trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euroPrecedent no. 22/2018/AL on non-breach of obligation to disclose pre-existing medical conditions in life insurance policy
Precedent no. 22/2018/AL on non-breach of obligation to disclose pre-existing medical conditions in life insurance policy
* Claim of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff, Mr. Dang Van L, in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro lawsuit petitions dated November 10, 2010, dated December 8, 2010:
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People’s Court of District 1 must compel C Life Insurance Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as Company C) to make trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout of VND 405,000,000 and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro interest accrued until trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro effective date of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment, which trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro amount trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Company C shall compensate for two insurance policies below which his wife took out:
- Policy No. S11000009505 dated October 14, 2008 for trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro indemnity of VND 265,000,000.
- Policy No. S11000040924 dated March 25, 2009 for trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro indemnity of VND 190,000,000.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Company paid him VND 50,000,000 in advance.
* Claim of Mr. Dang Van L in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro amended lawsuit petition dated May 30, 2011:
Compel Company C to pay him VND 470,000,000 and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro interest accrued until trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro effective date of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment. trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro provisional interest calculated up to present is VND 43,000,000.
- Policy No. S11000009505 dated October 14, 2008 for trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro indemnity of VND 287,000,000.
- Policy No. S11000040924 dated March 25, 2009 for trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro indemnity of VND 190,000,000.
* Claim of Mr. Dang Van L in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro amended lawsuit petition dated June 22, 2011:
Compel Company C to pay VND 203,772,500 for 02 insurance policies No. S11000009505, S11000040924 and keep performing trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro policy No. S11000009505 dated October 14, 2008; and return two original insurance policies No. S11000009505; S11000040924, in specific:
In respect of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro policy Thinh Tri Thanh Tai Bao Gia, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Company has to make trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro payout of VND 35,000,000 upon trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro policyholder's death (Article 4.1.2) up to present equivalent to 50% of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insured amount.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro annual support in cash of VND 7,000,000 (Article 4.4) equivalent to 10% of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insured amount.
And trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy No. S11000009505 shall keep being performed until trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro maturity date mentioned in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro policy.
- Refund term insurance policy.
Benefit of insurance upon death (Article 4.1): VND 190,000,000 (Company C paid VND 50,000,000).
Interest on late payment up to present: VND 21.772.500
* Claim of Mr. Dang Van L in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro additional lawsuit petition dated April 18, 2015:
Compel Company C to pay him VND 405,000,000 and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro interest accrued until trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro effective date of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment.
Compel Company C to return trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro two original insurance policies No. S11000009505 and S11000040924 held by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Company.
* Representation of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant, Company C, in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro response No. 008/2011/CV dated January 28, 2011:
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro customer, Mrs. Truong Thi H, who had had stomach pain and high cholesterol before entering into two insurance policies, did not declare her medical conditions in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro questionnaire of her application for insurance. If Company C previously knew her stomach pain and high cholesterol, it would decline to enter into an insurance policy with her. Therefore, Company C declines to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance benefit and decides to cancel two insurance policies of Mrs. H as a well-grounded decision (specified in Article 11.2 Rules and terms of policy) and as per trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro law (stipulated in Article 19 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on Insurance Business).
Company C requests trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People’s Court of District 1 to reject trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro lawsuit petition of Mr. L.
* Representation of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant, Company C, in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro response No. 024/2011/CV dated May 16, 2011:
1. In respect of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim requesting Company C to pay VND 405,000,000 and interest accrued of two insurance policies No. S11000009505 and S11000040924, Company C still upholds its point of view. trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Company paid all trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro amounts as its obligations in two mentioned insurance policies. Additionally, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim of Mr. Dang Van L has no valid ground as stipulated in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Rules and terms of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance contract and has no legal basis. Thus, Company C requests trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court to reject trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim of Mr. L.
2. In respect of claim requesting Company C to return two (02) original insurance policies No. S11000009505 and S11000040924, Company C accepts it.
* Representation of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro person with relevant rights and obligations, Mrs. Luong Thi T, in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro depositions dated April 14, 2011 and dated May 9, 2011:
She is trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro mother of Mrs. Truong Thi H who died on January 9, 2010; she requests Company C to pay her and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro family trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout. She agrees to give her son-in-law, Mr. Dang Van L, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout she may benefit in order for Mr. L to have full rights and advantages in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro dispute with Company C.
* Representation of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro person with relevant rights and obligations, Mrs. Dang Kieu L, in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro deposition dated April 14, 2011:
Mrs. L is trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro child of Mrs. Truong Thi H who died on January 9, 2010. She is also entitled to a part of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout as prescribed, hence, she requests Company C to pay her trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro amount of her inheritance in such insurance payout upon her mother’s death. She agrees to give her father, Mr. Dang Van L, her part of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim right which she supposedly inherits from her mother, and Mr. L have full rights in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro dispute with Company C to claim trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout of her mother, Mrs. H.
