Recently, a woman approached our lawyer about being ordered by the court to share debts with her ex-husband after her divorce.
The general situation of the case is that the man and the woman are husband and wife for many years, and the man is the legal representative of a company. Due to problems in the company's economic situation, the man borrowed more than 20 yuan from his friend to pay wages to the company's employees. Subsequently, the husband failed to repay the arrears in time and was sued by the creditors to the court. After mediation by the court, the parties reached a mediation agreement. The husband promised to repay the loan. However, the husband did not fulfill and divorced his wife by agreement. In the divorce agreement, it is agreed that "all debts shall be borne by the husband." Subsequently, the creditor sued the woman to the court, requesting the court to order the woman to be a joint debtor and jointly and severally liable for repayment with the husband.
For the lawsuit, the woman argued that the debt had nothing to do with her. The reason for this is that the husband borrowed the debt for the purpose of running the company, not for the husband and wife to live together. In addition, he has been divorced, and while dividing the divorced property, he has additionally agreed that he will not bear any debts. According to Article 3 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases Involving Disputes over Debts between Husband and Wife, if one of the spouses incurs a debt in his or her own name during the existence of the marital relationship that exceeds the daily needs of the family, and the creditor claims rights on the ground that it is a joint debt of the husband and wife, the people's court will not support it.
Although the woman stated the above facts and reasons to the court, the court ultimately found that the debt was a joint debt of the husband and wife and ordered her to be liable for repayment. Why?
After reviewing the verdict, the divorce lawyer found that the judge had seized two key facts: first, the woman admitted in the lawsuit that she had personally collected the loan when she had borrowed the money, and second, that the woman was usually responsible for running errands for the company, cooking for employees, and did not receive wages.
Beijing Divorce Lawyer - Beijing Matrimonial Lawyer - Beijing Divorce Lawyer Consultation
Based on the above two facts, the judge held that: first, the woman knew and agreed to the husband's loan, and second, the company was jointly produced and operated by the husband and the woman.
After establishing the above two key facts, the judge quoted the proviso of the above-mentioned Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases Involving Disputes over Debts between Husband and Wife: "Except where the creditor can prove that the debt was used for the husband and wife's common life, joint production and operation, or gave the husband and wife a common expression of intent." "It is clear that the debts in this case have met the requirements of the Act for the composition of joint debts of husband and wife. Therefore, the court was right to order the woman to share the debt with her ex-husband.