Take a picture of the New Year's flavor
Interpretation: A, B, and C are all friends in the same circle, A owes B 500,000, and C owes A 300,000. One day, A told C, "You don't have to pay it back." A few days later, B and C formed a drinking party with friends in other circles, C drank too much, and inadvertently revealed, "A generously said that I don't need to pay back C, that's 300,000, and I don't need to pay it back, it's funny"! A few days later, B took A to court to revoke A's waiver of A's claim against C. What B is exercising is the creditor's right of avoidance. Unlike the passive debtor of the right of subrogation, the right of avoidance is actively acted by the debtor, for example, by voluntarily relinquishing its own claims. Because the debtor's voluntary waiver of creditor's rights will significantly affect the expected interests of the creditor, such waiver is not arbitrary and must be restricted. It can also be broadened to mean that the creditor can exercise the right of avoidance if the debtor's initiative against a third party affects the interests of the creditor.
Interpretation: The obviously unreasonable ** here can refer to the local guide price or market price, that is, the normal price. If the transaction does not reach 70% of the normal price, it will be regarded as an obviously unreasonable low price; If the transaction exceeds 30% of the normal price, it is considered obviously unreasonable**. Whether it is a low-price transfer or a first-class transfer, it is to avoid debts and damage the interests of creditors. If it can be proved that the debtor colluded with a third party to trap the creditor, the creditor may exercise the right of avoidance to revoke the debtor's above-mentioned cheating behavior.
Interpretation: A, B, and C are all friends in the same circle, A owes B 500,000, and C owes A 700,000. One day, A told C, "You don't have to pay it back." A few days later, B and C formed a drinking party with friends in other circles, C drank too much, and inadvertently revealed, "A generously said that I don't need C to pay back, that's 700,000, and if you don't need to pay me back, you don't need to pay it back, A is really interesting"! A few days later, B took A to court to revoke A's waiver of A's claim against C. Note that B can only withdraw 500,000 of them, and cannot demand the full withdrawal of 700,000. That is to say, of the 200,000 yuan, A does not use C, and it still belongs to A's right to dispose of it, and B cannot interfere. B can only interfere with the 500,000 that has something to do with him.
B can only go to the court to exercise the right of revocation, after all, it is A's cause that causes B to sue the court to protect his rights, so the necessary expenses such as litigation costs are of course borne by A.
Interpretation: The right of revocation is a right of formation, and the exercise of this right is limited by the exclusion period. The starting point of the year is the date on which the reason for revocation is known or ought to have been known, for example, I know that you gave up your debts behind my mother's back, okay! From the day I "know", it will take me a year to clean you up. What if I only found out about what you were doing behind my back in the sixth year of what happened? It's too late to know, I'm afraid ... This article stipulates that the upper limit of the exclusion period is five years, and I can only count the maximum limit of five years from the date you do this behind my back.