Whether it is possible to apply for enforcement again after withdrawing the application for enforcem

However, Zhang failed to perform his obligations within the statutory time limit, and Wang applied to the court for compulsory enforcement. After the court filed the case for enforcement, Wang and Zhang reached an agreement privately, stipulating that as long as Wang withdrew the application for enforcement, Zhang would pay all the compensation within one week.

Wang then withdrew the application to the court. Later, Zhang broke his promise and failed to perform according to the agreement. At this time, whether Wang can apply to the court again for compulsory enforcement.

Divergence]? There are two different opinions:

The first opinion is that, according to the principle of res judicata, Wang's withdrawal of the application for enforcement to the court has been regarded as a waiver of his right to apply for enforcement, and his creditor's rights should no longer be protected by law, and Wang's application to the court for enforcement again will not be supported by the court.

The second opinion holds that if the obligee gives up recourse due to the debtor's commitment, that is, the withdrawal of the application for enforcement, it should be regarded as the interruption of the statute of limitations for applying for enforcement, so Wang can apply for enforcement again.

Comment] The author agrees with the second opinion for the following reasons:

First of all, Article 215 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the period for applying for enforcement is two years, and the provisions on the suspension or interruption of the statute of limitations for applying for enforcement shall be governed by the law. Article 140 of the General Principles of the Civil Law stipulates that the statute of limitations is interrupted by the filing of a lawsuit, the request of one of the parties, or the agreement to perform an obligation. From the time of interruption, the limitation period shall be recalculated.

Comparing the above-mentioned legal provisions, we can analyze that there should be three situations in which the statute of limitations should be interrupted, namely, the filing of a lawsuit, the request of one of the parties, and the agreement of the parties to perform their obligations. It can be inferred from this that there should also be three ways to apply for the interruption of the statute of limitations for enforcement, namely, the application for enforcement, the applicant's assertion of rights, and the judgment debtor's consent to performance. Extrapolatingly, we can also conclude that if the applicant is not allowed to withdraw the application, then there is no problem that the enforcement of the application can interrupt the statute of limitations.

Second, although the Civil Procedure Law does not expressly provide that an application for enforcement may be withdrawn, there is no prohibition either. From the perspective of the applicant's autonomy of civil rights, both the substantive rights determined by the judgment and the applicant's right to apply for enforcement belong to the applicant's private rights. The court should not interfere too much with how the applicant disposes of his or her civil rights.

In litigation, in order to realize their own rights and interests, the parties often withdraw the lawsuit to show their sincerity after the other party has promised to agree to perform their obligations, but this does not lose the right to sue again. In the enforcement procedure, although the right of the parties to apply for enforcement is the period of expulsion, the law does not stipulate that the application for enforcement again is not allowed within this time limit, and it is unfair and detrimental to the stability of the social order if the parties are deprived of the right to re-enforcement.

To sum up, in this case, Wang can apply for compulsory enforcement again after withdrawing the application for enforcement. (Author's Affiliation: Guangchang County People's Court, Jiangxi Province).

If the application for compulsory enforcement is withdrawn and the court terminates the enforcement, the application for enforcement cannot be re-applied.

Legal analysis: Yes, after the applicant withdraws the application for enforcement, the court will rule to terminate the enforcement, and after the court terminates the enforcement, the applicant for enforcement can also apply to the court again for enforcement within two years after the judgment is effective. However, if the two-year time limit for applying for enforcement has passed, the applicant cannot apply for compulsory enforcement again.

Legal basis: Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 224:The property portion of a legally effective civil judgment or ruling, as well as a criminal judgment or ruling, is to be enforced by the first-instance trial court or the people's court at the same level as the first-instance trial court for the location of the property being enforced. Other legal documents that are to be enforced by the people's courts as provided by law are to be enforced by the people's court at the place where the person subject to enforcement is domiciled or where the property subject to enforcement is located.

Article 239: The period for applying for enforcement is two years. Where an application is made for the suspension or interruption of the statute of limitations, the provisions on the suspension or interruption of the statute of limitations shall be applied in accordance with the law. The period provided for in the preceding paragraph is calculated from the last day of the period for performance provided for in the legal document; Where the legal documents provide for performance in installments, it is calculated from the last day of the period for each performance provided; Where the legal document does not stipulate a period for performing the vertical key, it is calculated from the date on which the legal document takes effect.

Legal analysis: 1. After the applicant withdraws the application for enforcement, the court will rule to terminate the enforcement.

2. After the court concludes the enforcement, the applicant for enforcement may also apply to the court again for compulsory enforcement within two years after the judgment takes effect. However, if the two-year time limit for applying for enforcement has passed, the applicant cannot apply for compulsory enforcement again.

Legal basis: Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China: The period for enforcement is the period of expulsion, and only if the parties do not submit an application within the above-mentioned time limit, the rights of the parties will no longer be protected by judicial means, and the provisions on suspension or interruption shall not apply to such periods.

Legal analysis: After the application for enforcement is withdrawn, you can apply again, after the applicant withdraws the application for enforcement, the court will rule to terminate the enforcement of Ranbi, and after the court terminates the enforcement, the applicant for enforcement can also apply to the court for enforcement again within two years after the judgment takes effect. However, if the two-year time limit for applying for enforcement has passed, the applicant cannot apply for compulsory enforcement again.

Legal basis: Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 242:If the person subject to enforcement fails to perform the obligations set forth in the legal documents in accordance with the enforcement notice, the people's court has the right to inquire into the relevant units about the property of the person subject to enforcement, such as deposits, bonds, **, **, and **shares. The people's courts have the right to seize, freeze, transfer, or sell the property of the person subject to enforcement according to different circumstances. People's courts must not inquire about, seize, freeze, transfer, or sell property beyond the scope of the obligations that the person subject to enforcement shall perform.

When a people's court decides to seize, freeze, transfer, or convert property, it shall make a ruling and issue a notice of assistance in enforcement, and the relevant units must handle it.

Article 244:Where the person subject to enforcement fails to perform the obligations set forth in the legal documents in accordance with the enforcement notice, the people's court has the right to seal, seize, freeze, auction, or sell the part of the property that the person subject to enforcement shall perform the obligations of. However, the necessities of life shall be retained for the person subject to enforcement and the family members they support. The people's court shall make a ruling on the adoption of the measures in the preceding paragraph.

OK. Where parties or interested parties feel that the enforcement act violates legal provisions, they may submit a written objection to the people's court responsible for enforcement. Where parties or interested parties submit written objections, the people's courts shall review them within 15 days of receiving the written objections, and where the grounds are sustained, rule to revoke or correct them; If the reasons are not sustained, the ruling shall be rejected.

Where parties or interested parties are dissatisfied with the ruling, they may apply for reconsideration to the Wang Chunmin Court at the level above within 10 days from the date on which the ruling is served. Where the people's court has not enforced the application for enforcement for more than six months from the date of receipt of the application for enforcement, the person applying for enforcement may apply to the people's court at the level above for enforcement.

Legal basis: Article 226 of the Civil Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China.