Law amending and supplementing a number of articles of the Law on Enforcement of Civil Judgments, passed by the National Assembly, 13th Legislature, 8th Session on November 25, 2014, effective from July 1, 2015. Here are some amended and supplemented contents related to inspection work for Investigators, Inspectors, and Specialists to study; aiming to carry out the supervision of civil judgment enforcement in accordance with the spirit of the amended and supplemented Law on Enforcement of Civil Judgments.
Article table of contents
Regulations on Supervisory Subjects and Specification of Duties and Powers of the People's Procuracy
The amended law supplements and clarifies that the People's Procuracy supervises the adherence to the law by the Courts, civil judgment enforcement agencies, enforcers, and related entities and individuals in civil judgment enforcement.
When supervising civil judgment enforcement, the People's Procuracy has specific duties and powers: Extending the subjects of supervision to include decisions and actions of the Court in civil judgment enforcement, such as issuing and transferring judgments and decisions, etc. Furthermore, it includes supervision of related entities and individuals.
Additionally, it specifies the forms of supervision, which include: Requests, recommendations, and protests. Among these three forms, for protests, the civil judgment enforcement agency must respond and comply according to the Civil Judgment Enforcement Law.
New Regulations on the Rights and Obligations of Judgment Creditors
The law has added provisions that judgment creditors are not required to bear the expenses of verifying the judgment debtor's conditions carried out by the enforcers; they are exempt from or get a reduction in enforcement fees if they provide accurate information about the debtor’s conditions and in certain other cases. This regulation is considered a significant advancement, ensuring the best protection of the rights and interests of the judgment creditors, reducing their burden, especially for the elderly, solitary, sick, poor, those in remote areas, and in different localities from the judgment debtors, facilitating them in exercising their judgment enforcement rights recognized by the law.
The law has expanded and facilitated judgment creditors not only to request enforcement, suspend part or all of the judgment, apply security measures, coercive enforcement measures but also to be notified about enforcement; request the Court to clarify unclear points in its judgment or decision. This regulation, along with the right to authorize others to verify, provide information about the debtor's conditions; transfer the enforcement right to others, and other rights have created practical conditions for involved parties to have more options to enforce judgments in line with the policy of private investment in civil judgment enforcement activities.
A very new right supplemented by the law for involved parties, ensuring objectivity in organizing civil judgment enforcement, creating trust among people in civil judgment enforcement activities; is the right to request the replacement of an enforcer if there are grounds to believe that the enforcer is not impartial in their duties.
New Issues in Verifying Judgment Enforcement Conditions
In accordance with Articles 44, 44a, and 45; the law has abolished the obligation of judgment creditors to verify the conditions of judgment debtors, transferring it into a right where they can verify by themselves or authorize others to verify and provide information on the debtor's assets, income, and enforcement conditions to the enforcement agency; abolishing the obligation to pay verification costs. Thus, under the amended law, verification of judgment conditions is the responsibility of the enforcer, and the costs are borne by the State Budget. If the verification results of the enforcer and the judgment creditor differ or if there is a protest from the People's Procuracy, re-verification is required. Re-verification is conducted within 5 working days from the receipt of the verification results provided by the involved party or the protest from the People's Procuracy.
Moreover, to address the current lax verification practice, ensuring effective coordination in civil judgment enforcement, the law has added a requirement for the enforcer to present their enforcer card; the enforcer has the right to request specialized agencies or invite and hire experts to clarify necessary verification contents in certain cases; directly inspect assets, capital management books, assets, and verify at other agencies, organizations related to managing, preserving, and storing information on the assets and accounts of the judgment debtor. Related agencies, organizations, and individuals involved in verifying judgment enforcement conditions must comply with the enforcer’s requests and are responsible for the provided information contents. In case of refusal, they must respond in writing and clearly state the reason.
