money, the time of formation and specific evidence.
