The Rules For Clarifying The Preclusion Of Enforcement Of Divorce Agreements On Property Ownership

In recent years,the number of cases in divorce disputes has remained huge.In such cases,the cases of non-party action to object to enforcement by outsiders arising from divorce agreements on property ownership are more controversial.According to the database of PKULAW,there were 465 cases of non-party action to object to enforcement involving divorce property division between 2017 and 2021,among which there were 446 cases involving property ownership disputes,accounting for96%,and the trend is increasing year by year.In such cases,it is often agreed in the divorce agreement on property division that the property divided during the marriage will be owned by one of the parties,but the transfer is not registered for various reasons,resulting in inconsistency between the actual right holder and the registered right holder.When the registered right holder fails to fulfill his personal debts in time and is applied for execution by the creditor,the enforcement court seizes the house under the registered right holder’s name through the appearance of rights.Whether the agreed right holder can preclude the execution by the agreement on property ownership in the divorce agreement,there is a certain difference in judicial practice on the handling of such cases.Housing is a necessity to maintain life,with high value and influence.Once it is not handled properly,it will cause great social contradiction and even bring about the problem of judicial injustice.In this study,through the statistical analysis of such cases in the case database of PKULAW,it was summarized that the controversial points in the actual trial of such cases mainly focus on the nature of the rights to the house enjoyed by the agreement owner based on the property ownership agreement in the divorce agreement,the basis of legal application and whether the rights can preclude enforcement.Both the theoretical and practical circles are inconclusive on this issue.In addition,the nature of the divorce property division agreement and whether the property ownership agreement can be subject to changes in property rights are also subject to divergent opinions.The trial of such cases involves the application of legal norms of the Civil Code,such as property rights,marriage and family,contract,etc.The concepts and values behind the different legal norms are different,and the laws and judicial interpretations are not clearly defined.The courts tend to apply different laws in trials,resulting in "different judgments in the same case" and "different justifications in the same case".In this study,the agreement on division of divorce property is characterized as a "property settlement agreement".The agreement clearly does not have the effect of change of property rights,and the right holder only has the right to claim based on this agreement.In order to establish judicial credibility and protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties,this study will provide uniform rules for the adjudication of such cases,demonstrate the feasibility of giving priority to claims under certain circumstances from both theoretical and practical aspects,and provide that the claims of the contractual right holders can be precluded from enforcement when certain conditions are met.