* Representation of legal representative of Dang Linh N, Mr. Dang Van L, in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro deposition dated May 9, 2011:
Request trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court to bring to case into trial as soon as possible in order to return justice and honor to his family and many Vietnamese citizens who have bought life insurance of Company C and other life insurance companies.
- In respect of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro observance of law on civil procedures of presiding officers and procedural participants, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro representative of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People’s Procuracy of District 1 expressed as follows:
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judge has complied with regulations of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euroCivil Procedure Code.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro dispute was rightly determined, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case is still within trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro litigation prescriptive period and sufficient evidence has been taken.
Litigation documents have been issued and served to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People’s Procuracy and procedural participants in accordance with Article 147 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code
Legal statuses of litigants are rightly determined, decision to bring trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case to trial was issued and documents were sent to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People’s Procuracy within trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro statutory time limit.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro preparatory process of trial exceeds trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro time limit prescribed in Article 179 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Trial Panel conducted trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro court hearing on time and at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro predetermined location with litigants mentioned in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro decision to bring to case to trial and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro trial was conducted in accordance with prescribed rules of trial. During trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro trial, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro presiding judge ensured that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro litigants could present their opinions.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro extent of observance of regulations by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro litigants: Since trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro acceptance of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case and at today’s court hearing, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant, and person with relevant rights and obligations have complied with laws and regulations on civil procedures.
First Instance Judgment:
* Pursuant to:
- Clause 3 Article 25, Point a Clause 1 Article 33, Point a Clause 1 Article 35, Article 245 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euroCivil Procedure Code 2004, amended in 2011;
- Article 21, Article 29 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euroLaw on Insurance Business, coming into force on April 1, 2001;
- Article 305, Article 407 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euroCivil Code, coming into force on January 1, 2006;
- Ordinance on Court Fees and Charges, coming into force on July 1, 2009;
- Joint Circular No. 01/TTLTdated June 19, 1997 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Ministry of Justice - trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Ministry of Finance - trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Supreme People’s Court - trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People’s Supreme Procuracy;
- Decision No. 2868/QD-NHNNdated November 29, 2010 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro State Bank of Vietnam.
* Judges:
1. Accept trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff.
- Compel C Life Insurance Co., Ltd to make Mr. Dang Van L trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout of VND 300,875,342 (Three hundred million eight hundred seventy five thousand three hundred forty two dong).
- C Life Insurance Co., Ltd has to return Mr. Dang Van L two insurance policies Thinh Tri Thanh Tai Bao Gia dated October 14, 2008, refund term insurance policy dated March 25, 2009.
- Insurance policy No. S11000009505 dated October 14, 2008 (Thinh Tri Thanh Tai Bao Gia) will keep being performed and pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro maturity benefits when Dang Linh N reaches 22 years of age and is alive on trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro maturity date.
Enforce as soon as practicable when trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment takes effect under supervision of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro competent civil enforcement agency.
From trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro date on which Mr. Dang Van L submits a request for judgment enforcement, if C Life Insurance Co., Ltd fails to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro above amount, it must also pay Mr. L monthly interest according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro basic interest rate quoted by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro State Bank equivalent to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro delayed enforcement time.
2. With reference to court fees: C Life Insurance Co., Ltd has to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first instance civil court fee of VND 15,043,767.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff does not have to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first instance civil court fee and is refunded trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro paid court fee advance of VND 11,925,000, including: VND 10,100,000 according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. 05237 dated January 5, 2011, VND 200,000 according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. 05621 dated April 26, 2011 and VND 1,625,000 according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. 05737 dated January 5, 2011 of Sub-Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of District 1, Ho Chi Minh City.
3. With reference to right to appeal:
- Mr. Tran Xuan H - authorized representative of Mr. L, Mrs. T, Mrs. Kieu L, is present in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro trial date but absent at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro pronouncement, thus, Mr. L, Mrs. T, Mrs. Kieu L have right to appeal trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment within 15 days from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro date on which trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment is duly served.
- C Life Insurance Co., Ltd has trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro right to appeal trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment within 15 days from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro pronouncement date.
In case trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judgment or court decision is enforced as per regulations in Article 2 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euroLaw on enforcements of civil judgments, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judgment creditor and judgment debtor are lawfully allowed to reach an agreement on judgment enforcement, request judgment enforcement, be subject to voluntary execution or coercive judgment enforcement in compliance with regulations in Article 6, 7 and 9 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on enforcement of civil judgments, and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro effective period of judgment enforcement shall comply within provisions in Article 30 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on enforcement of civil judgments.
On September 9, 2015, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant - C Life Insurance Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as Company C) filed an appeal against trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro entire First Instance Judgment.
At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate court hearing:
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff does not withdraw trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro lawsuit petition and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellant does not withdraw trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal. trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro litigants fail to agree on lawsuit settlement.
