Precedent No. 82/2025/AL was adopted by the Council of Justices of the Supreme People’s Court on December 24, 2025, and published under Decision No. 339a/QD-CA dated December 25, 2025, of the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court.
1. What is a precedent?
Precedent refers to arguments and rulings in legally effective judgments and decisions of the Court on a specific case selected by the Council of Justices of the Supreme People’s Court and published by the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court as a precedent for Courts to study and apply in adjudication. (Article 1 of Resolution 04/2019/NQ-HĐTP)
A selected precedent must meet the following criteria:
– It contains value in clarifying provisions of the law that have different interpretations, analyzing and explaining legal issues and events, and pointing out principles, handling directions, and legal norms to be applied in a specific case, or demonstrating justice for issues not yet specifically regulated by law;
– It is normative;
– It has guidance value for the uniform application of the law in adjudication.
2. Precedent No. 82/2025/AL on determining the common property of husband and wife before marriage registration
2.1. Source of the precedent
Cassation Decision No. 02/2022/HNGĐ-GĐT dated January 13, 2022, of the Council of Justices of the Supreme People’s Court regarding the marriage and family case “Dispute over divorce and property division upon divorce” between the plaintiff, Mr. E, and the defendant, Ms. Nguyen Thị Ngoc C; the persons with related rights and obligations are Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc B and Mr. Nguyen Kim D.
Location of the precedent content:
Paragraphs 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 of the “Court’s Opinion” section.
2.2. Summary of the precedent content
– Precedent situation:
One spouse is a foreigner; both parties have filed a marriage registration declaration and organized a wedding ceremony. Subsequently, the Vietnamese spouse enters into a land use rights transfer contract and is granted a land use rights certificate before the marriage is officially registered. The transferor confirms that the land use rights were transferred to both the husband and wife.
– Legal solution:
In this case, the Court must determine that the land use rights acquired by one party are the common property of the husband and wife.
Legal regulations related to the precedent:
– Clause 7 Article 8, Article 27, Article 32, Article 95 of the Law on Marriage and Family of Vietnam 2000 (corresponding to Clause 13 Article 3, Article 33, Article 43, Article 59 of the Law on Marriage and Family of Vietnam 2014, amended and supplemented in 2025);
– Article 215 of the Civil Code 2005 (corresponding to Article 208 of the Civil Code 2015).
Keywords of the precedent:
“Common property of husband and wife”; “Land use rights transfer contract”; “Before marriage registration”; “Marriage registration declaration”.
CASE CONTENT:
The plaintiff, Mr. E, and his authorized representative, Ms. Le Nguyen Vi V, stated: Mr. E and Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C married on August 6, 2013, at the People’s Committee of Binh Dinh Province. On November 2, 2016, Mr. E filed for divorce from Ms. C; regarding children and common debts: there are none, and no request for the Court to resolve; regarding common property, it includes:
– Machinery and electronic items he purchased before and during the marriage: refrigerator, television, washing machine, microwave, air compressor with a total value of nearly 50,000,000 VND. He requested division but later voluntarily withdrew this request.
– An area of 1,288m2 in H Hamlet, T Village, B District, Binh Thuan Province: this land area originated from the couple transferring from Mr. Tran Minh P and Ms. Nguyen Thi P1 for 600,000,000 VND. The couple signed a purchase contract with Mr. P and Ms. P1 via a handwritten document on October 5, 2013, for a total of 1,288m2, but only 589.8m2 had a land use rights certificate. Therefore, on October 8, 2013, the couple and the sellers went to the Notary Office to complete the transfer of 589.8m2 and paid an advance of 322,000,000 VND; the remaining area was to wait for the certificate to be issued before completing the transfer. On April 8, 2014, the parties went to S Notary Office to sign the transfer contract for 590.7m2. The couple paid the full amount. However, Ms. C deceived him twice, saying that as a foreigner, he could not be named in the contract, so she should be named; yet she allowed Mr. Nguyen Kim D and Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc B (her siblings) to be named as the buyers, specifically:
+ Transfer contract dated October 8, 2013: Mr. P, Ms. P1, and Ms. P2 transferred 589.8m2 (Lot 57, Map 03) to Ms. C and Ms. B for 249,900,000 VND.
+ Transfer contract dated April 8, 2014: Mr. P and Ms. P1 transferred 590.7m2 (Lot 57, Map 335) to Mr. Nguyen Kim D for 100,000,000 VND.
By June 2014, they obtained a construction permit and built a Grade 3B house (173.85m2) costing about 700,000,000 VND.
– An area of 600m2 in H Hamlet, T Village, B District, Binh Thuan Province: transferred from Ms. Tran Thi N for 280,000,000 VND according to a Purchase Agreement dated July 9, 2013. Two contracts were established:
+ Transfer contract dated July 9, 2013: Ms. N and Ms. M transferred 291.3m2 (Lot 56, Map 3, later Lot 58, Map 335) to Ms. C for 100,000,000 VND.
