Can my room exclude the court's mandatory execution in your name?

7 Yan said no.71

In principle, the claims of celebrities cannot be excluded for enforcement. However, when the celebrities exist in survival and meet certain conditions, their claims should be given priority and can be excluded for enforcement.

Statement

Wang Yu is a single mother. She raised her children alone. She couldn't afford a house due to economic difficulties and kept renting a house. During his son's university, Wang Yu finally saved enough down payment for buying a house, but because the age of age could not provide her with a mortgage loan, Wang Yu and his son discussed that the son's name signed a house to buy a house, and the real estate certificate was first issued to the son name Down. Later, Wang Yu borrowed all his relative's money to pay all the mortgage loans. Who knew that soon after paying off the loan, the court seized the house to auction the house. After Wang Yu learned the news, he quickly called his son to ask about the reason that Fang Zhi was caused by his son's guarantee for his friend. But the house is actually Wang Yu, but it is only registered under the name of his son. Can the court be enforced the house in this case?

Legal evaluation

In this case, Wang Yu can filed a lawsuit for the execution of objections and objections. In the dispute over real estate, because the change of product rights is registered as the effectiveness of the register, who is registered in the house, it is preserved who has property rights. The agreement between the celebrities and the registered property owner cannot produce the effect of the property rights, and the celebrities only enjoy the right to claim the right. In the execution of the objection procedure, the essence is to weigh the claims of the borrowing of celebrities and the applied executive. Because the claims are equal, in principle, the claims of celebrities cannot be excluded for enforcement. Gives its priority to claims and can be excluded for enforcement.

Under what circumstances can I determine that the borrowing of celebrities exist in production benefits? In practice, the court mainly determines the two perspectives of "whether it is legal" and "whether it is used for residence and has no other for real estate".

First of all, there must be a true and effective legal relationship of buying a house. For example, there is a reason to have reasonable reasons for buying a house, a written borrowing of a house to buy a house, and the actual capital of the celebrities. The people's courts are more strict for the authenticity of buying a house by name. If you use celebrities to buy houses for self -occupation, and do not violate the original intention of suppressing unreasonable housing needs and restricting speculative house purchase, it does not harm social public interests and social order. Generally, it should be valid. Determined as invalid.

Secondly, lending celebrities need to possess and use houses. This requires evaluation and judgment based on whether the celebrities dominate and control the real estate. For example, whether celebrities have obtained the key to the house, whether they go through the procedures, whether they have signed a property service contract, whether they have paid the costs of water, warm, electricity, gas, parking spaces and property, whether to renovate, etc.

Third, there are no other real estate for living in the name of living and borrowing by celebrities. In principle, the protection of survival interests should be limited to housing, and houses with investment attributes such as shops and office buildings should not be identified as the protection of survival interests. No other houses used for living refer to houses that are not used for living in cities or county -level cities in the same district involved in the case in the case; or although there is a house, the area is small, and the house purchased houses are in the area of ​​area. It still belongs to the needs of basic residence. In the name of buying a house, the people's court will take into account the number of houses and the area of ​​the house to comprehensively determine it.

Conclusion

In combination with the situation in this case, because the bank did not provide a loan to Wang Yu, Wang Yu only used his son to buy a house. It did not harm social public interests and social order. The name contract should be effective. And it purchases this house for self -occupation and no other real estate under the name, which meets the condition of the determination of survival interests. If it can prove the fact that the real estate is actually contributed, we believe that the court should support its rights and interests to exclude forced enforcement.

Of course, we should pay attention to other issues in such cases. For example, whether the house is registered under the name of the celebrity is based on the name of borrowing name or a gift. If the name is based on the name, whether it should be reasonably explained why the transfer procedures are not handled.

For another example: In the case of the objection of the objection, borrowing celebrities in addition to the request to eliminate the execution, whether the request of confirmation can be provided at the same time. If the request of confirmation at the same time, the foundation of whether there is a right to request, can obtain the support of the court.

About the author: Bai Yang, a lawyer of Beijing Dacheng (Zhengzhou) Law Firm, focuses on the retrial field of the people and business.

Source: Beijing Dacheng (Zhengzhou) Law Firm Lawyer Bai Yang

Promotion of this issue: Puyang Women's Federation

List of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China

Good news: The first female science and technology worker committee of Henan Province is established!

National Health and Health Commission: Provide autonomatic screening intervention services for children aged 0 to 6

- END -