Typically in Judgment 120/2019/DS-PT dated April 3, 2019 on disputes over contracts for land use rights donation and property recovery. Whereby:
“In 1994, Ms. Pham Thi L was granted a certificate of land use right for plot number 123, 132 sheets of map number 3, located in T commune, G district, Ben Tre province, with a total area of 4270m2. Mrs. H is her youngest daughter and has lived with her since childhood. On January 12, 2012, she made a contract to donate land use rights to Ms. H and was certified at the People's Committee of commune T, district G and Ms. H was also granted a land use right certificate. However, because she is old, all the profits are handed over to Ms. H to harvest, but Mrs. H does not give her alimony. So mother and daughter quarreled, and she left her sister's house in Ba Tri to live. Now, Ms. L files a lawsuit to the Court to request the cancellation of the contract for the donation of land use rights on January 12, 2012 and asks Ms. H to return to Ms. L the value of the two land plots number 123 and 132 at the price of the Association. The fixed valuation is VND 250,101,000.”
At the time of the donation, there was a house on the disputed land that Mrs. L was living in. Mrs. H and Mr. X also acknowledged that the house was a common property, including Mrs. L. Moreover, with this donation, Mrs. L has no other land, no place to live now, and has to stay at his brother's house. Therefore, accepting part of Ms. L's request is reasonable.
The Court then decided:
- Cancellation of the contract of donation of land use rights signed on January 12, 2012 between the donor to Ms. Pham Thi L and the recipient to Ms. Pham Thi Hong H.
- Forcing Mrs. Pham Thi Hong H to return half of the value of land plot number 123 and plot 132 to Ms. Pham Thi L in cash of 125,050,500 VND.
Therefore, in the case of the above judgment, even though the donation has been completed (Ms. H has been granted a land use right certificate) and there is no legal regulation to allow the donor to reclaim the land. But the Court still considers the legality to force Ms. H to return to Ms. L 1/2 of the value of the land use rights that Ms. L has donated to Ms. H.
This is a very reasonable judgment of the Court. To help protect the parents who accidentally gave their children the only real estate property, only to be left unattended by their children. This judgment is also an opportunity for many people who have accidentally donated real estate to others without specific conditions for care and fostering in the contract, now without care and support, can believe in the fairness and love of the Court to reclaim the land that he has given to the wrong person.