trực tiếp bóng đá k+Cassation judgment no. 13/2008/DS-GDT dated june 18, 2008 regarding dispute over property right

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ SUPREME PEOPLE’S COURT

CASSATION JUDGMENT NO. 13/2008/DS-GDT DATED JUNE 18, 2008 REGARDING DISPUTE OVER PROPERTY RIGHT

On June 18, 2008, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ cassation trial was conducted at trực tiếp bóng đá k+ office of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Supreme People’s Court to hear trực tiếp bóng đá k+ civil case of “Dispute over property right" between:

Petitioner:

1.Mr. Vo Van Binh, born in 1965; Mr. Binh settled in Russia, on June 27, 2005, Mr. Binh re-entered into household register in Tan Hy Village, Binh Dong Commune, Binh Son District, Quang Ngai Province.

2.Mr. Binh authorizes Mr. Nguyen Luong, born in 1950; residing in: Tan Hy Village, Binh Dong Commune, Binh Son District, Quang Ngai Province, according to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Letter of Authorization dated July 12, 2004.

Respondent:

1.Mr. Vo Van Ket (Mr. Binh’s father), born in 1937;

2.Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon (Mr. Binh’s stepmother), born in 1958;

Both residing in: Group 7, Le Hong Phong Ward, Quang Ngai City, Quang Ngai Province.

Persons with related interests and obligations:

1.Mr. Le Va, born in 1962; residing at: Block 2, Le Hong Phong Ward, Quang Ngai City, Quang Ngai Province.

2.Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh, born in 1955; residing in: 163 Tran Hung Dao, Quang Ngai City, Quang Ngai Province.

3.Mrs. Tran Thi Trinh, born in 1950; residing in: Khe Thanh, Tinh Son Commune, Son Tinh District, Quang Ngai Province.

4.Mr. Vo Trong Thanh (Vu Trong Thanh), born in 1961 and his wife, Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong Cam, born in 1964; Residing at: 53 Truong Quang Trong, Quang Ngai City, Quang Ngai Province.5.Mrs. Vo Thi Lien, born in 1958; residing in: Tan Hy Village, Binh Dong Commune, Binh Son District, Quang Ngai Province.

FINDING THAT

Mr. Vo Van Binh is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ son of Mr. Vo Van Ket and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ stepson of Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon. In 1989, Mr. Binh went to university in Russian Federation, in 1994, he asked to settle in Russian Federation.

On June 21, 2004, Mr. Vo Van Binh initiated a lawsuit: in 1997, 1998, 1999, he sent a total of VND 454,584,500 to contribute capital to buy land and build a motel named Thanh Binh in Group 7, Le Hong Phong Ward, Quang Ngai Town (now is City) to run a joint business with Mr. Ket (his father) and Mrs. Ngon (his stepmother), so he requests trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court to recognize him as co-owner of Thanh Binh motel with Mr. Ket, Mrs. Ngon and receive Thanh Binh motel to run business.

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon admitted that Mr. Binh had sent money to them, but they said that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ money sent by Mr. Binh was a borrowed sum, not a joint investment and they only borrowed Mr. Binh VND 401,984,500, not VND 454,584,500 (they received trực tiếp bóng đá k+ remaining amount, but then they transferred it to Mr. Binh’s relatives as required by Mr. Binh); in 2003, Mr. Binh claimed trực tiếp bóng đá k+ debt, they had to mortgage land use right certificate of Thanh Binh motel to borrow Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh VND 350,000,000 and borrow Mrs. Tran Thi Trinh VND 100,000,000 to repay Mr. Binh VND 400,000,000 in order for Mr. Binh and his wife to buy a house in Hanoi (received by Mrs. Ha, Mr. Binh’s wife with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ receipt); they determined that Thanh Binh motel is under their ownership, and because of business losses, they leased out Thanh Binh motel to Mr. Le Va and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease contract has not expired; therefore, they disagree with Mr. Binh’s request.

