【光明云说法】为入职而“假结婚” “假结婚协议”能否对抗真的登记结婚?******
都市情感剧《爱的二八定律》讲述了女主秦施为了满足知名律所入职女律师需已婚的要求,与男主阳华阴差阳错“假结婚”,但是历经种种“真相爱”的故事。“假结婚协议”能否对抗真的登记结婚?“假离婚”和真离婚哪个算数?这些问题不论是在剧中还是剧外都有探讨的必要。一起来听听法官怎么说。
“假结婚协议”vs真登记结婚
秦施为了入职诚与慧律师事务所伪造了自己“已婚”的身份,阳华为了躲避母亲的催婚让秦施假扮自己的未婚妻,二人一拍即合约定了半年的假结婚期限并签署了协议。后来律所在整理档案时要求秦施补齐已婚的材料,二人决定登记结婚,并签署了为期三年的“结婚协议”及婚前财产协议。
秦施和阳华签署的为期三年的“假结婚协议”能否对抗二人在民政局的“真登记结婚”?
根据《中华人民共和国民法典》婚姻家庭编之规定,结婚登记应自愿合法。所谓自愿,即“男女双方完全自愿”,且“要求结婚的男女双方应当亲自到婚姻登记机关申请结婚登记。符合本法规定的,予以登记,发给结婚证。完成结婚登记,即确立婚姻关系。”所谓合法,即不存在民法典规定的婚姻无效的情形或者规定的可撤销的情形。
北京朝阳区人民法院综合审判庭武鑫蓉说,只要男女双方自愿领证,且不存在重婚、有禁止结婚的亲属关系、未达到法定婚龄、受胁迫、隐瞒重大疾病等情形,婚姻关系对登记双方均有约束力。不论双方有无感情基础、是否真心建立婚姻家庭关系、登记结婚有何种目的,在法律上都是“真结婚”。因此,秦施和阳华的“假结婚协议”不能对抗二人在民政局的真登记结婚。
“剧中,秦施“假结婚”是为了满足律所苛刻的入职条件,而现实生活中,通过“假结婚”想要达到的目的多种多样,如为子女办理户口、取得买房资格、过户购车指标等。看似一纸简单的婚约能撬动巨大的利益杠杆,实则隐藏着更多、更复杂的法律风险。”武鑫蓉说,第一,人身风险。第二,财产风险。第三,继承风险。
秦施和阳华“假结婚真相爱”的经历固然浪漫,但现实更多的是“人财两空”的狗血。不论从哪个方面看,“假结婚”这种破坏法律严肃性和婚姻神圣性的“饮鸩止渴”的行为都是不可取的。
“假离婚协议”VS真离婚
除了“假结婚”,“假离婚”这个概念我们也不陌生。虽然本剧中没有演绎,但是其他的热播剧和日常生活中,为了取得购房资格、逃避共同债务或者获取其他利益“假离婚真分手”的例子比比皆是。
“假结婚协议”中男女双方为保护个人财产往往进行最清晰的分割,如约定分别财产所有制;而“假离婚协议”中为了达到最终目的,势必会存在妥协、隐瞒、退让,如将本应平等分割的房产约定为一方所有。当“假离婚”变“真分手”,签署的假离婚协议是否有效?能否对共同财产重新分割?
“假离婚”是夫妻双方为获取某一利益约定暂时离婚,待达成目的后再行复婚的行为。与“假结婚”一样,法律上没有“假离婚”的概念。夫妻双方可以选择在民政局协议离婚,也可以选择在人民法院诉讼离婚。
民法典规定,“完成离婚登记,或者离婚判决书、调解书生效,即解除婚姻关系。”男女双方想要恢复婚姻关系,只能重新登记结婚,但凡一方“假戏真做”不愿复婚,都无法“破镜重圆”。
武鑫蓉说,如果“假离婚”引发财产纠纷,法院可依据诉求对所谓的“假离婚协议”中当事人处分财产的真实意愿进行审查,并从当事人在签订协议前后的相关行为予以认定。如果通过举证质证可以确认签署离婚协议并非基于夫妻双方情感破裂而是为了追求其他利益,这种情况可以认定以虚假的意思表示签订的财产分割条款无效。如果有证据证明“假离婚协议”中的财产分割条款并非双方真实意愿,则应依法对夫妻共同财产重新分配。
承载着感情与责任的婚姻不应成为利益的牺牲品。切莫因“小利”失“真情”,最后“鸡飞蛋打”。
中新网评:处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事******
中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称,将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对,企图将核污水“一倒了之”,把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。
资料图:日本福岛第一核电站。2011年,福岛核电站事故发生后,大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋,对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害,数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日,作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。
日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由,在2021年4月13日,正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多,日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。
日本政府辩称,这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全,甚至“可以喝”,这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。
事实上,经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质,核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收,长期来看,将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁,最终危害人类健康。
因此,核污水排海计划推出后,遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示,福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中,约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场,反对该计划。
日本政府认为,核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案,但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海,核污水会随着洋流流动,其影响势必会跨越国界,危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。
《韩国经济新闻》发文称,相关研究认为,福岛核污水如果排放入海,约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域,该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。
德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告,若日本将所有核污水排入海中,不到半年,整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁,包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。
日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国,有义务保护海洋环境。然而,在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上,日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。
国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估,但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论,并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下,日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设,这是极不负责任的行为。
太平洋不是日本的下水道,日本必须正视各方合理关切,在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后,制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远,若只顾眼前,执意将核污水排放入海,不仅其自身,周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单,其后果必将会危害数代人。
Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business
By John Lee
(ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year.
Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business.
The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster.
On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year.
The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public.
In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run.
Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public.
The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution.
The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community.
The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses.
According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan.
As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment.
However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact.
Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad.
The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies.
If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence.
中国网客户端 国家重点新闻网站,9语种权威发布 |