The Heishan District People's Court in Yiyang City recently ruled against a woman who attempted to use a marriage promise to negate a significant debt. The court declared that marriage, being a voluntary union based on affection, cannot serve as a tool for settling debts or material exchange, thereby upholding the sanctity of marital agreements.

The case involved Mr. Luo and Ms. Jia, residents of Hunan, Trung Quoc, who met online and quickly developed a relationship. During their courtship, Ms. Jia faced financial difficulties and borrowed 50,000 yuan from Mr. Luo.

To secure the loan, Ms. Jia drafted a promissory note containing a unique clause: if they were to marry, the 50,000 yuan would automatically transform into a dowry from Mr. Luo's family to hers, nullifying her obligation to repay. However, before any marriage could take place, the couple separated due to irreconcilable differences.

Following their breakup, Mr. Luo repeatedly requested the return of his money, but Ms. Jia refused. She argued that she remained "ready to marry" as per the agreement in the promissory note, and therefore, the loan had already been converted into a dowry.

The dispute escalated and was brought before the Heishan District People's Court. In its ruling early this year, the judge emphasized that the clause stipulating "debt repayment by marriage" violated public order and good customs, rendering it void. The court clarified that a financial obligation remains independent of a romantic relationship, even if the latter ends.

Consequently, the court ordered Ms. Jia to return the full 50,000 yuan to her former boyfriend. The judge remarked, "Love requires trust but also reason. Embedding personal conditions into financial transactions not only causes legal trouble but also harms the essence of marriage."

Nhat Minh (According to Sina)