Persons with related interests and obligations:

Representation of Mr. Le Va: On December 27, 2003, he signed a contract to lease Thanh Binh motel of Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon to do business, with a 3-year lease term, he paid trực tiếp bóng đá k+ rent for 2 years in advance (he only has run business for 19 months until trực tiếp bóng đá k+ date of first instance trial); during business process, he spent money to invest and upgrade trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel, so he requests trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court to resolve trực tiếp bóng đá k+ case as per trực tiếp bóng đá k+ law.

Representation of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh: On June 17, 2003, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Ket mortgaged trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land use right certificate (now is Thanh Binh hotel) to borrow her VND 350,000,000, now she requests Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon to repay principal and interest, if they do not have money, such collateral will be used to offset trực tiếp bóng đá k+ loan.

Representation of Mrs. Tran Thi Trinh: she lent trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon VND 100,000,000, now she requests them to repay principal and interest, if they do not have money, such collateral will be used to offset trực tiếp bóng đá k+ loan.

In trực tiếp bóng đá k+ first instance civil judgment No. 09/2005/DSST dated August 2, 2005, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ People’s Court of Dong Nai province judged:

1.Recognize that Thanh Binh (Hoa Binh) motel is composed of: level-4.1 building (equivalent to old level-2B building), 3-storey house, concrete floor frame, tin-roofed, construction area of 234m2, worth VND 701,824,500; level-4.3A building (equivalent to old level-4A building), construction area 94.05m2, worth VND 64,360,296; building of other type NK1 (equivalent to old level-4.1 building), area of 35.26m2, worth VND 15,010,812; and ancillary facilities: garage area of 67.2m2, worth VND 8,930,000, fence walls, stone foundations, concrete pillars, chain-link fence area of 85.1m2, worth VND 5,106,000. Fence walls, stone foundations, brick walls, concrete pillars, chain-link fence area of 163.8m2, worth VND 19,901,700, concrete yard area of 629m2, worth VND 34,217,600 and furniture worth VND 118,296,500 as stated in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ asset valuation record dated April 6, 2005 on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land area of 1,886.36m2, worth VND 2,263,632,000. Total asset value of Thanh Binh (Hoa Binh) motel is VND 3,231,278,180 at Group 7, Le Hong Phong Ward, Quang Ngai Town, Quang Ngai Province, is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ joint property (ownership in common) of Mr. Vo Van Binh and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon.

Total value of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ property in dispute is VND 3,231,2778,180 less VND 105,300,000 VND of land use right value of 85.65 m2  which is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ common passage and 42m2 of fence walls, concrete pillars, chain-link fence is common use area. S trực tiếp bóng đá k+ value of property of Thanh Binh motel is VND 3,231,278,180 - VND 105,300,000 = VND 3,125,979,228. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ ownership in common consists of:

- 57.65% of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ capital of Mr. Vo Van Binh

- 42.35% of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ capital of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon.

2.Mr. Vo Van Binh is entitled to own, manage and use trực tiếp bóng đá k+ level-4.1B building. (equivalent to level-2B building), 3-storey house, concrete floor frame, tin-roofed, construction area of 234m2 (16.6m x 14.1m), worth VND 701,824,500; level-4.3A building (equivalent to old level-4A building), construction area 94.05m2 (5.7m x 16.5m), worth VND 64,360,296; building of other type NK1 (equivalent to old level-4.1 building), area of 35.26m2 (8.6mx 4.1m), worth VND 15,010,812; brick walls + chain-link fence area of 90.75m2 (60.5m x 1.5m), worth VND 11,026,125 (90.75m2 x VND 80,000 x 75%), concrete yard area of 397.30m2 (13.7m x 29m), worth VND 21,613,120 (397.30m2 x VND 162,000 x 75%). trực tiếp bóng đá k+ value of buildings and ancillary facilities: VND 813,834,223 (1) on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land area of 1002.71m2 which is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land area of Section A (according to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ master plan of Thanh Binh motel) and equipment of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel (according to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ valuation record dated April 6, 2005), includes:

-     19 DEAWOO TVs worth VND 14,820,000.