Representation of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellant, Company C, represented by Mr. Hoang P and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro lawyer:
When entering trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Company C, Mrs. H made untruthful declaration, in specific, she made untruthful declaration in two matters below in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance:
1. According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Medical Consultation Report No. 42/BV-99 of Hospital B dated September 3, 2009, Mrs. H had medical history of stomach pain in 2 years.
Company C claims that this matter was declared by Mrs. H and recorded by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro doctor in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro above Medical Consultation Report.
Therefore, it may be determined that Mrs. H had had stomach pain since September 3, 2007, before she concluded trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy. Company C claims that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro phrase “stomach disorders” refers to all diseases related to stomach, including stomach pain. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 54 in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance dated March 25, 2009: “peptic ulcers, peptic bleeding, pancreatitis, colitis, frequent dyspepsia, dysphagia, or disorders in stomach, innards or gallbladder?” Mrs. H ticked in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” box (it means that Mrs. H declared that she had no stomach disorders), which is an untruthful declaration.
2. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate court hearing, Company C provided a certified copy of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood biochemical test dated September 22, 2008, gathered from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro periodic medical records of employees in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Kindergarten C, for which Mrs. H previously had worked. Company C claims that although Mrs. H had trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood test on September 22, 2008 but she intentionally declared untruthful information in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro item 61 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance.
From trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro mentioned two matters, it is well-founded that Mrs. H declared untruthful information and violated trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro obligation to disclose information. Therefore, pursuant to Article 11.2 of Rules and terms of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance contract, Company C cancels above 2 insurance policies and they are invalid.
In addition, on September 15, 2010, Mr. L receipt VND 50,000,000 and signed trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro document specifying payment and certification of completely paying out trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim. In this slip, Mr. L agreed to terminate two insurance policies No. S11000009505 and S11000040924, and admitted that Company C made full insurance payout and no longer has responsibility to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance benefits in these two policies.
As Company C has no liability to make trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout to Mr. L, request trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court of Appeal to consider correcting trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment not accepting trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro lawsuit petition of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff.
Representation of Mr. Dang Van L, represented by Mr. Tran Xuan H:
In trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro common sense, "stomach pain" and "stomach disorder" are two different concepts, none of document or evidence says that stomach pain is stomach disorder. Mrs. H often has annual checkups at her workplace. However, this is a normal thing that most agencies and organizations provide for their employees. When undergoing regular checkups, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro participant does not know and should not have known what measures and methods that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro health facility carried out. Moreover, this regular health checkup sheet does not state that Mrs. H’s disease relates to rejection of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro conclusion of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Company C. Therefore, it is unfounded for Company C to state that Mrs. H provided untruthful information to decline her claim. Request trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court of Appeal to uphold trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro persons with relevant rights and obligations, Mrs. Luong Thi T, Mrs. Dang Kieu L, Dang Linh N (Mr. Dang Van L acts as legal representative of his minor), represented by Tran Xuan H:
Persons with relevant rights and obligations have same opinions with trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff, requests trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Trial Panel to uphold trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment.
Opinions of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro representative of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People’s Procuracy of Ho Chi Minh City:
With reference to format: trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro litigant, which was made within trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro statutory time limit, is considered valid, so request trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court to accept it. trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Trial Panel and proceeding participants have complied with laws and regulations during trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro lawsuit settlement in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate stage.
With reference to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro content of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case: According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal presented by Company C and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro lawyer, it is unfounded to determine that Mrs. H declared untruthful information and violated trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro obligation to disclose information. Thus, there are insufficient conditions for canceling 02 insurance policies as represented by Company C and there are inadequate valid grounds for accepting trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of Company C, request trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Trial Panel to uphold trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment.
DECIDES
Hereby judges:
Do not accept trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant, C Life Insurance Co., Ltd. and uphold trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment No. 1211/2015/TLST-DS dated August 26, 2015 of People’s Court of District 1, Ho Chi Minh City.
Accept trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff
Compel C Life Insurance Co., Ltd to make Mr. Dang Van L trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout of VND 300,875,342 (Three hundred million eight hundred seventy five thousand three hundred forty two dong).
C Life Insurance Co., Ltd has to return Mr. Dang Van L two insurance policies Thinh Tri Thanh Tai Bao Gia dated October 14, 2008, refund term insurance policy dated March 25, 2009.
Insurance policy No. S11000000505 dated October 14, 2008 (Thinh Tri Thanh Tai Bao Gia) will keep being performed and pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro maturity benefits when Dang Linh N reaches 22 years of age and is alive on trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro maturity date.
Enforce as soon as practicable when trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment takes effect under supervision of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro competent civil enforcement agency.
From trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro date on which Mr. Dang Van L submits a request for judgment enforcement, if C Life Insurance Co., Ltd fails to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro above amount, it must also pay Mr. L monthly interest according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro basic interest rate quoted by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro State Bank equivalent to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro delayed enforcement time
First instance civil court fee: C Life Insurance Co., Ltd has to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first instance civil court fee of VND 15,043,767. Mr. Dang Van L does not have to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first instance civil court fee and is refunded trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro paid court fee advance of VND 11,925,000, including: VND 10,100,000 according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. 05237 dated January 5, 2011, VND 200,000 according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. 05621 dated April 26, 2011 and VND 1,625,000 according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. 05737 dated January 5, 2011 of Sub-Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of District 1, Ho Chi Minh City.
Appellate civil court fee: C Life Insurance Co., Ltd has to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate civil court fee of VND 200,000 (Two hundred thousand dong), which is deducted from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro paid court fee advance of C Life Insurance Co., Ltd according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. AE/2014/0005146 dated September 10, 2015 of Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Ho Chi Minh City. C Life Insurance Co., Ltd paid full appellate court fee advance.
In case trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judgment is enforced as per regulations in Article 2 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on enforcement of civil judgments, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judgment creditor and judgment debtor are lawfully allowed to reach an agreement on judgment enforcement, request judgment enforcement, be subject to voluntary execution or coercive judgment enforcement in compliance with regulations in Article 6, 7 and 9 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on enforcement of civil judgments, and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro effective period of judgment enforcement shall comply within provisions in Article 30 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on enforcement of civil judgments.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Appellate Judgment shall take legal effect from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro date of pronouncement.
JUDGEMENT OF trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro COURT
[1] After consideration of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case files assessed and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro adversarial process at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro court hearing, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Trial Panel judges as follows:
[2] In terms of court procedures: trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of Company C was made within trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro statutory time limit, Company C followed procedures for appeal as per trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro law, so it is well-founded to accept it.
[3] With reference to content: Deeming trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant to reject trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro lawsuit petition of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Trial Panel considers that:
[4] trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 54 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance dated March 25, 2009 states: “peptic ulcers, peptic bleeding, pancreatitis, colitis, frequent dyspepsia, dysphagia, or disorders in stomach, innards or gallbladder?” Mrs. H ticked trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” box. In trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro medical consultation report No. 42/BV-99 of Hospital B dated September 3, 2009, Mrs. H declared her stomach in 2 years. According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro medical consultation report, Mrs. H had had stomach pain since September 3, 2007, before she concluded trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy. Company C claims that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro phrase “stomach disorders” refers to all diseases related to stomach, including stomach pain. However, at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate court hearing, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant does not provide any evidence to prove it and any scientific explanation that stomach pain is stomach disorder.
[5] Pursuant to Clause 2 Article 407 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Code 2005: “In cases where a standardized contract contains ambiguous provisions, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro offeror of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro standardized contract shall bear adverse consequences of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro interpretation of such provisions”;
[6] Pursuant to Clause 4 Article 409 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Code 2005: “When a contract contains a provision or wording that is difficult to understand, such provision or wording must be interpreted according to practices at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro place where trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro contract is entered into”;
[7] Pursuant to Article 21 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on Insurance Business: “Where an insurance contract contains ambiguous clauses, such clauses shall be interpreted in favor of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance buyer”.
[8] According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro above laws and regulations, if parties have different and ambiguous explanation, such provision shall be interpreted in favor of Mrs. H. Accordingly, there are inadequate grounds for determining that stomach pain is included in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro stomach disorder as stated by Company C.
[9] Considering that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance does not have a question related to stomach pain. Accordingly, Company C has no valid ground for claiming that Mrs. H had stomach pain and declared untruthful information and violated trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro obligation to disclose information.
[10] trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 61 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance dated March 25, 2009: “In recent 5 years, did you have any diagnose test such as X-ray, ultrasound, cardiogram, blood test, biopsy? or suffer sickness, underwent health examination and treatment at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro hospital not stated in above section?” Mrs. H ticked trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” box. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate court hearing, Company C provided trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro biochemical blood test dated September 22, 2008 in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro name of Truong Thi H. Company C determines that this is trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro document it took from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro regular heath checkup records of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Kindergarten C for which Mrs. H previously worked. Company C claims that although Mrs. H had trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood test on September 22, 2008 but she intentionally declared untruthful information in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 61 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance. Considering that regular health checkups are periodically carried out by agencies and organizations. When undergoing regular checkups, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro participant does not know and should not have known what measures and methods that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro health facility carried out. Moreover, when undergoing regular checkups, Mrs. H did not detect signs of any disease leading to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Company C’s refusal to conclude trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Mrs. H. Therefore, it is unfounded that Mrs. H had felt unusual symptoms in her body before had trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood test and then bought insurance from Company C.
