The Improvement Of Civil Enforcement Settlement Relief Mechanisms

"Difficulty in enforcement" is a long-standing problem in China’s civil enforcement,and enforcement settlement has gradually become an important way to solve this problem,and the high settlement rate seems to ease the pressure of enforcement,but in practice,there are still many settlement agreements that have not been fully implemented,which has led to secondary disputes.The enforcement settlement relief mechanism is the main means to resolve secondary disputes,so exploring and improving the civil enforcement settlement relief mechanism plays an important role in the effective and smooth operation of the enforcement settlement system and giving play to the advantages of the system.The Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China promulgated and implemented in 1991 only includes "resumption of enforcement",while the dual relief mode of "resumption of enforcement" and "separate prosecution" is stipulated in the Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Enforcement of Settlement promulgated and implemented in 2018.This leads to confusion in the application of judicial practice,it is difficult for the applicant to achieve relief,and it is difficult for the enforcement of settlement remedies to play its due role,and at the same time,it also increases the judicial burden.The 2022 Civil Enforcement Law of the People’s Republic of China(Draft)sets up an objection lawsuit for the debtor,which solves the long-standing problem of the lack of the right to remedy for the debtor,but there is still no provision on the remedy mechanism for the enforcement and settlement of third parties,and there is a legislative gap.In addition,China’s current enforcement reconciliation remedies are ex post facto remedies,and it is difficult to solve practical problems by relying on ex post facto remedies alone.At the same time,there is a lack of court supervision over the performance of the settlement agreement and punishment of the defaulting parties.Therefore,after elaborating the connotation of civil enforcement settlement remedies,the enforcement settlement agreement is divided into types.This paper analyzes the nature of the enforcement settlement agreement that has been debated a lot in the academic circles and whether it should be given the enforcement power of the enforcement settlement agreement,and concludes that the dual nature of the settlement agreement is affirmed and can give the settlement agreement some space for enforcement at the legislative level.After analyzing the current situation of legislation and judicial status of enforcement of settlement remedies,the existing problems of China’s enforcement of settlement relief mechanisms are put forward,and several suggestions are put forward for the existing problems of China’s enforcement of settlement relief mechanisms: first,distinguish the relief channels for different types of enforcement settlement agreements;Second,the relief against the applicant is further strengthened by giving the applicant the right to defend unease,and at the same time introducing the debtor’s objection to the third-party relief mechanism;Third,clarify the judicial review system of the courts and establish a platform for tracking and supervising the implementation of settlement agreements to broaden the channels for prior relief and post-event supervision;Fourth,establish a disciplinary system for defaulting parties,and punish defaulting parties to improve the degree of relief.