By Wei Liu Jing, reporter of our newspaper
October 28th, Licheng District Court
A four-story small building at Mr. Ruan's home was suddenly sealed by the court, leaving Mr. Ruan "at a loss". But what's even stranger is that three months later, he also received a "court notice". Having no usual disputes with others, why did he get involved in a lawsuit?
It turns out that his ex-wife Lin owed a huge debt of 470,000 yuan but was unable to repay it. The creditor sued him? However, Mr. Ruan and Lin had been divorced for 16 years, so why should he pay the debt?
After the Licheng court reviewed the case, they believed that this property under Mr. Ruan's name was obtained during the period when he and Lin were married through "new construction, inheritance, gift, analysis, change", thus still considered as joint property despite being registered under Mr. Ruan's name. Moreover, the two did not divide this jointly owned property when they got divorced. Therefore, the creditor can sue on behalf of Lin to request the division of property.
In order to recover the huge debt, the creditor sued the ex-husband who owed money.
Mr. Ruan lives in the urban area of Quanzhou. Last June, a four-story small building under his name was sealed by the court. Subsequently, he learned from the court that the trouble was caused by a debt owed by his ex-wife. But he and his ex-wife had been divorced for 16 years, and this house had nothing to do with his ex-wife.
For this reason, Mr. Ruan raised an objection to the execution, but it was rejected. What Mr. Ruan didn't expect was that three months later, he suddenly received a court notice: the person suing him was Chen, who lent money to his ex-wife. It turned out that his ex-wife Lin owed Chen 470,000 yuan which she failed to repay, leading to her being sued in court. The court ruled that Lin should repay the principal and interest. Since Lin had consistently failed to repay the debt, Chen then took Mr. Ruan to court.
The reason given by creditor Chen was that although Mr. Ruan had divorced Lin in 1993, the building under his name was joint property acquired during their marriage, and when they divorced, they did not divide this property. Thus, he initiated a creditor's subrogation action - meaning Chen wanted to represent Lin and her ex-husband Mr. Ruan to divide the share of the property belonging to Lin, "re-dividing" the family assets 16 years later.
Former spouses stand on the same "side"
After the Licheng court accepted the case, Lin was subsequently added as a defendant by the court, and both parties faced each other in court.
In court, Mr. Ruan's lawyer argued that this house was ancestral property, and it was agreed before the divorce that it belonged solely to Mr. Ruan. At the same time, he also presented a certificate of inheritance rights, stating that this property was part of the heritage left by Mr. Ruan's father. Since July 1993, his ex-wife Lin had no rights over this house. Even if this house was considered joint property, according to the law, the statute of limitations for requesting the division of marital joint property is two years.
Lin, the ex-wife, also sent a lawyer to appear in court, whose opinion similarly stood on the side of the former husband. Lin's side argued that this property was the personal property of the ex-husband and not jointly owned by the couple. In 1993, when both were preparing for divorce, it was agreed that the property would belong to Mr. Ruan. Therefore, Chen had no right to initiate a subrogation lawsuit.
During the trial process, plaintiff Chen, while sticking to his own views, also applied to the court to entrust a real estate appraisal agency to evaluate the value of this property, which was finally appraised at more than 420,000 yuan.
The house still belongs to the ex-husband, but compensation of 210,000 yuan must be paid to the ex-wife
After reviewing the case, the Licheng court believed that this property was obtained by Mr. Ruan and Lin during their marriage through "new construction, inheritance, gifts, analysis, changes", and was registered under Mr. Ruan's name during their marriage. Although Mr. Ruan provided a certificate of inheritance rights, he could not prove that this property was obtained by him as personal property. Therefore, this property should be recognized as joint property acquired during the marriage of the two defendants. And the two defendants did not divide this jointly owned property when they got divorced. Therefore, as the applicant for enforcement, Chen can, according to the law, sue on behalf of Lin to request the division of property.
Considering that the property is registered under Mr. Ruan's name and managed by him, the court made a first-instance judgment from the perspective of protecting the interests of creditors. The judgment result was that the house still belongs to Mr. Ruan, but Mr. Ruan needs to compensate Lin with half of the assessed total price of the house, which is more than 210,000 yuan.
After the judgment, Mr. Ruan was dissatisfied and appealed to the Quanzhou Intermediate People's Court. Recently, the Quanzhou Intermediate People's Court upheld the original verdict in the second instance.
□ Judge's Explanation of the Law
Subrogation Partition Lawsuit
"This type of case is the first of its kind in Licheng. Mr. Chen initiated a subrogation partition lawsuit based on the Supreme People's Court's 'Provisions on Seizure, Detention, and Freezing of Property in Civil Enforcement by the People's Courts'. This regulation helped the court solve an enforcement problem," said Judge Chen Wenfang of the First Civil Division of Licheng Court yesterday. In Article 14 of the regulation, a new type of litigation was created in the form of judicial interpretation, which is the creditor's (applicant for enforcement) subrogation partition lawsuit in compulsory enforcement.
Article 14, paragraph one of the 'Regulation' stipulates that for jointly owned property of the person subject to enforcement and others, the court may seal, seize, or freeze the property and promptly notify the co-owners; paragraph three stipulates that if the co-owners initiate a partition lawsuit or the applicant for enforcement initiates a subrogation partition lawsuit on their behalf, the people's court shall allow it.