[11] Accordingly, there are insufficient grounds for determining that Mrs. H committed fraud when concluding trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy, there are no valid grounds for identifying that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” boxes at questions 54 and 61 ticked by Mrs. H in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance directly affect whether Company C concludes trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Mrs. H.
[12] Moreover, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro rules and terms of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro refund term insurance and Thinh Tri Thanh Tai Bao Gia of Company C indicate:
[13] “Article 11.2. If any information provided by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro policyholder or trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insured person intentionally conceals or misrepresents that seriously affects trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro decision to assess insurance acceptance, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro company may cancel trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro contract and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro contract is not valid from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro beginning”. In respect to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro phrase “seriously affects” in Article 11.2, at today’s court hearing, Company C does not clearly explain that how “serious” can be interpreted and as stated by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance seller does not confirm whether trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance is accepted in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro buyer of term life insurance has medical history of stomach pain and high cholesterol. In trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro response No. 008 dated January 28, 2011, Company C asserts: “ If we knew that Truong Thi H had stomach pain and high cholesterol, we would decline to conclude trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy”. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first instance and appellate court hearing, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro representative and lawyer of Company C state that if they knew that Mrs. H had stomach pain and high cholesterol, they would consider concluding an insurance policy with her. This proves that Company C has no specific criteria to deal with such a case as mentioned. Therefore, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro phrase “seriously affect” should be interpreted that a disease not qualified for life insurance, but not be understood as may be qualified or not qualified for life insurance as stated by Company C, this provision is also ambiguous; so pursuant to Clause 2 Article 407 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Code: “5] Pursuant to Clause 2 Article 407 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Code 2005: “In cases where a standardized contract contains ambiguous provisions, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro offeror of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro standardized contract shall bear adverse consequences of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro interpretation of such provisions” and Article 21 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on Insurance Business: “Where an insurance contract contains ambiguous clauses, such clauses shall be interpreted in favor of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance buyer”, so such provision should be understood and interpreted in favor of Mrs. H.
[14] Representation of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Diem P, a witness of this case: she bought a preferential periodic insurance product from Company C according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy No. S11000297923. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro time of insurance policy conclusion, she told Company C that she had been using drugs for stomach pain, she has occasionally suffered stomach pain for about 3 years and has had regular check-up, Triglycerid 2.2 mmol/l. According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro verification of People’s Court of District 1 at People’s Hospital of District 1 dated July 28, 2015, Triglycerid 2.2 mmol/l is higher than normal.
[15] Deeming that, when buying term life insurance from Company C, although Mrs. Nguyen Thi Diem P declared that she had stomach pain and high cholesterol, Company C still sold her insurance with standard premium. This proves that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro stomach pain and high cholesterol is regarded as “not seriously affect” so Company C sold insurance with standard premium as trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro same as ordinary cases. It could be concluded that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro fact that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance buyer’s failure to declare their stomach pain and high cholesterol does not seriously affect to Company C’s decision in consider whether to conclude an insurance policy, hence, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance buyer does not violate Article 11.2 of Rules and terms stipulated by Company C. trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court of First Instance has valid ground to make such a judgment.
[16] Company C asserts that it paid all trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro amounts as its obligations in two mentioned insurance policies. With regard to this dispute, Company C and Mr. L reached final settlement, as stated in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro document specifying payment and certification of completely paying out trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim dated September 15, 2010. In trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro section 3 of this document, Mr. L certified that Company C made full insurance payout and no longer bear any responsibility for paying insurance benefits for these two contracts; in section 4, Mr. L committed not to take any action that will affect Company C from now on, and Company C is not obliged to discharge any responsibility or obligation against trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro policies No. S11000009505 and S11000040924. Considering that Mrs. L’s signing in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro document specifying payment and certification of completely paying out trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim dated September 15, 2010 does not make Mr. L lose his right to sue if Mr. L thinks that this agreement affects his legal rights and interests.
[17] Based on foregoing consideration, there are valid grounds for determining that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court of First Instance accepted lawsuit petition of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff legally and on valid basis Thus, it is un-founded to accept trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of Company C and Trial Panel will uphold trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment.
[18] Other decisions of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment against which trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro litigants and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People’s Procuracy have not appealed still remain effective.
[19] Regarding appellate criminal court fee: Because trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment is upheld, Company C has to pay an appellate civil court fee of VND 200,000.
Based on above-mentioned facts and matters,
Pursuant to Clause 1 Article 132, Clause 1 Article 275 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code;
Pursuant to Clause 1 Article 30 of Ordinance on Court Fees and Charges 2009.
SUMMARY
[4] trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 54 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance dated March 25, 2009 states: “peptic ulcers, peptic bleeding, pancreatitis, colitis, frequent dyspepsia, dysphagia, or disorders in stomach, innards or gallbladder?” Mrs. H ticked trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” box. In trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro medical consultation report No. 42/BV-99 of Hospital B dated September 3, 2009, Mrs. H declared her stomach in 2 years. According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro medical consultation report, Mrs. H had had stomach pain since September 3, 2007, before she concluded trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy. Company C claims that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro phrase “stomach disorders” refers to all diseases related to stomach, including stomach pain. However, at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate court hearing, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant does not provide any evidence to prove it and any scientific explanation that stomach pain is stomach disorder.
