[Direct answer]The fact that the person subject to demolition has not signed the agreement does not prevent the forced enforcement according to law. After the acquisition entity makes a compensation decision or orders the surrender of the land, if the party refuses to comply with the decision and does not file an appeal or lawsuit, the administrative organ shall apply to the people's court for forced enforcement in accordance with Article 62 of the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law, as it does not have the right to enforce itself. Regarding the obligations specified in the effective legal document, the right holder may also apply for enforcement and seize and auction the property. The forced enforcement must be reviewed and approved by the court. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible to assess the relief node. For more details, please refer to the following link:Legal services for creditor-debtor disputesAndBeijing Henglu Law Firm.

I. Legal basis and interpretation of provisions

1. Article 62 of the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China (effective September 1, 2021)

Anyone who violates the provisions of land management laws and regulations and obstructs the state's construction of land expropriation shall be ordered by the land administrative departments of people's governments at or above the county level to surrender the land; if they refuse to surrender it, they shall apply to the people's courts for compulsory enforcement. This article clearly stipulates that the government does not have the right to forcibly demolish or evict, and must apply to the people's courts for enforcement, which will be implemented after the court's review. This prevents the abuse of administrative power and is the statutory path of compulsory expropriation.

2. Article 243 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 24, 2021, and implemented on January 1, 2022)

Civil judgments and rulings that have legal effect, as well as the property-related parts of criminal judgments and rulings, shall be executed by the court of first instance or the court at the same level as the place where the property is located; if one party refuses to perform, the other party may apply to the court for enforcement. This article establishes the basic basis for applying for enforcement. Creditors can initiate enforcement based on effective documents without the need for additional litigation, which is the ultimate guarantee for the realization of creditor's rights.

3. Practical judicial interpretation (execution objections and the credibility of registration)

When a third party raises an objection to enforcement on the grounds of ownership disputes during the execution process, the court reviews it in accordance with the "Regulations on Review of Objections to Enforcement". The real estate registration book is the primary criterion for determining the right holder. A nominee agreement only involves internal creditor's rights and does not result in a change of property rights. Generally, it cannot preclude enforcement. If the defendant fails to appear in court after being summoned and there are no title confirmation documents before the seizure in another case, the objection is often rejected, and the enforcement process continues. Therefore, the procedural node and the timing of obtaining the documents are of great importance.

II. Henglue Law Firm's Real Cases (Detailed Review)

Review of the case:In 2021, the civil loan dispute between Zhang Nan and Zhou Qiang was mediated. Zhou Qiang repaid 2 million yuan in two installments. However, Zhou Qiang failed to fulfill his obligations, so Zhang Nan applied for enforcement in 2023. The court ordered the evaluation and auction of Zhou Qiang's property located in Yichang, Hubei (property certificate number 0438677). In August 2024, the third party, Wang Xiaoyu, raised an objection to the enforcement, claiming that the property was purchased in Zhou Qiang's name but that he was the actual owner, and requested the suspension of the enforcement. The first-instance court ruled that the purchase under a false name was valid and that Wang Xiaoyu was the true owner, ordering the suspension of the enforcement. Zhang Nan appealed and entrusted Wang Dong from Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.

The focus of the controversy:First, whether the relationship of buying a house under someone else's name can preclude forced execution, and whether the internal creditor's rights created by the borrowing of someone else's name can be used to resist the applicant for enforcement; Second, whether the application of law in the first instance is correct. It should apply the provisions on review of enforcement objections rather than the Interpretation of the Property Law to identify the right holders; Third, whether Wang Xiaoyu obtained the title confirmation document before the seizure, and whether the absence of effective documents in other cases meets the conditions for precluding enforcement.

Our position and the other party's position are as follows:Applicant Zhang Nan requests permission to execute the seized property under Zhou Qiang's name in order to recover the creditor's rights of 2 million yuan; third-party Wang Xiaoyu submits the transfer of the purchase money, the decoration receipts, and the long-term residence certificates, claiming that she bought the house under someone else's name and actually contributed to the purchase and should be the real owner of the property, and requests to suspend the execution.

Attorney's Strategy and Legal Opinions:Attorney Wang Dong elaborated on four points: First, the credibility of property registration. Real estate property rights are subject to registration, and a loan-in-name agreement only establishes a creditor-debtor relationship and cannot preclude forced execution. Second, the first-instance court misapplied Article 2 of the Interpretation of the Property Section of the Civil Code (I) and should use the "Regulations on Objections and Reconsideration of Enforcement" as the basis for excluding enforcement against third parties. Since the property was registered under Zhou Qiang's name, there was no change in property rights and the enforcement could not be resisted. Third, procedural flaws. Wang Xiaoyu failed to obtain a title confirmation document in another case before the seizure, which did not comply with Article 26 of the "Regulations on Objections and Reconsideration of Enforcement". Fourth, evading policy risks. Buying a house in another person's name may evade purchase restrictions and violate public order and good customs.