-     01 ARIKA television worth VND 812,500.

-     10 Ariston water heaters worth VND 8,505,000.

-     10 air conditioners, including 2 air conditioners (split type) worth VND 12,800,000 and 8 air conditioners (window type) worth VND 32,000,000.

-     Telephone system includes 1 switchboard and 24 telephones, including computer system for charging in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ switchboard worth VND 24,500,000.

-     01 TUBODRUM 6 kg washing machine worth VND 2,975,000.

-     01 set of sofa worth VND 680,000.

-     12 shower column set with single lever mixer, worth VND 1,680,000.

-     12 sets of 7-item mirrors worth VND 560,000.

-     3 phase electric system worth VND 480,000.

-     8 tables worth VND 1,120,000.

-     16 chairs worth VND 1,680,000.

-     8 1.4m beds worth VND 1,920,000.

-     15 1.2m beds worth VND 4,000,000.

-     20 iron cabinets worth VND 4,000,000.

-     4 chandeliers worth VND 1.840.000.

-     1 Toan My stainless water bottle 2000L worth VND 1,440,000.

-     1 cabinet with aluminum frame + mirror + wood, 1m high, 2.5m long, 0.5m wide, worth VND 2,484,000.

-     Electrical system, fan, water supply and drainage attached to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ property of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel.

Total value of equipment of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel VND 118,296,500 (2)

Value of land use right VND 1,203,252,000 (1002.71m2 x 1,200,000 VND/m2) (3)

Total asset value of Thanh Binh motel that Mr. Vo Van Binh is entitled to is VND 2,135,382,723 (1 + 2 + 3). All properties of motel, auxiliary facilities and interior equipment located on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ area of ​​1002.71m2 worth VND 2,135,382,723 at Group 7, Le Hong Phong Ward, Quang Ngai Town, Quang Ngai Province. Determine trực tiếp bóng đá k+ division of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land area of Section A (according to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ master plan of Thanh Binh motel) for Mr. Vo Van Binh.

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ dividing boundary line is a straight line, with boundary marker (1) to boundary marker (8) parallel to NK1 house (old 4.1) is 4m and level-4.3A building (old level-A building) is 6,4m of Section A.

* Length:

- marker (1) to marker (8) is 42m long

- marker (1) to marker (2) is 29m long

- marker (2) to marker (3) is 26.5m

- marker (3) to marker (4) is 1m

- marker (4) to marker (5) is 3.5m

- marker (5) to marker (6) is 21.4m

- marker (6) to marker (7) is 12.5m

- marker (7) to marker (8) is 8.2m

- marker (8) to marker (1) is 42m

3.trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Ngon are entitled to own, manage and use a -level-4.2A 2-storey house (equivalent to old level-3.A house) with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ construction area of ​​93.50m2 (18.70m x 5m) with a garage area of 67.2 m2 (6m x 11.2m) worth VND 8,930,000, brick fence + chain-link fence area of ​​73.05m2 (48.7m x 1.5m) worth VND 8,875,575 (73.05m2 x 162,000 VND x 75%).

- Stone foundation fence, concrete pillars + chain-link fence area of ​​43.1m2 (28.75m x 1.5m) worth VND 2,586,000 (43.1 m2 x VND 80,000 x 75%).  Concrete yard 231.7m2 (629m2 - 397.3m2) worth VND 12,604,480 (231.7m2 x VND 68.000 x 80%).  Total garage + auxiliary facilities worth VND 32,996,055 (1) on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land area of ​​798m2 is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land area of ​​Section B (according to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ master plan of Thanh Binh motel) at Group 7, Le Hong Ward Phong, Quang Ngai Town, Quang Ngai Province. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ value of land use right is VND 957,600,000 (2) (VND 1,200,000 x 798m2). trực tiếp bóng đá k+ total value of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ property received by Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon is VND 990,596,055 (1 + 2) (trực tiếp bóng đá k+ level-4.2A house of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ old level-3A built by Mr. Le Va, Mrs. Ngon delivered trực tiếp bóng đá k+ money to Mr. Le Va, Mr. Va handed over trực tiếp bóng đá k+ house to Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon, so such house will not be included in value of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ disputed property).

