Comprehensive Law

Business Domain

Ø Lawsuit of objection to proxy execution

Ø Proxy derivative litigation (additional debtor)

Ø Apply for resumption of execution

Ø Search for property clues

Ø Enforcement Application

Ø Application for Change of Litigation Subject

Ø Apply for the realization of mortgage rights

Ø Application for court preservation of properties

Ø Lawsuit or apply for arbitration

Team Characteristics

（一）Team members

The non-performing assets department is composed of more than ten lead lawyers, co lawyers, several intern lawyers, legal assistants, and team secretaries. The team's workflow is clear and smooth, with clear division of labor among team members. They have rich experience in the field of financial loan disputes, assist each other, handle affairs steadily, and are good at communication and coordination. They can timely and effectively follow up and provide feedback on the progress of cases, providing efficient legal services to clients.

（二）Standardization of Series Case Business

For cases where the legal subject is clear, the legal relationship is clear, the facts are clear, the evidence is conclusive, and the application of the law is clear, standardized procedures are used to process and produce legal documents. Regularly provide business training to team members, and when handling cases, team members will carefully verify key elements such as the names of all parties involved, litigation requests, subject matter amounts, and case facts.

（三）Special case thematic discussion and report

Adhering to a professional and rigorous work attitude, we are committed to comprehensive assessment and professional prevention of legal risks in financial business. For cases involving complex and risky situations such as guarantee effectiveness, maximum guarantee amount, derivative litigation, and execution objection litigation, the team leader reports in writing to the Business Quality Control Committee of our firm in a special form. Multiple senior partners jointly discuss the risk points of the case and the ideas and skills of proxy litigation, comprehensively understand and review such cases, and timely report the case risks and proxy ideas to financial institutions to ensure the quality of services.

（四）Adopting the collection method of "using litigation to promote settlement and using settlement to promote payment"

After receiving the case, team members will investigate and classify it according to the size of the subject matter, the debtor's debt paying ability, whether it is a joint debt between husband and wife, and whether there is a dispute over ownership of the collateral.

In the early stage, we actively contacted the borrower and mortgagor, and with their trust and active cooperation, our team of lawyers provided multiple solutions to the debt based on their actual situation. At the same time, provide constructive opinions to the mortgagor and other creditors on debt settlement, case withdrawal, and preservation of the mortgaged property. After multiple rounds of negotiation, the mortgagor ultimately disposed of the property on their own, achieving rapid recovery of the creditor's rights.

Scope of Services

Lawsuit or apply for arbitration, apply for property preservation, apply for realization of mortgage rights, apply for change of litigation subject, apply for execution, search for property clues, apply for resumption of execution, act as an agent for derivative litigation (add debt repayment subject, act as an agent for execution objection, etc.).

Team Outlook

Constantly find problems in agency cases, dig out problems, do a good job of risk warning, give full play to team advantages, enhance team strength, constantly use the Internet and powerful data service system, promote litigation procedures with a higher level of practice and a more rigorous and meticulous service attitude, ultimately solve problems, improve the efficiency and recovery rate of claims, and better provide legal services for financial institutions.

Classic Case（1）

Case name: A lawsuit filed by a bank against Sun, a third party Zhang, and a company in Shenzhen for objection to execution by third parties.

Case Summary:

A certain bank signed loan contracts with Zhang and a company in Shenzhen, and the bank provided loans to Zhang and the company in Shenzhen. Zhang provided mortgage guarantees with his property and registered the mortgage. After the loan expired, Zhang was unable to repay. A bank initiated arbitration, and after obtaining an award, Zhang failed to fulfill his repayment obligations within the specified period. The bank applied for compulsory enforcement. During the execution process, a third party named Sun, who is the ex-wife of Zhang, raised an objection to the execution, claiming to confirm that he owns 50% of the property rights and residential rights involved in the case, as well as 50% of the distribution rights obtained from the sale of the property. He applied to suspend the property auction, but the execution court ruled to reject his request after hearing the case. Later, he filed a lawsuit against the execution objection of a third party, but the first instance court did not adopt the bank's defense opinion. The bank appealed to the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court, which adopted the bank's agent's opinion and determined that the 50% distribution right of the sale proceeds was not a division of the common property rights, but a redistribution of the common property rights based on divorce. In nature, it is an ordinary creditor's right and cannot be obstructed from execution. According to the relevant provisions of the Civil Code, the right of residence is for the purpose of satisfying living and residence needs, and registration is a prerequisite for its establishment. The right of residence involved in the case was only agreed upon by both parties and was not registered, which is not legally established. In the end, all the reasons for the bank's appeal were supported, and the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court ruled to revoke the first instance judgment and reject all of Sun's claims. Later, Sun applied for a retrial to the High Court, and we defended ourselves in accordance with the law and submitted a set of new evidence. After the High Court tried in accordance with the law, Sun's request for retrial was rejected.

Case agency strategy：

1. The property involved in the case is not registered under Sun's name. As a third party to the case, ownership of the subject matter of the execution has not yet been obtained. Only in situations where the law and judicial interpretations clearly stipulate that the execution can be prevented, can the execution be prevented to counteract the priority right to compensation of a certain bank. The first instance court has expanded the legal and judicial interpretations to clearly stipulate the circumstances that can prevent enforcement, violated legal procedures, and incorrectly applied legal provisions to make a first instance judgment.