The court's reasoning and the outcome of the case:The appellate court adopted the lawyer's opinion, holding that Wang Xiaoyu and Zhou Qiang had a special relationship, that the purchase price was not directly transferred to the seller, and that there was a dispute over the purchase of the property under another person's name; even if this were true, such behavior would evade the purchase restrictions, violate public order and good customs, and undermine the publicity effect of property rights, harming the credibility of the registration. According to Article 25 Paragraph 1 Item 1, Article 26 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Handling of Cases of Objections to and Review of Enforcement by the People's Courts (Amended in 2020)" and Article 177 Paragraph 1 Item 2 of the Civil Procedure Law, the court ruled to revoke the first-instance judgment and allow the enforcement of the property located in Yichang City, Hubei Province, under Zhou Qiang's name.

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Wang DongThe attorney (practice certificate number: 11101201910090334, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

III. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If the person being relocated refuses to sign the agreement, will they be subject to forced execution?

Yes. After the acquisition entity makes a compensation decision or an order to surrender the land in accordance with the law, if the demolition subject refuses to comply and does not appeal or litigate, the administrative organ shall apply to the people's court for compulsory enforcement in accordance with Article 62 of the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law, as it does not have the right to enforce itself. In this case, although Mr. Wang Dong represented the client in an enforcement objection case involving a house purchase under a false name, it still shows that the property under the registered owner's name can be subject to compulsory enforcement, and the objection not being established does not affect the progress of the enforcement.

Q2: Can administrative authorities enforce demolition by themselves?

No. According to Article 62 of the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law, if the land-expropriated persons refuse to surrender the land, the people's governments at or above the county level may apply to the people's courts for compulsory enforcement in accordance with the law; and it is beyond the authority of administrative organs to forcibly relocate on their own, which may be sued for confirmation of illegality and compensation. Compulsory enforcement must be reviewed and supervised by the court, and cannot be directly implemented by the expropriating party.

Q3: If you disagree with the compensation decision, should you first file for reconsideration or initiate legal proceedings?

If you are not satisfied with the compensation decision, you can first apply for administrative reconsideration. If you are not satisfied with the reconsideration, you can then file a lawsuit. You can also directly initiate an administrative lawsuit, but you should do so within the statutory time limit to avoid losing the right to relief after the time limit has passed. In this case, the lawsuit challenging the enforcement objection shows that the choice of procedure directly affects the outcome. The first-instance court applied the wrong law, but the second-instance court corrected it. Therefore, it is necessary to grasp the relief node in time under the guidance of professional lawyers.

Q4: Can the third party stop the execution if they claim that the house was purchased under someone else's name?

Generally, it is not possible. The real estate registration book is the primary criterion for determining the right holder. The borrow-name agreement only involves internal creditor-debtor relations and does not result in a change of property rights. It generally cannot preclude forced execution unless the third party has obtained a valid title document in another case and meets the statutory conditions before the seizure. In this case, Wang Xiaoyu's claim of buying a house under someone else's name was not supported, and the second-instance court allowed the execution.

Q5: Within what timeframe must an application for enforcement be submitted?

The period for applying for enforcement is two years, starting from the last day of the performance period specified in the legal document; for performance in installments, it starts from the expiration of the last installment. Applications submitted after the deadline may be ruled inadmissible. Therefore, if the other party fails to perform after winning the lawsuit or reaching a settlement, you should prepare the clues to the property as soon as possible and apply to the court for enforcement. If necessary, you can entrust a lawyer to investigate.

IV. Suggestions for Protecting Rights and Interests

  • Upon receiving the compensation or the decision to order the surrender of the land, first review whether the procedures and grounds are legal, and then initiate a review or lawsuit within the statutory time limit.
  • Don't mistakenly believe that if you don't sign the document, it will definitely not be enforced. If you don't seek relief within the legal time limit, the case will enter the forced enforcement procedure.
  • Where there is a dispute over the ownership of the subject matter of the enforcement, the party concerned shall obtain a document of confirmation of ownership before the seizure, otherwise, it will be difficult to refute the claims such as using others' names to evade enforcement.
  • Hire a professional lawyer as soon as possible to identify procedural flaws and evidence at each stage of decision-making, review, and litigation.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →\nLegal services for creditor-debtor disputes·Attorney Wang Dong·Beijing Henglu Law Firm