|
Wang Yazhou v. Huang Ruifu (appeal from a civil loan dispute )
|
|
王亞周與黃瑞福民間借貸糾紛上訴案
|
|
【法寶引證碼】
|
|
|
|
*尊敬的用戶，您好！本篇僅為該案例的英文摘要。北大法寶提供單獨的翻譯服務，如需整篇翻譯，請發郵件至database@chinalawinfo.com，或致電86
(10) 8268-9699進行咨詢。
*Dear user, this document contains only a summary of the
respective judicial case. To request a full-text translation as an additional service,
please contact us at: + 86 (10) 8268-9699 database@chinalawinfo.com
|
|
|
|
Wang Yazhou v. Huang Ruifu (appeal from a civil loan dispute )
(appeal from a civil loan dispute )
王亞周與黃瑞福民間借貸糾紛上訴案
|
|
[Key Terms]
service ; service by public notice ; service by dropping documents
[核心術語]
送達;公告送達;留置送達
|
|
[Disputed Issues]
How many methods can a court complete service of litigation documents? How to handle service in difficult situations?
[爭議焦點]
1.法院送達訴訟文書有幾種方式？對于難以送達的情況如何處理？
|
|
[Case Summary]
The term “service” refers to the conduct that a people's court delivers the litigation document to the addressee according to legal procedures and methods. Under relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law there are six ways of service by a court as follows: direct service; service by dropping documents; service by mandate; service by post; service by passing on and service by public notice. In case of difficult situation for service under Article 79 of the Civil Procedure Law if the recipient of a service or any of his adult family members living with him refuses to accept a legal document the person serving the document shall ask the representatives of the relevant basic organization or unit to which the recipient of the service belongs to appear on the scene...
[案例要旨]
送達是指人民法院按照法定程序和方式將訴訟文書送交受送達人的行為。根據《民事訴訟法》的相關規定人民法院送達的方式有以下六種：直接送達；留置送達；委托送達；郵遞送達；轉交送達；公告送達。對于難以送達的情況根據《民事訴訟法》第七十九條的規定受送達人或者他的同住成年家屬拒絕接收訴訟文書的...
|
Full-text omitted | | 王亞周與黃瑞福民間借貸糾紛上訴案 |
| | 福建省高級人民法院 |
| | 民事判決書 |
| | (2011)閩民終字第635號 |
| | 上訴人（原審被告）：王亞周。 |
| | 委托代理人：唐勇，北京勇文智勝法律咨詢服務中心主任。 |
| | 被上訴人（原審原告）：黃瑞福。 |
| | 委托代理人：林庚，福建天澤廣業律師事務所律師。 |
| | 上訴人王亞周因民間借貸糾紛一案，不服廈門市中級人民法院（2010）廈民初字第422號民事判決。向本院提起上訴。本院依法組成合議庭，公開開庭審理了本案。上訴人王亞周的委托代理人唐勇、被上訴人黃瑞福的委托代理人林庚到庭參加訴訟。本案現已審理終結。 |
| | 原審查明：2007年8月28日，黃瑞福通過黃洋在中國建設銀行股份有限公司廈門分行東區支行的賬戶（賬號1935629980110060761）轉賬200萬元到王亞周的賬戶（賬號4367420013660321674）。2007年8月29日，林滿園通過轉賬將自己賬戶內的100萬元轉入黃洋的上述賬戶，2007年8月31日黃瑞福通過轉賬將自己賬戶內的100萬元轉入黃洋的上述賬戶。 |
| | 黃瑞福與林滿園系夫妻，黃洋系黃瑞福與林滿園的婚生子。訴訟期間，林滿園向原審法院出具書面聲明，同意黃瑞福以個人名義向王亞周主張200萬元債權，不以共同債權人的名義參加本案訴訟。 |
| | 原審法院認為，訟爭款項的轉賬在廈門完成，本案合同履行地在廈門市，根據《中華人民共和國民事訴訟法》第二十四條的規定，該院對本案具有管轄權。因當事人未約定訟爭合同適用的法律，依照《中華人民共和國涉外民事關系法律適用法》第四十一條的規定，因本案訟爭合同履行地在廈門市，依最密切聯系原則，本案應適用中華人民共和國法律。 |
| | 黃瑞福通過其子黃洋的賬戶轉帳200萬元至王亞周的賬戶，並主張該款系其出借給王亞周的款項，因王亞周未對黃瑞福主張的借款關系提出抗辯，依現有證據該院認為對原告主張其與王亞周之間存在借貸關系應予采信。因雙方未就該借款約定還款期限，現黃瑞福主張王亞周償還借款，于法有據，應予支持。王亞周經合法傳喚，無正當理由拒不到庭參加訴訟，本案經開庭審理，現已查明事實，依法應當缺席判決。綜上，依照《中華人民共和國合同法》第二百一十條、《最高人民法院關于貫徹執行〈中華人民共和國民法通則〉若幹問題的意見（試行）》第121條、《中華人民共和國民事訴訟法》第一百三十條之規定，判決：王亞周應于判決生效之日起十日內償還黃瑞福借款200萬元。如未按判決指定的期間履行給付金錢義務，根據《中華人民共和國民事訴訟法》第二百二十九條之規定，應當加倍支付遲延履行期間的債務利息。案件受理費22800元，由王亞周承擔。 |
| | ．．．．．． |
Dear visitor,you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases . If you are not a subscriber, please subscribe . Should you have any questions, please contact us at:
+86 (10) 8268-9699 or +86 (10) 8266-8266 (ext. 153)
Mobile: +86 133-1157-0713
Fax: +86 (10) 8266-8268
database@chinalawinfo.com
| |
您好：您現在要進入的是北大法律英文網會員專區，如您是我們英文用戶可直接 登錄，進入會員專區查詢您所需要的信息；如您還不是我們 的英文用戶，請注冊並交納相應費用成為我們的英文會員 。如有問題請來電咨詢；
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content
found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright
owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.
Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations
of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language
versions as the final authority. lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly
or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.
We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve
the quality of our materials.
|
|