[Direct answer]In the enforcement of joint debts of a married couple, whether the spouse is "implicated" depends on whether the debt belongs to the couple's joint debts. According to Article 1064 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, debts signed by both spouses, debts recognized by one spouse after the fact, and debts incurred by one spouse for the needs of family daily life belong to joint debts; debts exceeding the scope of daily family affairs require the creditor to provide evidence that the debts are used for common life, common production and operation, or with a common intention. If the debt belongs to joint debts, the couple's joint property and the property under the names of both spouses may be enforced; if the debt belongs to personal debts, only the property of the debtor or his/her share in the joint property can be enforced, and the spouse can raise an objection to the enforcement on the grounds of an erroneous seizure. Beijing Henglue Law Firm\nCreditor-debtor enforcement teamIt can assist in assessing the nature of the debt. For more details, please refer to the following link:Beijing Henglu Law Firm.

I. Legal basis and interpretation of provisions

1. Article 1064 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective from January 1, 2021)

This article establishes the principle of "joint debt and joint signature": debts incurred by mutual expressions of intent, such as the joint signature of both spouses or the subsequent recognition of one party, as well as debts incurred by one party in the name of the family for daily living needs during the continuance of the marriage relationship, are considered joint debts of the couple. The legislative purpose is to balance the protection of creditors with the property safety of the spouse who did not borrow money: it guides creditors to fix the risk through "joint signature in advance", and requires creditors to provide evidence of debts exceeding the scope of daily family affairs that are used for the couple's joint living, joint production and operation, or joint expressions of intent. Common disputes include the determination of whether the debts exceed the scope of daily family affairs and whether they are used for joint operation.

2. Article 14 of the "Regulations of the Supreme People's Court on the Seizure, Attachment, and Freezing of Property in Civil Enforcement by People's Courts" (effective from January 1, 2005, and amended in 2020)

For the property owned jointly by the debtor and others, the people's court may seal up, seize, and freeze it, and notify the co-owners in a timely manner; if the co-owners agree to divide the jointly owned property and are recognized by the creditor, it may be deemed valid. This means that even if the real estate and deposits are registered in the spouse's name, as long as they belong to the couple's joint property, they are still the debtor's liable property, and the spouse's "joint ownership" cannot automatically prevent the enforcement. However, the spouse can clarify the share through agreement division or partition litigation, or raise an enforcement objection as a third party and then file a lawsuit against the enforcement objection.

3. Practical judicial interpretation (addition of a spouse and enforcement remedies)

In practice, courts generally do not directly add spouses who are not specified in the effective documents as the persons subject to enforcement in the enforcement process: adding a person subject to enforcement must meet statutory circumstances, and spouses are not automatically liable. If the creditor claims that the debt is a joint debt of the couple, he usually needs to separately file a lawsuit to confirm the joint debt of the couple, and then enforce the debt against the spouse's property after obtaining the effective documents. The determination of "family daily life needs" is often based on the amount of the loan and the local consumption level, and large-scale loans are subject to strict review of the flow of funds. If the spouse raises an objection to the enforcement, the court shall review and make a ruling within 15 days in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law on the objection of third parties. For jointly owned property, the court generally reserves the spouse's share in the enforcement process or determines the proportion through the division of property.

II. Henglue Lawyer's Real Case (Detailed Review)

Review of the case:In 2021, the civil loan dispute between Zhang Nan and Zhou Qiang was mediated by the court, and it was confirmed that Zhou Qiang would repay the loan of 2 million yuan in two installments. Since Zhou Qiang failed to fulfill his obligation, Zhang Nan applied for forced execution in 2023, and the court ruled to appraise and auction the property owned by Zhou Qiang located in Yichang, Hubei Province (property certificate number 0438677). In August 2024, the third party, Wang Xiaoyu, raised an objection to the execution, claiming that the property was purchased in Zhou Qiang's name and that he was the actual owner, and requested to suspend the execution. The first-instance court found that the purchase of the property in another person's name was valid and ruled to suspend the execution. Zhang Nan was not satisfied with the ruling and entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Wang DongThe lawyer filed an appeal.

The focus of the controversy:First, can the relationship of buying a house under someone else's name be excluded from forced execution? Second, is it correct to identify the "real right holder" according to Article 2 of the Interpretation (I) of the Property Law of the Civil Code in the first-instance trial? Third, did Wang Xiaoyu obtain the title confirmation document in another case before the seizure?

Our position and that of the other party are as follows:Zhang Nan requested permission to execute the seized property and realize the creditor's right of 2 million yuan; the third party, Wang Xiaoyu, submitted the transfer of the purchase money, the decoration receipts and the long-term residence certificate, claiming that she bought the house under someone else's name and actually contributed to the purchase and possession of the house, and requested to maintain the suspension of execution.

Attorney's Strategy and Legal Opinion:Attorney Wang Dong elaborated on four points: Firstly, the registration of real estate ownership is the decisive factor. The nominee agreement only establishes a creditor-debtor relationship and does not result in a change of ownership, which cannot be used to resist the enforcement applicant. Secondly, the first-instance court misapplied Article 2 of the Interpretation of the Property Law of the People's Republic of China (I), and the exclusion of enforcement by third parties should be based on the "Regulations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Handling of Enforcement Objections and Review Cases by the People's Courts". Once the property is registered under the name of the debtor, it cannot be excluded from enforcement. Thirdly, Wang Xiaoyu failed to obtain a valid title document for the case before the seizure, which does not meet the conditions for excluding enforcement stipulated in Article 26 of the aforementioned regulations. Fourthly, purchasing a house under a nominee's name to evade purchase restrictions violates public order and good customs and should not be protected.

