Dilemma And Solution Of The Lawsuit To Object To Execution Of A Party Of House Property In Judicial Practice

The system for the lawsuit to object to execution of an outside party in China was established in 2007,for the sake of an outside party.Since then,China has successively revised the legal provisions and issued relevant judicial interpretations to guide the specific practice of the lawsuit.The lawsuit to object to execution of an outside party of house property has become the top priority due to the high value and interests of multi-parties are involved.However,in practice,due to various reasons,there are a number of trial dilemmas,which have led to problems of different judgments in the same kind of cases and damage the credibility of the judiciary.Therefore,in order to solve this problem and achieve the purpose of solving the dilemma and unifying the judging standards,this paper shall discuss several real cases of the first and second instance which include the main points of the verdicts in detail and analyzes the differences to reveal the dilemma of vague trial scope,trial items and the criteria for eliminating the execution are not clear.By analyzing the causes of these dilemmas and the crux of the problems,from the angle of legislative purpose,the understanding and interpretation of the applicable law,it is concluded that: if the relevant legal provisions are ambiguous,the judge should exercise discretion and based on the principle not breaking the registration of the ownership of the property,and protecting “no fault” expectancy right of property.In addition,in view of the high incidence of false litigation,the judge should also take on-site investigation to carefully examine the authenticity of the facts on which the claim is based to avoid false litigation.Compare to other objections,judgment of lawsuit to object to execution of an outside party of house property requires the judge to have a more solid theoretical foundation and richer experience.Judges should learn more about real estate laws,regulations,policies,transaction rules and market practices.However,it is far from enough to enhance the trial quality to rely solely on the improvement of the judge's personal experience.In addition,China should adopt an effective method at the paper level to meet the urgent need of practice.Because the legal provisions of this lawsuit are ambiguous and have not yet formed a unified guiding opinion,it is strongly recommended that in the judicial practice,the idea of Expectancy Right of Property should be introduced to legislation;meanwhile,guidance cases or unified national guidelines should also be given.