Boundary of land area of Section B divided to Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon:

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ dividing boundary line is a straight line, from boundary marker (13) to boundary marker (8), 45m long parallel to NK1 house (old 4.1) is 4m and level-4.3A building (old level-A building) is 6.4m of Section A.

Length next to Section B:

-     marker (8) to marker (9) is 19.7m

-     marker (9) to marker (11) is 39m

-     marker (11) to marker (13) is 18.3m

-     marker (13) to marker (8) is 45m

4.Cancel trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease contract of Thanh Binh (Hoa Binh) motel between Mr. Le Va and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon dated December 27, 2003

- Mr. Le Va must hand over all assets of Thanh Binh motel, 3-storey house (level 2B), construction area of 2354m2, including: 1^stfloor: reception room, 101, 123, 124, 116, 117, 118, 119, 121, Osin 1, Osin 2 room (former room of Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon), physiotherapy room, living room, storage room.

- 2^ndfloor: living room, 221, 226, 224, 223, 233, 234, 231, 230

- 3^rdfloor:301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308

One-storey house level 4.3A; construction area of ​​94.05m2 of one-storey house of NK1, construction area of ​​35.26m2 of all interior equipment of Thanh Binh (Hoa Binh) motel according to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ valuation report dated April 6, 2005, with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ garage, other ancillary facilities received by Vo Van Ket and Tran Thi Phuong Ngon.

- Mrs. Ngon and Mr. Ket must return trực tiếp bóng đá k+ rent to Mr. Le Va trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount of VND 25,000,000 {(VND 120,000,000 - (19 months x VND 5,000,000)} (because of termination of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease contract).

- Mr. Le Va must clean up trực tiếp bóng đá k+ assets in 2 rooms Osin 1 and Osin 2 (to deliver 2 rooms to Thanh Binh motel) including:

-     Chinese Tozokita fans: 2 pieces

-     TV Akina 14inch: 2 pieces

-     Stained-glass aluminum cabinet is 1m high, 0.6m wide: 1 piece-     Oval table: 2 sets-     Chandelier: 2 sets

-     seat mattress: 20 pieces

-     Toilets: 2 sets

Mr. Le Va is not entitled to use trực tiếp bóng đá k+ business registration certificate No. 34A 8000942 dated May 5, 2004 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Planning and Finance Department of Quang Ngai Town for Hoa Binh motel business (because of termination of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease contract)

Mr. Le Va must hand over trực tiếp bóng đá k+ entire property of Thanh Binh motel, auxiliary facilities and furniture mentioned above to Mr. Vo Van Ket and his wife, Tran Thi Phuong Ngon. Mr. Ket and Ms. Ngon have to hand over to Mr. Binh all trực tiếp bóng đá k+ assets of Thanh Binh motel (Hoa Binh), auxiliary facilities and interior equipment on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land area of ​​1002.71m2 (divided to Mr. Binh as above) so that Mr. Binh could fully own, manage and use those assets.

Mr. Binh shall register house ownership and land use management rights and apply for re-issuance of motel business license with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ competent authority.

6.Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon are not allowed to use trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land use right certificate No. 00166/QSDD/770/QD-UB dated March 25, 2002 and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land use right certificate No. 00189/QSDD/373/QD-UB dated June 28, 2002. Mr. Ket and Ms. Ngon shall register house ownership and land use rights in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ law with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ competent authority.

7.Recognize trực tiếp bóng đá k+ agreement of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ litigants not dividing perennial crops: two pine trees, a star fruit tree, two mango trees, a rambutan tree, a ivy tree, because trực tiếp bóng đá k+ plants are small and not valuable, a perennial plant will belong to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ party having trực tiếp bóng đá k+ divided piece of land on which trực tiếp bóng đá k+ plant has grown.

