Decree 08/2020/ND-CP on the organization and activities of Judicial Officers officially came into effect from February 24, 2020. This Decree introduced several new contents related to Judicial Officers, notably the removal of the enforcement authority of Judicial Officers previously stipulated in Decree 61/2009/ND-CP.
Article table of contents
Illustrative photo
To be specific, according to Clause 2, Article 52 of Decree 08/2020/ND-CP, when organizing the enforcement of judgments, bailiffs are not allowed to perform the following tasks and powers:
- Applying measures to ensure enforcement, coercive measures for enforcement as stipulated in Article 66, Article 71, Article 72 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement;
- Using supporting tools while performing public duties as prescribed in Clause 9, Article 20 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement;
- Imposing administrative penalties;
- Requesting the Court to determine, divide, and handle shared assets for enforcement as stipulated in Article 74 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement;
- Requesting the Court to declare transactions void as prescribed in Clause 2, Article 75 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement;
- The rights to request the Court to determine the ownership, use of assets, temporary seizure documents; determining ownership, use of assets for enforcement, resolving asset disputes; requesting the cancellation of documents and transactions related to assets; resolving disputes about auction results of assets as stipulated in Clause 4, Article 68, Clause 3, Article 69, and Clause 2, Article 102 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement.
Therefore, based on the above regulations, from February 24, 2020, bailiffs have the right to organize enforcement at the request of the concerned parties but are not allowed to apply measures to ensure enforcement, coercive measures for enforcement, and are also not allowed to use supporting tools while performing public duties.
Previously, under Decree 61/2009/ND-CP, when organizing enforcement, bailiffs were allowed to apply measures to ensure enforcement and had the right to decide on applying coercive measures after the voluntary period specified in the enforcement decision had expired, except in cases where they requested the Head of the Civil Judgment Enforcement Agency of Ho Chi Minh City to decide on coercive enforcement as stipulated in Article 40 of Decree 61.
Nguyen Trinh
