After getting married, Mr. Kang purchased a commercial housing unit, which was registered under his name. Several years later, when Mr. Kang was preparing for a divorce, he and his wife, Ms. Liu, explicitly agreed in the "Divorce Agreement" that the commercial housing unit would "be transferred to the child's name", meaning it would belong to their daughter, Xiao Kang. However, due to reasons such as the child being a minor, Mr. Kang never went through the house transfer procedures. Later, Mr. Kang remarried to Ms. Qin and had two more children.
In 2025, Kang passed away due to illness. After graduating from university, Xiao Kang requested to transfer the ownership of this commercial housing to his name. However, his stepmother Qin and two half-sisters raised objections, arguing that the house belonged to Kang's estate and as legal heirs, they should also have a share. Based on this, they refused to cooperate with the transfer procedures. Xiao Kang immediately filed a lawsuit against his stepmother, two sisters, and his biological mother Liu to the People's Court of Linli County, Changde City, Hunan Province.
After trial, the People's Court of Linli County, Changde City, Hunan Province, held that the "Divorce Agreement" signed by Liu and Kang was a true expression of their mutual intention and was legal and valid.
Firstly, the agreement explicitly stipulates that the house involved in the case "shall be owned by the child". Essentially, it represents a gift commitment jointly made by Liu and Kang to their daughter Xiaokang, forming a legal and valid gift contract relationship between the two parties. From the signing of the agreement to Kang's death, there is no evidence indicating that the gift behavior fell under any statutory revocable circumstances (such as the donee seriously infringing upon the donor's legitimate rights and interests), therefore, the gift contract remains valid.
Secondly, Kang had an obligation to transfer the house to Xiaokang during his lifetime. After Kang's death, although the house falls within the scope of his estate, his unfulfilled gift obligation does not cease with his death. As the legal heirs of Kang, Qin and her two daughters, without explicitly waiving their inheritance rights, are legally obligated to continue fulfilling Kang's unfinished obligations during his lifetime, which is to assist in transferring the house to Xiaokang. Considering that Qin's two daughters are minors, their obligations are fulfilled by their guardian, Qin. Finally, the court ruled in accordance with the law that Xiaokang's biological mother, Liu, and stepmother, Qin, shall assist Xiaokang in changing the registration of the house involved in the case to Xiaokang's name within 5 days from the effective date of the judgment.
The agreement on property and child custody reached by the couple during their divorce reflects their true intentions and is legally binding. The clause "donating the house to the children" is not a casual promise, but a declaration of intent that carries legal obligations. Secondly, according to the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, the division of an estate shall be subject to the payment of taxes and debts that the deceased was legally obligated to pay. In this case, Kang's promise to "donate the house to his children" before his death has been transformed into a contractual obligation. This obligation falls within the category of his remaining "debts," and the heir should fulfill the obligations left by the deceased while inheriting the estate. Similarly, the final judgment in this case effectively safeguards the legitimate rights and interests of the children in the divorce agreement, preventing the negation of previous promises due to the death of one parent or changes in family structure, fully embodying the principle of good faith and the protection of minors' rights and interests.
The stipulation in the divorce agreement that "the house belongs to the child" is not a "good-for-nothing promise". No matter how family relationships change in the future, or even if one parent passes away unfortunately, as long as the gift is legal and valid, the heir has no right to revoke it at will. The law will firmly uphold its promise to the child, ensuring that the divorce agreement is carried through to the end.
This article is translated from the WeChat official account "Shandong Higher People's Court", and we would like to express our gratitude here!