If one spouse sells a house behind the other party s back, is the contract for the sale of the house

If the sales contract is established in accordance with the law, then the sales contract has legal effect and cannot harm a bona fide third party.

I don't think it works. If you are married, the house belongs to two people, and you can't sell it behind each other's backs.

It is not valid, because the contract of sale and purchase of the house needs to be signed by two people. If it is only signed by one person, there is no legal basis.

Legal analysis: the unauthorized sale of a house by one of the husband and wife cannot be absolutely concluded to be invalid or valid, and must be judged comprehensively

1. Invalid. Husbands and wives have equal rights to dispose of jointly owned property. The house acquired during the marriage is the joint property of the husband and wife, although only the name of one person is registered on the title deed, and the disposition of the joint property by either spouse must be obtained with the consent of the other party.

Unless otherwise agreed by the parties.

2. Effective. Whether from a legal point of view or from a practical judgment, if the third party is acting in good faith and has paid a reasonable consideration, and the house has been delivered or transferred, the contract is not only valid, but should continue to be performed if there is no delivery or transfer.

Legal basis: Article 1062 of the Civil Code The following property acquired by husband and wife during the existence of the marital relationship shall be the joint property of the husband and wife and shall be jointly owned by the husband and wife

1) Wages, bonuses, and remuneration for labor services;

2) Income from production, operation and investment;

3) income from intellectual property rights;

4) Inherited or donated property, except as provided for in item 3 of Article 1063 of this Law;

5) Other property that shall be jointly owned.

Husband and wife have equal rights to dispose of joint property.

Legal analysis: If one of the husband and wife sells the house without authorization and signs the house sale and purchase of the Hexiang group, if the house sale contract is established in accordance with the law or has the ability to enter into the contract and the intention of the buyer and the seller is true, and does not violate the law and the public interest. And if it constitutes an apparent **, the sales contract has legal effect.

Legal basis: Article 143 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China Civil juristic acts that meet the following conditions are valid:

1) The perpetrator has the corresponding capacity for civil conduct;

2) The meaning is genuine;

3) Do not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and do not violate public order and good customs.

Article 172:Where the actor does not have ** rights, exceeds ** rights, or still carries out ** conduct after ** rights are terminated, and the counterpart has reason to believe that the actor has ** rights, the ** conduct is valid.

A contract signed by one of the spouses who is authorized to sell the house is valid. The sale of an indiscriminate house that is the joint property of the husband and wife needs to be determined by both husband and wife, and the right of a single party to dispose of it is restricted. If one party independently carries out the sale without the consent of the spouse, the spouse may recover the right to the house, but it needs to bear the liability for breach of contract to the buyer and compensate for its losses; Where the buyer purchases in good faith, pays a reasonable consideration, and has already gone through the property rights registration formalities, the people's court will not support the claim of recovering the house.

[Legal basis].Article 171 of the Civil Code.

Where the actor does not have ** rights, exceeds ** rights, or still carries out ** conduct after ** rights are terminated, and it is not recognized by the ** person, it is not effective against the ** person. The counterpart may urge the person being ** to make a retrospective recognition within 30 days of receiving the notice. If the person does not express it, it shall be deemed to be a refusal to blindly accompany Hongjue to recognize.

Before the act carried out by the perpetrator is recognized, the bona fide counterpart has the right to revoke it. The revocation shall be made by way of notification. Where the conduct carried out by the actor is not recognized, the bona fide counterpart has the right to request that the actor perform the debt or request compensation from the actor for the harm suffered.

However, the scope of compensation shall not exceed the benefits that the counterparty can obtain when the person is posthumously recognized. Where the counterpart knows or should know that the actor has no rights, the counterpart and the actor bear responsibility in accordance with their respective faults.

Real estate blue socks is the name of the husband and wife, whether the sales contract signed by one party is valid depends on whether it is agreed by the other party, under normal circumstances, both parties need to sign to do, but if there is a power of attorney or consent of the other party, it is okay.

The legal basis for the remorse related to this article].

Article 9 of the Regulations on the Administration of Urban Private Housing stipulates that for the purchase and sale of urban private housing, the seller must hold the house ownership certificate and identity certificate, and the buyer must go through the formalities with the housing management authority where the house is located with the letter of proof of purchase of the house and the identity certificate.

No unit or individual may buy or sell private urban houses without permission. It is strictly forbidden to use private houses in the city to carry out speculative activities.

Article 10 stipulates that the owner of the house must submit a certificate of consent of the co-owners when selling the co-owned house. Under the same conditions, the co-owners have the right of first refusal.

Method of confirming whether the sale of the house by one of the husband and wife is valid: If during the existence of the marital relationship, without dividing the property, some of the co-owners dispose of the joint property without authorization, it is generally deemed invalid. Generally speaking, in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the buyer, whether the buyer is bona fide and paid should be used as the condition for judging the validity of the contract for selling the house without the consent of both husband and wife, as long as the buyer and the waiter have evidence to prove the consent of the husband and wife, the contract is valid.

1. Can a husband sell a car without his wife's consent?

Whether a husband can sell a car without the wife's consent should be distinguished from the following situations:

1. If the husband and wife have joint ownership of the vehicle, the co-owners have common rights and obligations to the common property. Where, during the existence of the joint relationship between husband and wife, some co-owners dispose of the joint property without authorization, it is generally found to be invalid;

2. Where a third party acquires the property in good faith or for compensation, the lawful rights and interests of the third party shall be safeguarded; Losses to other co-owners shall be compensated by the person who disposes of the co-owned property without authorization.

2. Is the house sale contract signed by one party valid?

The contract signed by one of the spouses for the sale of the house is valid. This is because both husband and wife have equal rights to dispose of joint property. Where one party buys a house jointly owned by the husband and wife without the consent of the other party, and the third party purchases it in good faith, pays a reasonable consideration and goes through the property rights registration formalities, and the other party claims to recover the house, the people's court will not support it.

Where one of the husband and wife disposes of the jointly owned house without authorization, causing losses to the other party, and the other party requests compensation for the losses at the time of divorce, the people's court shall support it.

3. Do husband and wife have the right to dispose of joint property equally?

Husbands and wives have the right to dispose of joint property equally. During the existence of the joint ownership relationship, if one party disposes of the joint property without the consent of the other party, it is invalid. According to the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, co-owners enjoy common rights and bear common obligations in respect of common property.

Where during the existence of a co-ownership relationship, a portion of the co-owners dispose of the co-ownership property without authorization, it is generally found to be invalid. However, where a third party acquires property in good faith and for compensation, the lawful rights and interests of the third party shall be preserved, and the losses of the other co-owners shall be disposed of without authorization.

Article 1065 of the Civil Code.

The man and the woman may agree that the property acquired during the marriage and the property before the marriage shall be owned separately or jointly or partly separately and partly jointly. The agreement shall be in writing. Where there is no agreement or the agreement is not clear, the provisions of articles 1062 and 1063 of this Law apply.

If the house is the personal property of one of the spouses, the contract of sale shall be valid.

If the house is purchased jointly after the husband and wife get married, the house is the joint property of the husband and wife, the house is jointly disposed of by the husband and wife, and one of the husband and wife sells the house without authorization and signs the house sale contract, if the house sale and purchase are both established in accordance with the law and constitute the first appearance, the sale and purchase contract has legal effect.

Legal basis] Article 172 of the Civil Code, if the actor does not have the right to do so, exceeds the right to do so, or after the right is terminated, he still carries out the act, and the counterpart has reason to believe that the actor has the right, the act is effective.