[8] According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro above laws and regulations, if parties have different and ambiguous explanation, such provision shall be interpreted in favor of Mrs. H. Accordingly, there are inadequate grounds for determining that stomach pain is included in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro stomach disorder as stated by Company C.
[9] Considering that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance does not have a question related to stomach pain. Accordingly, Company C has no valid ground for claiming that Mrs. H had stomach pain and declared untruthful information and violated trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro obligation to disclose information.
[10] trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 61 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance dated March 25, 2009: “In recent 5 years, did you have any diagnose test such as X-ray, ultrasound, cardiogram, blood test, biopsy? or suffer sickness, underwent health examination and treatment at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro hospital not stated in above section? Mrs. H ticked trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” box. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate court hearing, Company C provided trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro biochemical blood test dated September 22, 2008 in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro name of Truong Thi H. Company C determines that this is trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro document it took from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro regular heath checkup records of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Kindergarten C for which Mrs. H previously worked. Company C claims that although Mrs. H had trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood test on September 22, 2008 but she intentionally declared untruthful information in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 61 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance. Considering that regular health checkups are periodically carried out by agencies and organizations. When undergoing regular checkups, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro participant does not know and should not have known what measures and methods that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro health facility carried out. Moreover, when undergoing regular checkups, Mrs. H did not detect signs of any disease leading to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Company C’s refusal to conclude trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Mrs. H. Therefore, it is unfounded that Mrs. H had felt unusual symptoms in her body before had trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood test and then bought insurance from Company C.
[11] Accordingly, there are insufficient grounds for determining that Mrs. H committed fraud when concluding trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy, there are no valid grounds for identifying that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” boxes at questions 54 and 61 ticked by Mrs. H in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance directly affect whether Company C concludes trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Mrs. H.”
[2] In terms of court procedures: trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of Company C was made within trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro statutory time limit, Company C followed procedures for appeal as per trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro law, so it is well-founded to accept it.
[3] With reference to content: Deeming trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant to reject trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro lawsuit petition of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Trial Panel considers that:
[4] trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 54 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance dated March 25, 2009 states: “peptic ulcers, peptic bleeding, pancreatitis, colitis, frequent dyspepsia, dysphagia, or disorders in stomach, innards or gallbladder?” Mrs. H ticked trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” box. In trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro medical consultation report No. 42/BV-99 of Hospital B dated September 3, 2009, Mrs. H declared her stomach in 2 years. According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro medical consultation report, Mrs. H had had stomach pain since September 3, 2007, before she concluded trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy. Company C claims that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro phrase “stomach disorders” refers to all diseases related to stomach, including stomach pain. However, at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate court hearing, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant does not provide any evidence to prove it and any scientific explanation that stomach pain is stomach disorder.
[5] Pursuant to Clause 2 Article 407 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Code 2005: “In cases where a standardized contract contains ambiguous provisions, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro offeror of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro standardized contract shall bear adverse consequences of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro interpretation of such provisions”;
[6] Pursuant to Clause 4 Article 409 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Code 2005: “When a contract contains a provision or wording that is difficult to understand, such provision or wording must be interpreted according to practices at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro place where trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro contract is entered into”;
[7] Pursuant to Article 21 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on Insurance Business: “Where an insurance contract contains ambiguous clauses, such clauses shall be interpreted in favor of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance buyer”.
[8] According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro above laws and regulations, if parties have different and ambiguous explanation, such provision shall be interpreted in favor of Mrs. H. Accordingly, there are inadequate grounds for determining that stomach pain is included in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro stomach disorder as stated by Company C.
[9] Considering that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance does not have a question related to stomach pain. Accordingly, Company C has no valid ground for claiming that Mrs. H had stomach pain and declared untruthful information and violated trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro obligation to disclose information.
[10] trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 61 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance dated March 25, 2009: “In recent 5 years, did you have any diagnose test such as X-ray, ultrasound, cardiogram, blood test, biopsy? or suffer sickness, underwent health examination and treatment at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro hospital not stated in above section?” Mrs. H ticked trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” box. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate court hearing, Company C provided trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro biochemical blood test dated September 22, 2008 in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro name of Truong Thi H. Company C determines that this is trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro document it took from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro regular heath checkup records of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Kindergarten C for which Mrs. H previously worked. Company C claims that although Mrs. H had trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood test on September 22, 2008 but she intentionally declared untruthful information in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 61 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance. Considering that regular health checkups are periodically carried out by agencies and organizations. When undergoing regular checkups, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro participant does not know and should not have known what measures and methods that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro health facility carried out. Moreover, when undergoing regular checkups, Mrs. H did not detect signs of any disease leading to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Company C’s refusal to conclude trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Mrs. H. Therefore, it is unfounded that Mrs. H had felt unusual symptoms in her body before had trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood test and then bought insurance from Company C.