+ Transfer contract dated September 26, 2014: Ms. N and Ms. M transferred 261.4m2 (Lot 67, Map 335) to Ms. C for 130,000,000 VND.
Mr. E claimed the money for these lots came from him. Due to language barriers and trust, he let Ms. C be named on the certificates. He requested the Court to divide the common property (the house and 1,888m2 of land) totaling 1,630,000,000 VND.
The defendant, Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C, stated: She agreed on the marriage and child details. She agreed to the divorce. Regarding debt: She and Mr. E owe Ms. Tran Thi To U 300,000,000 VND; Mr. E holds the debt note, so she didn’t request a resolution. Regarding property: they have no common property. The assets Mr. E mentioned are her and her siblings’ separate property:
– 552.7m2 land bought from Ms. N with her own savings before knowing Mr. E.
– 589.8m2 land (Certificate in the names of Ms. C and Ms. B): Ms. B owns 85% and Ms. C owns 15% from pre-marital funds.
– 590.7m2 land (Certificate in the name of Mr. Nguyen Kim D): belongs to Mr. D; Ms. C only manages it.
– The house: built with money contributed by Mr. D, Ms. B, and herself; she is only a manager and minority contributor.
She denied receiving money from Mr. E for these assets.
The person with related rights and obligations, Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc B, stated: In November 2013, she bought a lot through Ms. P. Since Ms. P could not afford it, Ms. B bought it for 500,000 VND/m2 totaling 322,000,000 VND. The money was her family’s savings; Ms. C only had the initial 50,000,000 VND deposit. She disagreed with dividing the land as she only asked Ms. C to hold the name for convenience.
The person with related rights and obligations, Mr. Nguyen Kim D, stated: In early 2013, Ms. C and her husband planned to buy land but lacked funds. Later, due to their conflicts, they stopped. Ms. B helped Ms. C buy 589.8m2. In April 2014, Mr. D bought the remaining 590.7m2 for 250,000,000 VND. It is his separate property.
The person with related rights and obligations, Ms. Tran Thi N, stated: On July 9, 2013, she transferred 600m2 to the couple for 280,000,000 VND. Payment was in installments. Ms. C said Mr. E was a foreigner and could not be named, so Ms. C represented both. She confirmed transferring land to the couple, not just Ms. C.
The persons with related rights and obligations, Mr. Tran Minh P and Ms. Nguyen Thi P1, stated: On October 5, 2013, they transferred 1,288m2 to the couple for 600,000,000 VND via a handwritten paper signed by Mr. E. Later, Ms. C explained Mr. E could not be named in official contracts due to being a foreigner. They confirmed they only transferred the land to Ms. C and Mr. E.
In the First Instance Marriage and Family Judgment No. 34/2017/HNGĐ-ST dated November 30, 2017, the People’s Court of Binh Thuan Province decided:
– Recognized the mutual consent for divorce.
– Accepted Mr. E’s withdrawal of the claim for 50,000,000 VND worth of assets.
– Accepted Mr. E’s property division request. Determined the common property of the couple created during the marriage includes 1,888m2 of land (under various certificates) and one Grade 3B house (173.85m2). Total value: 3,104,426,000 VND.
Determined equal contribution. Each party is entitled to 1,552,213,000 VND. Assigned ownership and management of the house and land to Ms. C. Ms. C is obligated to refund Mr. E 1,552,213,000 VND.
On December 7, 2017, Ms. C, Mr. D, and Ms. B appealed. On December 13, 2017, Mr. E appealed for re-valuation.
In the Appellate Marriage and Family Judgment No. 04/2019/HNGĐ-PT dated March 5, 2019, the High People’s Court in Ho Chi Minh City decided:
Accepted the appeals. Modified the judgment:
a/ Determined common property includes: Lot 67 (261.4m2), 1/2 of Lot 57 (589.8m2/2), and the Grade 3B house.
b/ Assigned usage and ownership to Ms. C.
c/ Forced Ms. C to refund Mr. E 30% of the land value and 20% of the house value. Total (estimated): 426,755,000 VND.
On May 22, 2019, Mr. E requested a cassation review. On November 23, 2021, the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court protested the appellate judgment.
At the cassation meeting, the Supreme People’s Procuracy representative proposed accepting the protest.
COURT’S OPINION:
[1] Regarding the marriage: The couple married on August 6, 2013. Both consented to divorce. The lower courts’ recognition of divorce is grounded.
[2] Regarding the determination of common property:
[3] For Lot 67, Map 335 (261.4m2):
[4] On September 26, 2014, Ms. N transferred this lot to Ms. C. The receipt showed both Mr. E and Ms. C as payors. Ms. N confirmed transferring to the couple.
[5] Although the certificate is in Ms. C’s name, it was formed during marriage and there is no evidence of it being separate property. The lower courts’ determination as common property is grounded under Clause 3 Article 27 of the Law on Marriage and Family 2000.