The agreement between Sun and Zhang regarding the right of residence was formed in 2015. At that time, the law did not provide for the establishment and effectiveness of the right of residence. According to Article 3 of the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of Time Effectiveness" and Article 368 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, the right of residence, as a special usufructuary right, was established based on the principle of registration effectiveness. Although Sun and Zhang had agreed on the right of residence, they did not register the right of residence, which cannot be established according to law.

3. A certain bank, based on the principle of property rights disclosure and public trust, reviewed the ID card, real estate ownership certificate, divorce certificate, divorce agreement, and single statement provided by Zhang, and verified the materials provided by him through the Personal Credit Center of the People's Bank of China, which were consistent with his own self description and provided information. For the identification of the authenticity of the relevant materials submitted by Zhang, a certain bank can only conduct it within its ability, and any review beyond its ability to identify is not a reasonable review obligation. It is difficult for bank staff to visually determine the authenticity of divorce agreements, and at that time, the relevant departments did not open a verification system to banks. Therefore, it can be concluded that a certain bank has fulfilled its reasonable review obligations。

Case handling results：

The second instance court adopted the appeal opinion of the bank, revoked the first instance judgment, and rejected all of Sun's claims. Sun applied for a retrial to the High Court, and we submitted a retrial opinion and a set of new evidence. The High Court rejected Sun's request for retrial in accordance with the law, and then the case resumed execution.

Classic Case（2）

Case Name: A Financial Loan Contract Dispute between a Bank, a Management Company, and Wang.

Case summary ：

A certain bank signed a loan contract with a certain management company and Mr. Wang, and the bank provided loans to the management company and Mr. Wang. Mr. Wang used his property as collateral and registered the mortgage. After the principal was due, Wang was unable to repay it and then applied for a loan extension. After the loan matured again, Wang was still unable to repay the principal, and a certain bank filed a lawsuit. Wang argued that a bank collected fake divorce certificates without his consent and violated property appraisal regulations, resulting in Yang defrauding him of a loan of 1.8 million yuan. Yang unilaterally produced the business license, official seal, financial seal, and personal seal of a management company. Wang went to the bank to apply for a loan, and Yang volunteered to help Wang with the operation, resulting in the leakage of Wang's U-shield, bank card password, and company password. The criminal judgment determined that the loan was proposed, introduced, and prepared by Yang, who also requested Wang to go to the bank to handle it. Yang led the entire loan process, and the loan was transferred to Yang's personal bank account through turnover without Wang's knowledge. Yang maliciously occupied and used the loan, and also paid interest for a period of time. Yang was found to have committed fraud and was responsible for refunding the loan, claiming that the loan contract and mortgage contract were invalid.

Case agency strategy：

1. The loan contract, loan disbursement form, mortgage contract, and extension agreement signed between a certain bank, a certain management company, and Wang are all genuine expressions of their intentions and are legal and valid. Wang, in addition to signing on behalf of himself in the above-mentioned contracts, also signed the loan contracts and loan disbursement forms involved in the case as the legal representative of a certain management company. And applying for a loan extension from a certain bank one year later is sufficient to demonstrate Wang's knowledge of the involved loan and clear intention to borrow.

2. Wang claimed that the loan was caused by fraud, but the criminal judgment did not determine that the fraudulent behavior involved was related to a certain bank, and that the bank had set up a security verification program in issuing the loan. As for whether Wang was defrauded and whether the financial loan contract in this case is related to a different legal relationship, it does not affect the determination of the loan contract in this case.

3. As a person with full capacity for civil conduct, Wang should have been aware of the potential legal consequences of leaking bank U-disks and online banking passwords to others, and allowed such behavior to occur. He should bear the corresponding legal consequences on his own. As the lender, the bank has fulfilled its obligation to review the corresponding loan materials in a formal manner. As for the legal relationship between Wang and Yang Mou, which is not the same as this case, Wang can resolve it through legal means.

Case handling result:

一、二审法院均采纳代理律师意见，支持银行的抵押债权。而后王某向高院申请再审，我方依法进行答辩，高院依法审理后驳回王某的再审请求。

Case Review:

According to the "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning Suspected Economic Crimes in the Trial of Economic Dispute Cases" and the "Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Illegal Fundraising", if the case involves different facts, disputes that do not involve criminal facts should continue to be tried, and the order of trial depends on the correlation and mutual influence between civil and criminal relationships in specific cases. In this case, regarding the validity of the financial loan contract signed between Wang and a certain bank, Wang is a person with full legal capacity and has the cognitive ability to understand the legal consequences of signing loan and mortgage contracts. Therefore, in the case where Wang cannot prove that his signature violates his true intention, the above-mentioned contract has legal binding force on him. Secondly, after the signing of the above-mentioned contract, a certain bank issued a loan to Wang as agreed, so the legal fact that occurred between the parties was a financial loan; From the content of the criminal judgment, it can be seen that the fact that Wang was deceived by Yang is another legal fact, which is not the same as the current case. The fact that Wang borrowed money from a certain bank does not need to be further investigated by criminal investigation, so it does not conform to the situation of "criminal first, civil later" suspension of trial. In summary, in similar situations, the court's standard for determining whether a bank's mortgage can be exercised depends on whether the bank institution is aware that the property in question has significant defects in rights, whether it has paid reasonable consideration, and whether it has fulfilled its duty of due diligence.