|
|
|
|
 |
| |
According to Article 32 of Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on April 28th 2001), provisions concerning the child’s education fee or child-care expense shall not prevent the child to ask for higher expenses at any proper time. Meanwhile, the court will also lower the amount of the expenses if either party’s situation changes.
Relevant case
Mr. Ian and MS. Liu got divorced owing to emotionally disharmony. In the process of divorce procedures, due to the specific job functions of Ian (engaged in manual comic-making at that time), monthly wages of whom was over ten thousand Yuan, hence, both parties agreed on the costs of aliment of 2000 Yuan per month to Qian (two full years of life; their son born in wedlock), and Qian remitted to Liu’s specific banking account at the end of each month. However, Qian’s living situations changed enormously after 8 years.
Qian remarried in 1996 and gave birth to another son, called Qian. In 1998, Qian and his current wife purchased a commercial residential building at the certain neighborhood of Hongkou District in Shanghai via housing mortgage, so they had to refund nearly 5000 Yuan per month for the mortgage. In 1999, Qian’s mother fell ill and hasn’t completely recovered up to now. Besides, with the huge change in world cartoon market and manual designing was replaced by 3D, Qian’s monthly income shrank from ten thousand Yuan to 3000 Yuan or so at the later part of year in 2004.
To some extent, Qian felt hard to bear 2000 Yuan of the costs of aliment according to the divorce agreement. Through the agent, Qian tried to negotiate with Liu for slightly decreasing the costs of aliment for Qian, but his request was strongly against by Liu. So, Qian had no alternative but to lodge an appeal for the decrease at the people’s court in Shanghai.
The plaintiff Qian stated that he got divorced with Liu, the accused Qian’s mother, owing to emotionally disharmony in April 1995 and they reached agreements on the costs of aliment for his son born in wedlock, Qian, of 2000 Yuan per month until he came of age at 18. So in the past 9 years, he has paid nearly 200,000 Yuan for living expenses in all and now because of the obvious decrease of the plaintiff’s income and the increasing expenses for his current family, he requested the court to slightly decrease the amount of the costs of aliment in line with laws.
The statutory agent of the accused Qian, Liu, his mother, argued that the plaintiff should abide by the stipulated costs of aliment of 2000 Yuan according to the divorce agreement. She thought that the plaintiff’s arguments were not the fact and the court should reject his request in line with laws.
Through the mediation of the court and both parties’ lawyers, they reached a reconciliation agreement in the long run, decreasing the costs of aliment from 2000 Yuan to 1000 Yuan per month. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
