最高法：避免将“失能”但无“失信”行为被执行人纳入失信黑名单

Core Insights - The implementation of the dishonesty enforcement list system since October 2013 has led to 17.1 million individuals voluntarily fulfilling their legal obligations or reaching settlement agreements by June 30, 2025, due to credit sanctions and consumption restrictions [1] - The Supreme Court emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between "dishonesty" and "inability" in enforcement cases, aiming to protect the rights of honest but unfortunate individuals while cracking down on malicious debt evasion [2] Group 1 - The dishonesty punishment system has effectively curbed malicious debt evasion and protected the legal rights of winning parties [1] - In 2024, 2.457 million new individuals were added to the dishonesty enforcement list, a year-on-year decrease of 23.4%, while 2.821 million individuals restored their credit status, a year-on-year increase of 35.4%, marking the first decline in the number of individuals on the dishonesty list in a decade [1] - The Supreme Court is guiding courts nationwide to implement classification management of "dishonesty" and "inability" to better serve economic and social development [1] Group 2 - The Supreme Court stresses the need for careful verification of the reasons behind non-compliance before adding individuals to the dishonesty list, to avoid misclassifying those who are unable to fulfill obligations due to genuine circumstances [2] - Courts are encouraged to apply a grace period of one to three months for individuals with development potential but facing temporary difficulties, balancing the rights of winning parties with the legitimate rights of the debtors [2] - Malicious behaviors such as hiding whereabouts, continuing business under different names, and extravagant spending despite being on the dishonesty list are highlighted as serious disruptions to market order, warranting increased punitive measures [3]