The legal effect of joking

Legal analysis: Joking behavior means that the expression of intention is not based on the true intention of the person expressing the intention, and the expectation that the other party will understand that it is not true. Intentional expressions of joking behavior are always invalid (regardless of whether the other person believes it to be true or not). If the counterparty believes the teasing behavior to be true, the teaser (based on the principle of good faith) is obliged to clarify the misunderstanding to the other party without delay and avoid the other party suffering reasonable loss of trust interests. Typical examples of teasing include entertaining talk, boasting, or making non-serious promises out of politeness. The core difference between unilateral promises and joking behavior is that the former means that the person has the intention to set obligations for himself, while the latter does not mean to set legal obligations for himself. The promise of the parties is similar to a "joke", without Legally binding.

Legal basis: Article 143 of the "People's Republic of China and Civil Code" is valid if the following conditions are met:

(1) The actor has the appropriate qualifications The capacity for civil conduct (2) the expression of intention is true and (3) does not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and does not violate public order and good customs.