[Direct answer]Yes. If a third party believes that he or she has civil rights, such as ownership of the subject of enforcement, which are sufficient to preclude enforcement, he or she shall file a written objection with the enforcement court before the end of the enforcement procedure. The court shall review and make a ruling within 15 days from the date of receipt of the written objection; if the objection is rejected and is unrelated to the original judgment or ruling, the third party may file a lawsuit challenging the enforcement within 15 days from the date of service of the ruling, requesting that the subject of enforcement not be executed. If the third party delays in filing an objection after receiving the documents of seizure and auction, it will be much more difficult to seek remedies after the subject of enforcement has been disposed of.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

Objections to the execution of the subject matter are common in three scenarios: First, the house or vehicle is registered under the name of the person subject to enforcement, but was actually purchased with funds from a third party or held in the name of another person; Second, the funds in the account were mistakenly transferred to the account of the person subject to enforcement and were subsequently frozen and deducted. The funds collected and paid on behalf of others and the deposit were also sealed up together; Third, the jointly owned property was disposed of as a whole. The parties often only become aware of the seizure order or auction announcement after receiving them, and in a short period of time, they need to organize evidence and decide whether to file an objection or initiate a separate case to confirm ownership. Choosing the wrong path will consume the remedial window.

II. Key points of contention

First, the nature of the rights. Whether the third party claims property rights or creditor's rights directly determines whether the execution can be precluded. Pure creditor's rights claims are usually not enough to resist enforcement. Second, the time point. The objection should be raised before the end of the execution procedure. Whether the party has obtained an effective title document in another case before the seizure is the focus of the review. Third, the choice of procedure. For those who file a lawsuit of objection unrelated to the original judgment and ruling, or who believe that the original judgment is wrong, they should follow the judicial supervision procedure. Fourth, the risk consequences. If the objection is not established and is deemed to hinder the execution, the party may face fines and detention.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

The case of enforcement objection litigation handled by our firm is quite valuable for reference. In the civil loan dispute between Zhang Nan and Zhou Qiang, it was confirmed through mediation that Zhou Qiang should repay 2 million yuan, but Zhou Qiang failed to fulfill his obligation. In 2023, Zhang Nan applied for forced execution of the Yichang property under Zhou Qiang's name; in August 2024, the third party, Wang Xiaoyu, raised an objection, claiming that the property was purchased in Zhou Qiang's name but that he himself was the actual investor. On this basis, the first-instance court ruled to suspend the execution. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Wang DongThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101201910090334, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent. The lawyer argues that: the ownership of real estate is subject to registration, and the loan agreement in the name of others only creates an internal creditor's right and cannot exclude enforcement; the first-instance court misapplied Article 2 of the Interpretation of the Property Right Chapter of the Civil Code (I) and should use the provisions on review of enforcement objections as the basis for review; the third party did not obtain a title confirmation document in another case before the property was sealed up; purchasing a house in the name of others to evade purchase restrictions violates public order and good customs. The second-instance court adopted the above opinions, revoked the first-instance ruling, and ruled to allow the enforcement of the property.Executing the caseThe key to solving the problem often lies in a comprehensive investigation of the debtor's assets and liabilities.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

According to Article 234 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 24, 2021 and implemented on January 1, 2022), a third party who has objections to the subject of enforcement shall raise them before the conclusion of the enforcement procedure. The court shall review the objections within 15 days from the date of receipt of the written objections, and rule to reject them if the grounds are unfounded. If the party believes that the original judgment or ruling is erroneous, the case shall be handled in accordance with the judicial supervision procedure. For matters unrelated to the original judgment or ruling, the party may file a lawsuit within 15 days from the date of receipt of the ruling. 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" (Fa Shi [2015] No. 10, amended in 2020) refine the review standards. Suggestions: Immediately fix the grounds for objections after receiving the documents of seizure and auction; prepare ownership certificates, investment records, evidence of possession and use, and tax payment evidence; and check whether the party has obtained a valid title confirmation document in another case before the seizure.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

