离婚协议下债权人撤销权的适用研究

A Study on the Application of the Creditor’s Right of Revocation in Divorce Agreements

摘要: 债务人通过通谋虚伪的离婚协议减少自身责任财产以非法逃避债务的情形与日俱增，司法实践表达出将债权人撤销权适用于离婚协议的迫切需求。但由于离婚协议的特殊性，理论界和实务界对债权人撤销权能否适用于此类以离婚为名的财产转移协议存在争议。实践中即使法院支持了债权人的诉讼请求，债权人往往面临撤销判决后债权仍无法实现的困境。《民法典婚姻家庭编解释(二)》第3条积极地回应了上述问题，明确了债权人撤销权在离婚协议中的适用以实现债权。但由于条文表述的原则性要求，并未提出细则具体化的解决路径，导致司法实践中出现裁判分歧。以此为线索，结合检索司法案例中所产生的具体问题进行进一步的解析。采取“相当性”标准明确此类案件的司法认定和适用范围让撤销权的适用更加规范，为债权人的债权清偿提供坚实的理论基础。

Abstract: The phenomenon of debtors evading liabilities by diminishing their assets through sham divorce agreements is increasingly prevalent, creating an urgent demand in judicial practice to extend the creditor’s right of revocation to such agreements. However, given the unique nature of divorce settlements, significant controversy persists within both academic and practical circles regarding the applicability of this right to fraudulent arrangements. Even in instances where courts uphold creditors’ claims, creditors frequently encounter the dilemma of being unable to realize their debts despite a successful revocation judgment. Article 3 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the Marriage and Family Section of the Civil Code (II) proactively addresses these issues by clarifying the applicability of the creditor’s right of revocation to divorce agreements to facilitate debt recovery. Nevertheless, due to the principled rather than prescriptive nature of its wording, the provision fails to offer a detailed operational framework, resulting in divergent judicial rulings. Guided by this context, this study analyzes specific challenges emerging from judicial case reviews. It proposes adopting a “proportionality” standard to clarify judicial determination and the scope of application in such cases, thereby standardizing the exercise of the right of revocation and establishing a robust theoretical foundation for the satisfaction of creditors’ claims.