[11] Accordingly, there are insufficient grounds for determining that Mrs. H committed fraud when concluding trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy, there are no valid grounds for identifying that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” boxes at questions 54 and 61 ticked by Mrs. H in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance directly affect whether Company C concludes trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Mrs. H.
[12] Moreover, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro rules and terms of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro refund term insurance and Thinh Tri Thanh Tai Bao Gia of Company C indicate:
[13] “Article 11.2. If any information provided by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro policyholder or trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insured person intentionally conceals or misrepresents that seriously affects trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro decision to assess insurance acceptance, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro company may cancel trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro contract and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro contract is not valid from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro beginning”. In respect to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro phrase “seriously affects” in Article 11.2, at today’s court hearing, Company C does not clearly explain that how “serious” can be interpreted and as stated by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance seller does not confirm whether trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance is accepted in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro buyer of term life insurance has medical history of stomach pain and high cholesterol. In trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro response No. 008 dated January 28, 2011, Company C asserts: “ If we knew that Truong Thi H had stomach pain and high cholesterol, we would decline to conclude trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy”. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first instance and appellate court hearing, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro representative and lawyer of Company C state that if they knew that Mrs. H had stomach pain and high cholesterol, they would consider concluding an insurance policy with her. This proves that Company C has no specific criteria to deal with such a case as mentioned. Therefore, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro phrase “seriously affect” should be interpreted that a disease not qualified for life insurance, but not be understood as may be qualified or not qualified for life insurance as stated by Company C, this provision is also ambiguous; so pursuant to Clause 2 Article 407 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Code: “5] Pursuant to Clause 2 Article 407 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Code 2005: “In cases where a standardized contract contains ambiguous provisions, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro offeror of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro standardized contract shall bear adverse consequences of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro interpretation of such provisions” and Article 21 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on Insurance Business: “Where an insurance contract contains ambiguous clauses, such clauses shall be interpreted in favor of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance buyer”, so such provision should be understood and interpreted in favor of Mrs. H.
[14] Representation of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Diem P, a witness of this case: she bought a preferential periodic insurance product from Company C according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy No. S11000297923. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro time of insurance policy conclusion, she told Company C that she had been using drugs for stomach pain, she has occasionally suffered stomach pain for about 3 years and has had regular check-up, Triglycerid 2.2 mmol/l. According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro verification of People’s Court of District 1 at People’s Hospital of District 1 dated July 28, 2015, Triglycerid 2.2 mmol/l is higher than normal.
[15] Deeming that, when buying term life insurance from Company C, although Mrs. Nguyen Thi Diem P declared that she had stomach pain and high cholesterol, Company C still sold her insurance with standard premium. This proves that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro stomach pain and high cholesterol is regarded as “not seriously affect” so Company C sold insurance with standard premium as trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro same as ordinary cases. It could be concluded that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro fact that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance buyer’s failure to declare their stomach pain and high cholesterol does not seriously affect to Company C’s decision in consider whether to conclude an insurance policy, hence, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance buyer does not violate Article 11.2 of Rules and terms stipulated by Company C. trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court of First Instance has valid ground to make such a judgment.
[16] Company C asserts that it paid all trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro amounts as its obligations in two mentioned insurance policies. With regard to this dispute, Company C and Mr. L reached final settlement, as stated in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro document specifying payment and certification of completely paying out trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim dated September 15, 2010. In trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro section 3 of this document, Mr. L certified that Company C made full insurance payout and no longer bear any responsibility for paying insurance benefits for these two contracts; in section 4, Mr. L committed not to take any action that will affect Company C from now on, and Company C is not obliged to discharge any responsibility or obligation against trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro policies No. S11000009505 and S11000040924. Considering that Mrs. L’s signing in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro document specifying payment and certification of completely paying out trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim dated September 15, 2010 does not make Mr. L lose his right to sue if Mr. L thinks that this agreement affects his legal rights and interests.
[17] Based on foregoing consideration, there are valid grounds for determining that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court of First Instance accepted lawsuit petition of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff legally and on valid basis Thus, it is un-founded to accept trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of Company C and Trial Panel will uphold trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment.
[18] Other decisions of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment against which trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro litigants and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People’s Procuracy have not appealed still remain effective.
[19] Regarding appellate criminal court fee: Because trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment is upheld, Company C has to pay an appellate civil court fee of VND 200,000.
Based on above-mentioned facts and matters,
Pursuant to Clause 1 Article 132, Clause 1 Article 275 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code;
Pursuant to Clause 1 Article 30 of Ordinance on Court Fees and Charges 2009.