An objection to enforcement is a procedural remedy, while an action to challenge the enforcement is a substantive review. Both have extremely short time limits, and missing the 15-day filing period often means losing the chance to overturn the decision. In the judicial practice of Beijing courts, claims such as buying a house under someone else's name, using property to settle debts, and third-party holding are subject to stricter review, and private agreements alone are often insufficient to preclude enforcement. It is also important to note that enforcement should not be suspended during the period of objection and action to challenge the enforcement. Instead, an application for temporary suspension of enforcement should be submitted concurrently. For funds that are indeed owned by third parties, evidence of the complete funding chain should be submitted as soon as possible. RelatedContract disputesThe evidence can be organized and reviewed together with the case.Beijing Henglu Law FirmIt is recommended to complete an assessment of the feasibility of the evidence and procedures before raising an objection.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Can I get support if I file an objection to enforcement or a lawsuit against the enforcement?

The key lies in whether the right in question is a property right or a creditor's right. If there are sufficient substantive rights, such as ownership, that can preclude enforcement, and the supporting evidence chain is complete, the probability of success is relatively high. However, it's usually difficult to preclude enforcement if there are only internal agreements or ordinary creditor's rights.

Q2: What evidence do I need to prepare?

The ownership registration information, the transaction records of investment transfers, the purchase or sale contracts, the tax receipts, the certificates of possession and use, the materials of the time points of seizure, and the effective documents of title confirmation in another case.

Q3: What is the approximate cost?

There is no application fee charged during the review stage of the execution objection; the litigation fees for the objection lawsuit shall be paid according to the standard for property cases, and the fees shall be charged in segments based on the amount of the subject matter. The attorney's fees shall be determined in accordance with the entrustment contract.

Q4: How long does the entire process take?

Generally, the execution objection will be reviewed and adjudicated within 15 days from the date of receipt of the objection; the first-instance litigation of the objection usually takes several months, and the second-instance litigation will extend the time limit for adjudication. During this period, the execution and disposition will generally continue to proceed.

Q5: What should I do first?

First, verify the subject of enforcement and your own rights certificates to confirm that the objection is still within the time limit for raising objections. Then, submit the objection to enforcement in writing. If the objection is rejected, you should file a lawsuit challenging the objection within 15 days.

The above content is based on the compilation of judicial practices in the Beijing area. The facts of individual cases and the jurisdiction of the court may affect the conclusions. Welcome to consult Henglue Lawyers about specific situations.

VII. Relevant public cases (for reference only, not handled by our firm)

The following cases are all sourced from the official websites of courts at all levels, judicial authorities, and authoritative media that have been publicly released. They are not related to the cases handled by our firm and are provided solely for reference in understanding relevant adjudication rules, without constituting specific opinions on individual cases.

[Case No.](2017) No. 322 of the Civil Appeals of the Supreme People's Court
[Trial Court]The Supreme People's Court (Public Announcement Cases)
[Judicial Summary]Where the funds belonging to a third party are misdirected to the account of the debtor due to the lack of the true intention of the parties, they cannot produce the legal effect of transferring the substantive rights of the funds; after the funds enter the debtor's account, they are immediately frozen and withdrawn by the court, and the debtor does not actually possess them. Therefore, the principle of "possession of money means ownership" does not apply. The third party enjoys civil rights sufficient to preclude forced execution of the funds, and the court should directly rule to stop the execution of the funds.
[Source]The Bulletin of the Supreme People's Court (Case of Jinbo Land Development Co., Ltd. of Henan Province vs. Liu Yurong and Other Third Parties' Lawsuit against the Enforcement Objection) (2017)

[Case No.]The case number has not been made public.
[Trial Court]The Supreme People's Court (27th Batch of Guiding Cases· Guiding Case No. 156)
[Judicial Summary]Where a third party requests to exclude the forced execution of a commercial housing registered under the name of the real estate development enterprise that is being executed against, he/she may choose to apply Article 28 or Article 29 of the "Provisions 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"; where the third party claims to apply Article 28, the people's court shall review it.
[Source]The 27th batch of guiding cases issued by the Supreme People's Court (Guiding Case No. 156: Wang Yan Yan v. Xu Yijun and Beijing Jinmi Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.—Third-Party Objection to Enforcement) (2021-02)

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

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In the event of a dispute, please consult a practicing lawyer in a timely manner.