[6] For Lot 58, Map 335 (291.3m2):
[7] On July 9, 2013, Ms. N transferred this lot to Ms. C. On July 22, 2013, Ms. C was granted the certificate.
[8] Mr. E claimed it was common property. Ms. C claimed it was separate property bought before marriage with her own money.
[9] However, Ms. N confirmed she transferred it to the couple. Ms. C told her Mr. E was a foreigner and could not be named. According to Article 9 of the Land Law 2003, foreigners were not allowed to receive land use rights in Vietnam. Thus, Ms. C being the sole name-holder is consistent with the testimonies of Mr. E and Ms. N.
[10] Although the contract dated July 9, 2013, was signed before the official marriage registration (August 6, 2013), the couple had already filed a marriage registration declaration on April 16, 2013, and held a wedding in July 2013.
[11] Therefore, there is a basis to determine Lot 58 is common property. The First Instance Court was correct; the Appellate Court was incorrect to call it separate property.
[12] For Lot 57, Map 3 (589.8m2) and Lot 57, Map 335 (590.7m2):
[13] On October 5, 2013, the sellers transferred 1,288m2 to Ms. C via a handwritten paper signed by Ms. C and Mr. E. When formalizing contracts, the land was split: Ms. C and Ms. B were named for 589.8m2; Mr. D for 590.7m2.
[14] Certificates were issued accordingly in 2013 and 2014.
[15] Mr. E claimed these were common property; Ms. C and her siblings disagreed.
[16] However, the sellers (Mr. P, Ms. P1) confirmed they only transferred to the couple, not the siblings. Ms. C used the “foreigner” excuse again. This testimony is grounded.
[17] In fact, the siblings did not manage or use the land; the couple did and built a house there. The contractor confirmed the couple paid for the construction.
[18] Thus, there is a basis to determine these lots and the house as common property.
[19] The Appellate Court’s decision to split Lot 57 and exclude Lot 57 (590.7m2) was groundless.
[20] The First Instance Court was correct in identifying them as common property, but failed to review the legality of the certificates issued to the siblings, leaving the case partially unresolved.
[21] Regarding property division: The Appellate Court’s 70/30 split favored Ms. C unfairly and violated the principle of equal division under Article 59 of the Law on Marriage and Family 2014. The First Instance Court’s 50/50 split for land was correct. Regarding the house, since Mr. E was away during completion, a 20% share for him is appropriate.
[22] Regarding valuation: The Appellate Court used the First Instance valuation despite Mr. E’s request for re-valuation and Ms. C’s non-cooperation. This did not protect Mr. E’s interests.
For these reasons,
DECISION:
Pursuant to point a clause 2 Article 337, clause 1 Article 342, clause 3 Article 343, clause 1, 2 Article 345 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015;
1. Accept the Cassation Protest Decision No. 10/2021/KN-HNGĐ dated November 23, 2021, regarding the determination and division of common property.
2. Annul Appellate Judgment No. 04/2019/HNGĐ-PT and First Instance Judgment No. 34/2017/HNGĐ-ST regarding the determination and division of common property.
3. Transfer the case file to the People’s Court of Binh Thuan Province for retrial of the common property part.
PRECEDENT CONTENT
“[7] On July 9, 2013, Ms. Tran Thi N and Ms. Tran Thi Huyen M (Ms. N’s daughter) transferred Lot No. 56, Map No. 3 (now Lot No. 58, Map No. 335) with an area of 291.3m2 in H Hamlet, T Village, B District to Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C for 100,000,000 VND; the contract was notarized at S Notary Office. On July 22, 2013, Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C was granted a land use rights certificate by the People’s Committee of B District.
[8] Mr. E claimed that the aforementioned 291.3m2 of land is the common property of the couple and requested a 1/2 division. Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C claimed the land was her separate property purchased before marriage with her personal funds.
[9] However, according to the confirmation of Ms. Tran Thi N, she transferred the lot to both Mr. E and Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C. Ms. Tran Thi N further stated that because Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C said Mr. E was a foreigner, he could not be named in the land transfer contract and was not allowed to buy land in Vietnam. Under Article 9 of the Land Law 2003, foreigners were not allowed to receive land use rights transfers in Vietnam. Therefore, the fact that only Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C was named (as the transferee) in the contract and the certificate was issued in her name on July 22, 2013, is consistent with the testimonies of Mr. E and Ms. Tran Thi N.
[10] Although the land transfer contract dated July 9, 2013, was signed before Mr. E and Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C officially registered their marriage (August 6, 2013), they had already filed a marriage registration declaration on April 16, 2013, and organized a wedding ceremony in July 2013.
[11] Therefore, there is a basis to determine that Lot No. 58, Map No. 335, area 219.3m2, is the common property of Mr. E and Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C. The First Instance Court’s determination as common property is grounded. The Appellate Court’s determination as Ms. Nguyen Thi Ngoc C’s separate property is incorrect.”.