The court's reasoning and case handling results:The second-instance 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 the fact of buying the house under a false name was questionable. Even if it were true, such behavior evaded the purchase restrictions, violated public order and good customs, and undermined the publicity effect of property rights, harming the credibility of the registration. According to Article 25(1)(1) and Article 26 of the "Regulations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Handling of Cases of Objections to and Reconsideration of Enforcement by People's Courts (Amended in 2020)" and Article 177(1)(2) of the "Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China", the court ruled to revoke the first-instance judgment and allow the enforcement of the Yichang property under Zhou Qiang's name. The path for third parties to resist forced execution through internal agreements is very limited, and third parties such as spouses are also subject to restrictions in claiming exclusion of enforcement.

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Wang DongAttorney (Practice Certificate No.: 11101201910090334, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acting on behalf of the client.

III. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If one spouse is in debt, can the court directly execute the assets under the spouse's name?

It is necessary to distinguish the nature of the debt. If the debt is identified as a marital joint debt, the real estate and deposits registered under the spouse's name but belonging to the couple's joint property may still be sealed up and executed, because the joint property as a whole is a liability asset; if it belongs to personal debt, in principle, only the debtor's personal property and the share of the joint property belonging to him can be executed. The personal property under the spouse's name, such as pre-marital property and personal injury compensation, will not be executed because of the other party's debt. For wrongful seizure, the spouse may raise an objection to the execution, and if the objection is rejected, he/she may file a lawsuit against the execution within 15 days.

Q2: Which debts will be considered as joint debts of the couple?

According to Article 1064 of the Civil Code, there are mainly three categories: First, debts signed by both spouses or debts recognized by one party retrospectively; Second, debts incurred by one party in the name of the family for daily living needs during the marriage, such as daily clothing, food, housing, transportation, and children's education expenses; Third, debts that the creditor can prove are used for the couple's common life, joint production and operation, or based on the couple's common intention. If the funds clearly exceed the scope of daily family affairs, the court will focus on reviewing the flow of funds: debts used for purchasing houses or cars, or for joint business operations may still be recognized as joint debts; debts used for gambling or personal extravagance are difficult to be recognized.

Q3: What are the remedies available after a spouse's property is seized?

The first step is to file a written objection to enforcement, stating that the party enjoys civil rights sufficient to preclude enforcement. The court shall review and make a ruling within 15 days from the date of receipt of the objection. If the party is dissatisfied with the ruling, it may file a lawsuit challenging the enforcement within 15 days from the date of service of the ruling. If the dispute concerns the share of ownership rather than the ownership itself, the spouse's share can be determined through a partition suit, and the share should be preserved during enforcement. If the party believes that the enforcement actions such as seizure and disposal are themselves illegal, it may also file an objection to the enforcement court. It is particularly crucial to fix the sources of the property and ownership evidence such as fund certificates during the relief process.

Q4: Can the spouse be added as the person subject to enforcement during the execution process?

Under normal circumstances, it is not possible to directly add additional parties. In principle, the execution procedure is limited to the liable parties determined by the effective legal documents. To change or add the parties subject to enforcement, it must comply with the statutory circumstances, and spouses are not automatically liable parties. If the creditor wants to claim joint debts from the spouse, it usually needs to file a separate lawsuit to confirm the joint debts of the couple. After the court reviews and confirms them in accordance with Article 1064 of the Civil Code, it will then enforce the execution against the spouse's property based on the effective legal documents. If the additional parties are added without going through the judicial process, the spouse may raise objections according to law and request correction.

Q5: What evidence should be prepared to prove that a debt is a joint debt of a married couple?

On the creditor's side, they should prepare the following materials to prove that the debt actually occurred: the loan contract, IOUs, transfer receipts, etc.; evidence of the use of funds, such as transaction records showing that the money was transferred to the borrower's account for purchasing a house or operating a business; chat records mentioning household expenses or renovations; and contracts signed by both parties or WeChat messages or audio recordings that were subsequently acknowledged. On the spouse's side, they should prepare the following defenses: a comparison of the debt amount with the family's daily consumption level, the personal spending records of the debtor, and agreements on separation of property or separate assets. The more complete the evidence is in showing the funding chain, the higher the likelihood that the claim or defense will be supported.

IV. Suggestions for Protecting Your Rights

  • When lending money, the creditor insists on the principle of "joint debt and joint signature", requiring both spouses to sign the agreement to confirm the debt, thus fixing the joint debt at its source.
  • If you find signs such as the debtor getting divorced or transferring property, apply for property preservation in time to prevent the reduction of the debtor's liable assets.
  • If the spouse's rights are improperly enforced, he or she shall raise an objection to the enforcement within 15 days and simultaneously fix the evidence of ownership, and, if necessary, file a lawsuit against the enforcement objection.
  • For large-scale debt disputes, it is advisable to first consult a lawyer to sort out the evidence of the flow of funds and their usage, and then decide whether to also claim against one's spouse.

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. →Legal services for creditor-debtor disputes·Attorney Wang Dong·Beijing Henglue Law Firm