A recently reported property dispute involving businessman Justin Sun and actress Jing Tian has drawn attention to a broader legal question: when a substantial amount of money or property is transferred during a romantic relationship in anticipation of marriage, can it be recovered if the marriage never occurs? Public reports indicate that a civil property dispute involving more than RMB 30 million has been filed, but the case has not yet proceeded to a determination on the merits.
California law provides a specific framework for certain gifts made in contemplation of marriage.
Gifts Made in Contemplation of Marriage
California Civil Code section 1590 applies when one party to a contemplated marriage gives money or property to the other on the basis or assumption that the marriage will take place.
If the recipient refuses to proceed with the contemplated marriage, or if the parties mutually agree not to marry, the person who made the gift may seek recovery of the property or such portion of its value as the court or jury determines is just under the circumstances.
Although engagement rings are the most familiar example, the statute expressly applies to money or property, so the analysis is not necessarily limited to jewelry.
Not Every Gift Made During a Relationship Is Recoverable
The critical issue is the nature of the transfer.
A birthday gift, ordinary financial support, or other unconditional gift generally presents a very different issue from property transferred specifically because the parties expected to marry.
Similarly, money characterized as a loan may be governed by ordinary contract and repayment principles rather than the rules applicable to gifts.
The parties’ intent at the time of the transfer therefore matters.
Relevant evidence may include:
- written communications between the parties;
- statements concerning marriage or engagement;
- bank-transfer descriptions;
- the timing and purpose of the payment;
- whether the transfer was expressly conditioned on marriage; and
- the parties’ conduct before and after the transfer.
The Practical Issue Is Evidence
A large payment during a romantic relationship is not automatically recoverable simply because the relationship later ends. Conversely, calling a transfer a “gift” does not necessarily resolve the issue if the evidence shows that it was made on the understanding that a marriage would occur.
For substantial transfers of money or property, the legal characterization of the transaction and the contemporaneous evidence may ultimately determine whether recovery is available.
Legal Authorities
- California Civil Code § 1590
Related practice areas: Family Law and Related Areas · Civil Litigation