Additionally, to address inadequacies of the Civil Judgment Enforcement Law of 2008 and practical implementation, at Article 44a, the amended and supplemented law of 2014 further clarifies what constitutes "no enforcement conditions" and the public disclosure of the judgment debtor's information in certain cases. The "no enforcement conditions" fall into one of the following three cases:
When the judgment debtor has no income or low income, only ensuring a minimum livelihood for themselves and their dependents and no assets to enforce the judgment or has assets but their value only suffices to cover enforcement costs or assets by law cannot be seized and processed for enforcement.
The judgment debtor must perform an obligation to return a specific item, but the item no longer exists or is damaged beyond use; must return documents but they cannot be retrieved or reissued, and there is no other agreement by the parties involved;
Unable to verify the address or residence of the judgment debtor or the minor being assigned to another caregiver.
Information on the name, address, and obligations of the judgment debtor without enforcement conditions will be posted on the civil judgment enforcement information website and sent to the Commune People's Committee where the verification is conducted for public posting. When the judgment debtor has enforcement conditions, the enforcement agency must carry out the enforcement.
New Regulations and Limits on Judgment Security Measures
The law has supplemented Clause 2 of Article 67 with content on the limits of the amount of money and assets being frozen to avoid arbitrary blocking of all accounts and assets that affect the account holder’s and asset owner’s normal business and transactions. In the context of IT development, transferring money in accounts can be executed in a very short time, while the procedure to issue a freezing decision requires longer time, hence Clause 2 of this article, the draft law supplements regulations as follows:
In cases where immediate freezing of a judgment debtor's accounts and assets is needed but a freezing decision has not yet been issued, the enforcer records the immediate freezing request to the agency, organization, or individual managing the judgment debtor's accounts and assets; within 24 hours of recording, the enforcer must issue a freezing decision for those accounts and assets. This regulation aims to better protect the interests of judgment creditors, limit asset dispersion, and enhance the responsibility of organizations holding the judgment debtor’s assets.
Simultaneously, at Article 68, the regulation requiring the enforcer to issue a Decision on Temporary Seizure of Assets and Documents, specifically identifying the seized items, is supplemented. This regulation addresses the lack of clarity and inconsistency in the 2008 Civil Judgment Enforcement Law, which did not require the enforcer to issue a decision but only to record a temporary seizure. The affirmation of the application of measures to secure enforcement in this case provides a more solid legal basis for the enforcer to perform their duties.
Regarding the temporary suspension of registering, transferring ownership, using, or changing the status of assets, the law supplements that at the time of temporary seizure of assets, the enforcer must request the involved parties, organizations, or individuals related to provide necessary documents to prove ownership or use rights and notify them of their right to file a lawsuit to assert ownership or use rights over the assets. This regulation helps the enforcer quickly determine whether there is a dispute over the assets. Simultaneously, to expedite the enforcement process, the law stipulates that if necessary, the enforcer must verify, clarify, or request the Court or competent agency to determine the ownership, use right of assets for enforcement, resolve asset disputes, and request the cancellation of related documents and transactions regarding the assets as per regulation. If there is sufficient basis to determine that the assets belong to the judgment debtor, within 10 days from the determination, the enforcer must issue a coercive measure as stipulated in Chapter IV of this law to compel the judgment debtor to comply with the judgment, ensuring the legal rights and interests of the judgment creditor. Conversely, if it is determined that the temporarily seized assets do not belong to the judgment debtor, a decision must be made to cease the suspension of registration, transfer of ownership, use, and change of status.
Amended and Supplemented Civil Judgment Enforcement Law has just been enacted, thorough study has yet to be done; therefore, this article may not cover all the new rules of the current law. Readers interested in this issue are encouraged to continue researching and exchanging information so that enforcers, inspectors, and supervisors in civil judgment enforcement field basically grasp the new points of the amended and supplemented law; aiming to perform the function of supervising the legal compliance in civil judgment enforcement correctly and effectively.
Source: vienkiemsatquangbinh.gov.vn