[8] According to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro above laws and regulations, if parties have different and ambiguous explanation, such provision shall be interpreted in favor of Mrs. H. Accordingly, there are inadequate grounds for determining that stomach pain is included in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro stomach disorder as stated by Company C.
[9] Considering that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance does not have a question related to stomach pain. Accordingly, Company C has no valid ground for claiming that Mrs. H had stomach pain and declared untruthful information and violated trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro obligation to disclose information.
[10] trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 61 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance dated March 25, 2009: “In recent 5 years, did you have any diagnose test such as X-ray, ultrasound, cardiogram, blood test, biopsy? or suffer sickness, underwent health examination and treatment at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro hospital not stated in above section? Mrs. H ticked trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” box. At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate court hearing, Company C provided trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro biochemical blood test dated September 22, 2008 in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro name of Truong Thi H. Company C determines that this is trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro document it took from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro regular heath checkup records of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Kindergarten C for which Mrs. H previously worked. Company C claims that although Mrs. H had trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood test on September 22, 2008 but she intentionally declared untruthful information in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro question 61 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance. Considering that regular health checkups are periodically carried out by agencies and organizations. When undergoing regular checkups, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro participant does not know and should not have known what measures and methods that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro health facility carried out. Moreover, when undergoing regular checkups, Mrs. H did not detect signs of any disease leading to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Company C’s refusal to conclude trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Mrs. H. Therefore, it is unfounded that Mrs. H had felt unusual symptoms in her body before had trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro blood test and then bought insurance from Company C.
[11] Accordingly, there are insufficient grounds for determining that Mrs. H committed fraud when concluding trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy, there are no valid grounds for identifying that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro “no” boxes at questions 54 and 61 ticked by Mrs. H in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro application for insurance directly affect whether Company C concludes trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance policy with Mrs. H.”
Do not accept trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appeal of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant, C Life Insurance Co., Ltd. and uphold trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro First Instance Judgment No. 1211/2015/TLST-DS dated August 26, 2015 of People’s Court of District 1, Ho Chi Minh City.
Accept trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro claim of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff
Compel C Life Insurance Co., Ltd to make Mr. Dang Van L trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro insurance payout of VND 300,875,342 (Three hundred million eight hundred seventy five thousand three hundred forty two dong).
C Life Insurance Co., Ltd has to return Mr. Dang Van L two insurance policies Thinh Tri Thanh Tai Bao Gia dated October 14, 2008, refund term insurance policy dated March 25, 2009.
Insurance policy No. S11000000505 dated October 14, 2008 (Thinh Tri Thanh Tai Bao Gia) will keep being performed and pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro maturity benefits when Dang Linh N reaches 22 years of age and is alive on trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro maturity date.
Enforce as soon as practicable when trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment takes effect under supervision of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro competent civil enforcement agency.
From trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro date on which Mr. Dang Van L submits a request for judgment enforcement, if C Life Insurance Co., Ltd fails to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro above amount, it must also pay Mr. L monthly interest according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro basic interest rate quoted by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro State Bank equivalent to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro delayed enforcement time
First instance civil court fee: C Life Insurance Co., Ltd has to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first instance civil court fee of VND 15,043,767. Mr. Dang Van L does not have to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first instance civil court fee and is refunded trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro paid court fee advance of VND 11,925,000, including: VND 10,100,000 according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. 05237 dated January 5, 2011, VND 200,000 according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. 05621 dated April 26, 2011 and VND 1,625,000 according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. 05737 dated January 5, 2011 of Sub-Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of District 1, Ho Chi Minh City.
Appellate civil court fee: C Life Insurance Co., Ltd has to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro appellate civil court fee of VND 200,000 (Two hundred thousand dong), which is deducted from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro paid court fee advance of C Life Insurance Co., Ltd according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro receipt No. AE/2014/0005146 dated September 10, 2015 of Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Ho Chi Minh City. C Life Insurance Co., Ltd paid full appellate court fee advance.
In case trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judgment is enforced as per regulations in Article 2 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on enforcement of civil judgments, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judgment creditor and judgment debtor are lawfully allowed to reach an agreement on judgment enforcement, request judgment enforcement, be subject to voluntary execution or coercive judgment enforcement in compliance with regulations in Article 6, 7 and 9 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on enforcement of civil judgments, and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro effective period of judgment enforcement shall comply within provisions in Article 30 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on enforcement of civil judgments.
trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Appellate Judgment shall take legal effect from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro date of pronouncement.
-
-
Address: 17 Nguyen Gia Thieu, Vo Thi Sau Ward, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City Phone: (028) 7302 2286 (6 lines) E-mail: đá bóng trực tiếp Protection
Editorial Director: Mr. Bui Tuong Vu - Tel. (028) 7302 2286
P.702A , Centre Point, 106 Nguyen Van Troi, Ward 8, Phu Nhuan District, HCM City;