The People's Court of Hualong District, Puyang City (2021) Yu 0902 Zhiyi No. 244 Enforcement Ruling held that for multiple assignments of creditor's rights, the final assignee can be directly changed to the applicant for enforcement by changing the additional procedure, without the need to change it one by one, and the enforcement procedure does not review the substantive issues of the assignment of creditor's rights, but the process of multiple assignments of creditor's rights must be clear, clear and continuous, so as to ensure that the parties in the multiple transfers have no dispute about the ownership of the creditor's rights, so as to change the final assignee to the applicant for enforcement. In other words, in the event that the effective legal document determines that the creditor's rights are transferred multiple times, the final assignee of the creditor's rights can directly apply to change himself to the applicant for enforcement.
I agree with the above. In judicial practice, multiple assignments of creditor's rights (including multiple assignments of creditor's rights that have entered the enforcement procedure) are very common, especially the multiple assignments of "non-performing asset packages" are common in judicial practice. This raises the question of whether the last assignee can be directly changed to the applicant for enforcement if the creditor's rights that have entered the enforcement procedure have been transferred multiple times. I have written a lot of articles on enforcement and enforcement objections such as the addition of the person subject to enforcement in my practical research on the validity of the contract, and interested friends can find out and take a look.
Article 9 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Change and Addition of Parties in Civil Enforcement (2020 Amendment) stipulates that: "If the applicant for enforcement transfers the creditor's rights determined in the effective legal documents to a third party in accordance with the law, and acknowledges in writing that the third party has obtained the creditor's rights, and the third party applies to change or add the third party as the applicant for enforcement, the people's court shall support it." According to this provision, it can be seen that in a case where the applicant for enforcement needs to be changed due to the assignment of creditor's rights, the court does not examine the substantive issues of the assignment of creditor's rights, and "the applicant for enforcement recognizes in writing that a third party obtains the creditor's rights" is the core requirement for the court to allow the change of the applicant for enforcement, and the connotation of this element is that the new creditor needs to be recognized by the original creditor, and according to the spirit of this connotation, if the creditor's rights are transferred multiple times, each assignor needs to approve in writing that the assignee has obtained the creditor's rights, for example, A (the applicant for enforcement) transfers the creditor's right to B, and B transfers the creditor's right to C, then C can directly apply to change it to the applicant for enforcement (without first changing B to the applicant for enforcement, and then changing C to the applicant for enforcement), but A needs to approve B in writing to obtain the creditor's right, and B to approve C in writing to obtain the creditor's right.
If the creditor's rights are transferred multiple times, the last assignee can be directly changed to the applicant for enforcement, which is in line with the provisions of the law and legal logic, and is also conducive to saving litigation costs and meeting the requirements of the market economy.
In addition, it should be noted that the failure to notify the debtor of the assignment of creditor's rights does not affect the validity of the assignment of creditor's rights itself and the change of the applicant for enforcement, as the Supreme People's Court (2019) Supreme Court Zhi Fu No. 91 Enforcement Ruling holds this view. On this issue, I have written an article and analyzed it in my research on the practice of contract validity, and I will not expand on it here.
Attached: Liu Mousheng, Wang Quan, et al. Objection to the Enforcement of Loan Contract Disputes.
Case Summary: In the case of a financial loan contract dispute between Zhongyuan Bank, the applicant for execution, and Huaqiang Company, Guo Moudong, and Guo, on September 28, 2018, the court rendered the (2018) Yu 0902 Min Chu No. 3913 Civil Judgment, the main content of the judgment: Huaqiang Company repaid the principal and interest of the loan of Zhongyuan Bank of 7.6 million yuan, and paid it within 10 days after the judgment took effect; Guo Moudong and Guo Moudong are jointly and severally liable for the above-mentioned creditor's rights; Zhongyuan Bank has the right to give priority to the compensation of the price obtained from the discount, auction or sale of the state-owned land use right under the name of Huaqiang Company with the land right certificate number Pu Guoyong (2014) No. 0024. After the judgment took effect, Zhongyuan Bank applied for compulsory enforcement because the person subject to enforcement failed to perform its obligations in accordance with the judgment. On September 16, 2020, the court issued the (2019) Yu 0902 Zhihui No. 114 Enforcement Ruling, ending the enforcement procedure.
