1. The judicial interpretation of the Marriage Law stipulates that the debts incurred by both husband and wife when they are jointly signed by * *, or when one party ratifies afterwards, shall be recognized as joint debts of husband and wife. During the marriage relationship, the people's court shall support the debts incurred by husband and wife in their own names due to the daily needs of the family, and the creditors claim their rights on the grounds that they belong to the same debt of husband and wife. The people's court will not support the debt incurred by one spouse in his own name during the marriage relationship that exceeds the daily needs of the family, and the creditor claims rights on the grounds that the debt belongs to the same husband and wife, unless the creditor can prove that the debt is used for the life, production and operation of the husband and wife, or because both husband and wife have the same meaning.
Second, the debt of husband and wife * * * refers to the debt that both husband and wife or one of them is living together with a third person during the marriage relationship. The determination and handling of the joint debt of husband and wife is a difficult problem in divorce cases. Although the revised Marriage Law of April 28th, 20001year has explicit provisions on this issue, it is difficult to accurately grasp and apply it in practice because it is too principled and general.
Third, it includes the following aspects: the property borrowed by one party before marriage has been converted into husband and wife property, and the debts arising from the purchase of these properties; First of all, "husband and wife live together" should always insist that the debtor in the husband and wife bears the burden of proof, and the non-debtor in the husband and wife does not bear the burden of proof. According to the principle of "who claims, who gives evidence", the burden of proof should be borne by the party who claims that the debt is the same debt, that is, the debt is used for the life of husband and wife, because only the borrower knows best and understands the purpose of the debt, and it is also the easiest to prove whether the debt is used for the life of husband and wife unless he has ulterior motives. It is unrealistic and difficult to prove that the debt is not used for the husband and wife to live together if the burden of proof is borne by both husband and wife who are unaware of the loan.
4. Secondly, if the non-debtor in the husband and wife can prove that there are two legal exceptions, that is, the creditor and the debtor have clearly agreed on personal debt, or the husband and wife have agreed on a separate property system and the third party knows this agreement, or the creditor knows that the debt is illegal (such as gambling and illegal business). ), then the debt should be recognized as personal debt of husband and wife.
Fifth, finally, we should pay attention to protecting innocent creditors. As for what is "goodwill", the author thinks that the creditor "has reason to believe that the loan will be used for the husband and wife to live together". For example, the loan written on the loan will be used for the husband and wife to live together, and the loan amount is small, and the other husband and wife have no objection after learning about it. From the perspective of maintaining the security of market transactions, the interests of innocent creditors should also be protected.