论父母为已婚子女出资购房行为的性质

On the nature of parents’ contribution to the purchase of a house for their married children

在司法实践中,父母为已婚子女出资购房行为的性质为赠与还是借款,存在争论,判决结果不一。《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国民法典〉婚姻家庭编的解释(一)》第29条第2款采赠与说。赠与说与权利义务相一致原则不相符,亦不利于形成良好的社会风尚。在处理出资纠纷时,当事人未做约定或约定不明确的,应推定为借款。在有证据证明出资人具有赠与意思时,但是对子女的赠与还是对子女及其配偶的赠与表示不明确时,应视为对子女及其配偶的赠与。

In judical practice,there is controversy over whether parents' contribution to the purchase of a house for their married children is a gift or a loan,and the verdict varies.Paragraph 2 of Article 29 of Interpretation(1) of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the “Marriage and Family” Book of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China adopts the position of “gift theory”.The theory of gift is inconsistent with the principle of consistency between rights and obligations,and it is also not conducive to the formation of good social customs.In dealing with a dispute over capital contribution,if the parties have not made an agreement or the agreement is unclear,it should be presumed as a loan.When there is evidence to prove that the investor has a gift intention,but when it is unclear whether the gift is to children or to children and their spouses,it should be considered as a gift to children and their spouses.