Hello, Lawnet would like to answer as follows:
According to the provisions of Article 116 of the Civil Code 2015, civil transaction is a contract or a unilateral legal act which gives rise to, changes or terminates civil rights and/or obligations.
According to the provisions of Article 117 of the Civil Code 2015, a civil transaction shall be effective when it satisfies all of the following conditions:
- Participants in the transaction have legal personality and/or legal capacity in conformity with such transaction;
- Participants in the transaction act entirely voluntarily;
- The purpose and contents of the transaction are not contrary to the law and/or social ethics.
Civil transactions which fail to satisfy any one of the conditions specified in Article 117 of Civil Code 2015 shall be invalid. There are 07 cases of invalid civil transactions specified in Articles 123, Article 124, Article 125, Article 126, Article 127, Article 128, Article 129 of the Civil Code 2015 as follows:
(1) Invalidity of civil transactions due to breach of legal prohibitions or contravention of social ethics
(2) Invalidity of civil transactions due to falsification
(3) Invalidity of civil transactions established and performed by minors or legally incapacitated persons or persons with limited cognition and behavior control or persons with limited legal capacity
(4) Invalidity of civil transactions due to misunderstanding
(5) Invalidity of civil transactions due to deception, threat or compulsion
(6) Invalidity of civil transactions established by person lacking in cognition and behavior control
(7) Invalidity of civil transactions due to non-compliance with form
Below are some judgments on invalid civil transactions:
- Judicial level: Appeal
- Judicial agency: People's Court of Ha Tinh province
- Quoted content: "In 1989, Ms. Nguyen Thi C was granted a plot of land of 250 m2 by the People's Committee of District T. In 2006, Mrs. C passed away without leaving a will. In 2017, Ms. C's daughter, Ms. Vo Thi T, discovered that Ms. C had previously sold the above plot of land to Mr. Nguyen Dinh L and Ms. Nguyen Thi C in 1989 for 700,000 VND but only paid 350,000 VND as a deposit. Ms. T believes that the land sale is not real. Ms. T sued to declare the land sale contract between Ms. C and Mr. L and Ms. C invalid and force Mr. L and Ms. C to return the land use right certificate. Ha Tinh City People's Court declared the land sale contract invalid, forcing Mr. L and Ms. C to return the land certificate to Ms. T but forcing Ms. T to pay Mr. L and Ms. C the value of 1/2 of the land plot..."
Judgment on the dispute requesting to declare civil transactions invalid No. 365/2022/DS-PT
- Judicial level: Appeal
- Judicial agency: People's Court of Long An province
- Quoted content: "Mrs. V and Mr. D have lived together since 1976. In 2020, Mr. D transferred to Mr. H the plot of land 699 that Mr. D and Mrs. V had previously used together since 1979. Ms. V sued to declare the transfer contract between Mr. D and Mr. H invalid because it did not have her consent. T District People's Court rejected Ms. V's request. Ms. V appealed. At the appeal hearing, Ms. V expressed that she did not know about Mr. D's transfer. The common children also confirmed that Ms. V did not know and did not benefit from the land transfer. The People's Procuracy of Long An province believes that the land plot is the common property of husband and wife, so Mr. D's transfer without Ms. V's consent is illegal..."
- Judicial level: First instance
- Judicial agency: People's Court of KT District, HD Province
- Quoted content: "In 2020, the People's Court of KT district forced Mr. T and Ms. Tr to repay Mr. H and Ms. Nh's debt of more than 2 billion VND. In June 2019, before the judgment took effect, Mr. T and Ms. Tr transferred to Ms. H (Mr. T's sister) the plot of land and house that they had previously mortgaged to the bank. In October 2020, the couple Mr. H and Ms. Nh sued to declare the above transfer transaction invalid because they believed that Mr. T and Ms. Tr aimed to avoid debt repayment obligations. In court, Ms. H explained that the transfer was because she had paid the bank debt on Mr. T's behalf. Ms. Tr should receive the property transfer to offset the money paid. The KT District People's Procuracy proposed not to accept the lawsuit request of Mr. H and Mrs. Nh because the transfer transaction took place before the judgment, forcing Mr. T and Mrs. Tr to repay the debt..."
- Judicial level: Appeal
- Judicial agency: Hanoi People's Court
- Quoted content: "In 2014, Ms. L hired Mr. H (lawyer) to provide legal support for the women to determine the origin of the 128 m2 plot of land. If determined, Ms. L will buy back 64 m2 of land from Mr. H. Ms. L transferred 1.62 billion VND to Mr. H and 300 million VND to Mr. H's wife. Because Mr. H could not determine the origin of the land, Ms. L requested that the above transactions be declared invalid and forced Mr. H to return the money. Ha Dong District People's Court accepted Ms. L's request, forcing Mr. H to return 1.62 billion VND, but rejected the request for 300 million VND..."
- Judicial level: Appeal
- Judicial agency: People's Court of Lao Cai province
- Quoted content: "In 1993, Ms. T and her husband bought land from Mr. M and his wife but did not go through transfer procedures. In 2001, Mr. T arbitrarily sold the above land to Mr. H for 5.5 million VND without the consent of his wife, Mrs. T.
In 2020, Ms. T sued to declare the 2001 contract between Mr. T and Mr. H invalid, forcing Mr. H to return the land. Bao Thang District People's Court accepted Ms. T's request. Mr. H appealed. At appeal, the People's Procuracy of Lao Cai Province said there was evidence to determine that Ms. T knew and agreed to the land sale. Therefore, we request to amend the first instance judgment and deny Ms. T's request to sue..."
Please Login to be able to download