Zhang and Li became acquainted through work. In 2020, Zhang purchased a commercial property and, as Li had previously assisted with the property certificate, Zhang entrusted Li again via WeChat to handle the property certificate for his shop. No written contract was signed between them. In December 2020, Zhang's wife Luo paid Li via WeChat transfer, including an additional 30,000 yuan marked as "property tax." Subsequently, Zhang repeatedly urged Li to complete the entrusted task, but the property certificate for the shop remained unprocessed. Zhang then demanded Li return the 30,000 yuan, but Li delayed repayment. Zhang filed a lawsuit, requesting the court to order Li to refund the 30,000 yuan.

The court found, after deliberation, that this case involved a dispute over a commission contract. Although Zhang and Li did not sign a written contract, they had agreed on the terms via WeChat, with Zhang having paid the relevant remuneration and advance fees for handling the entrusted matters. The WeChat chat records and transfer records served as complete and sufficient evidence, establishing a valid commission contract relationship between both parties, who were thus obligated to fulfill their respective contractual duties in accordance with the agreement.

In this case, the 30,000 yuan payment was an advance made by Party Zhang to Party Li for the taxes and fees required to process the property ownership certificate, constituting expenses paid by the client for the entrusted matter. Since the entrusted task remains unfulfilled and Party Zhang no longer requests Party Li to proceed with the matter, Party Li shall return the funds to the client, Party Zhang. Therefore, Luxi Court ruled in accordance with the law that Party Li shall repay Party Zhang the 30,000 yuan. After the judgment was issued, neither party filed an appeal, and the case has taken legal effect.

The Civil Code of the People's Republic of China stipulates that civil legal acts can take various forms. Even without a written contract, if sufficient evidence demonstrates mutual agreement on the entrusted matters and actual performance has begun, a principal-agent relationship may be deemed established. However, if the entrusted matters are determined through oral communication, disputes may arise where it becomes difficult to prove the contractual relationship and respective rights and obligations between the parties through tangible evidence. Therefore, when entrusting someone to handle affairs, it is advisable to retain records via WeChat, emails, or other documentable methods, clearly specifying key terms such as the scope of entrustment, service fees, performance period, refund conditions, and liability for breach, to ensure a basis for dispute resolution.

This article is reposted from the WeChat Official Account "Shandong Gao Fa," for which we express our gratitude!