It was also ascertained that the applicant submitted the following main evidence to this court: 1. One copy of the "Creditor's Rights Transfer Agreement" and one copy of the "Supplementary Agreement", the main contents: on August 14, 2020, Zhongyuan Bank and Liu Moulong entered into a creditor's rights transfer agreement, and on September 4, 2020, the two parties entered into a supplementary agreement, and Zhongyuan Bank transferred all the creditor's rights confirmed in the (2018) Yu 0902 Min Chu No. 3913 Civil Judgment (hereinafter referred to as the creditor's rights involved in the case) to the applicant Liu Moulong Liu Moulong, Liu Mousheng and Wang Quanmou on September 14, 2020, Wang Yan, Zhang Moubin, Chang, Li Moulin, Ren Mouzhi, Du Moumin 8 applicants entered into the "Creditor's Rights Transfer Agreement", the main content: Liu Moulong will transfer all the claims involved in the case through the "Creditor's Rights Transfer Agreement" and the "Supplementary Agreement" to the 8 applicants, the agreement will take effect from the date of signature or seal of both parties, Liu Moulong will no longer claim claims against Huaqiang Company, Guo Mou, Guo Moudong On December 23, Liu Mousheng, Wang Quan, Wang Yan, Zhang Moubin, Chang, Li Moulin, Ren Mouzhi, The main contents of the "Creditor's Rights Transfer Agreement" entered into between the 8 applicants and Taihe Company are: the 8 applicants obtained the creditor's rights involved in the case on September 14, 2020, and the 8 applicants transferred 900,000 yuan of the creditor's rights involved in the case to Taihe Company, and the Taihe Company directly claimed the creditor's rights against Huaqiang Company, Guo Moudong and Guo Mou; It shall take effect from the date of signature or seal of both parties.
It was also ascertained that Zhongyuan Bank and Liu Moulong respectively acknowledged in writing that the applicant had obtained the creditor's rights involved in the case.
Adjudication Opinion [Case No.: Puyang Hualong District People's Court (2021) Yu 0902 Zhi Yi No. 244] If the applicant for enforcement transfers the creditor's rights determined in the effective legal documents to a third party in accordance with the law, and acknowledges in writing that the third party has obtained the creditor's rights, and the third party applies to change it to the person applying for enforcement, the people's court shall support it. Zhongyuan Bank, the executor of the application in this case, transferred the creditor's rights involved in the case to Liu Moulong, and then Liu Moulong transferred the creditor's rights involved in the case to 8 applicants, and the latter 8 applicants transferred 900,000 yuan of the creditor's rights involved in the case to Taihe Company. The creditor's rights involved in the case have been transferred three times, and according to the provisions of the transfer agreement, the nine applicants now jointly enjoy the creditor's rights involved in the case, and Zhongyuan Bank and Liu Moulong have agreed in writing that the applicants have obtained the creditor's rights involved in the case. The enforcement procedure does not examine the substantive issues of the assignment of creditor's rights, but the process of multiple assignments of creditor's rights must be clear, clear and continuous, so as to ensure that the parties in the multiple assignments have no dispute over the ownership of the creditor's rights, so as to change the final assignee to the applicant for enforcement. In other words, in the event that the effective legal document determines that the creditor's rights are transferred multiple times, the final assignee of the creditor's rights can directly apply to change himself to the applicant for enforcement. Therefore, the applicant's request to be changed to the executor of this court's (2020) Yu 0902 Zhihui No. 114 enforcement case is justified, lawful and well-founded, and this court supports it. In accordance with Article 9 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Alteration and Addition of Parties in Civil Enforcement, the ruling is as follows:
Liu Mousheng, Wang Quan, Wang Yan, Zhang Moubin, Chang, Li Moulin, Ren Mouzhi, Du Moumin, and Taihe Packaging Materials (Puyang)** were changed as the executors of the application for enforcement of the (2020) Yu 0902 Zhi Hui Zi No. 114 enforcement case of this court.