8.Section C land according to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ master plan of Thanh Binh motel has an area of ​​85.65m2 (28.1m + 29m): 2 x 3 is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ common passage area and 42m2 (28m x 1.5m) fence walls, concrete pillars fence + chain-link fence is a common use area for land Section A and Section B (trực tiếp bóng đá k+ piece of land divided to Mr. Vo Van Binh and Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon). Land boundary section C; marker (13) to marker (1) is 3m; marker (1) to marker (2) is 29m; marker (2) to marker (15) is 3m; marker (15) to marker (13) is 28.10m.

9.Cancel mortgage of land use right contract No. 00166/QSDD/770/QD-UB dated March 25, 2002 between Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon and Mrs. Tran Thi Trinh. Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon have to pay Mrs. Tran Thi Trinh trực tiếp bóng đá k+ principal of VND 100,000,000.

10.Cancel mortgage of land use right contract No. 00189QSDD/373/QD-UB dated June 28, 2002 between Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh. Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon have to pay Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh trực tiếp bóng đá k+ principal of VND 350,000,000.

11.Reject trực tiếp bóng đá k+ claim of Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon, requesting trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Vo Trong Thanh (Vu Trong Thanh) and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong Cam to pay VND 73,000,000, Mr. Vo Van Binh to pay VND 43,000,000, to pay Mrs. Vo Thi Lien VND 6,000,000.

12.Reject trực tiếp bóng đá k+ claim of Mr. Vo Van Binh's for motel business interests (from February 2002 to July 28, 2005) of VND 243,844,078 (VND 400,000,000 - VND 156,155,922 (i.e. 270,868,902 x 57.65%) interest earned on capital structure).

13.Mr. Vo Van Binh must pay Vo Van Ket and his wife, Tran Thi Phuong Ngon, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount of VND 577,099,777 (in which trực tiếp bóng đá k+ interest is not accepted: VND 243,844,078, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ change of differences in divided assets: VND 333,255,699).In addition, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ first instance court decided trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court fee and expertising fee, and announced trực tiếp bóng đá k+ appeal right to litigants as per trực tiếp bóng đá k+ law and liability for trực tiếp bóng đá k+ delay of judgment enforcement

On August 10, 2008, Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon filed an appeal, claiming that: trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount of money sent by Mr. Binh to them is a borrowed sum, not joint investment; Mr. Binh is an overseas Vietnamese who is not allowed to buy real estate in Vietnam; on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ other hand, on July 5, 2003, Mr. Binh took back VND 400 million to buy a house for his wife in Hanoi, so Mr. Binh had no connection to Thanh Binh motel.

On August 9, 2005, Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh filed an appeal, on August 10, 2005, Mrs. Tran Thi Trinh also filed an appeal, claiming that: They legally lent Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon money secured by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ entire house and land in their names. Now, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court hands over nearly all trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land and house to Mr. Binh, but forces Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon to repay their debt to them is infringement of their lending right, moreover, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court only forces them to pay trực tiếp bóng đá k+ principal, not to pay interest, this causes great damage to their rights.

On August 17, 2005, Mr. Le Va filed an appeal, claiming that because Thanh Binh motel's ownership is in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ name of Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease contract he signed with Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon is legal. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court canceled trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease contract with Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon before trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease term, but trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court is wrong when not compelling them to return his investment to upgrade trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel or compensation for damage.

In Decision No. 35/QDKNPT-P5 dated August 15, 2005, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Chief Procurator of Quang Ngai People's Procuracy protested trực tiếp bóng đá k+ above first instance civil judgment.

In trực tiếp bóng đá k+ appellate civil judgment No. 37/2006/DSPT dated June 29, 2006, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Appellate Court of People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City decided to uphold trực tiếp bóng đá k+ first instance judgment.

After trực tiếp bóng đá k+ appellate trial, Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh, Ms. Tran Thi Trinh and Mr. Le Va all filed complaints.

In Official Letter No. 236/BC-GDT dated August 2, 2006, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Institute of prosecution and appellate trial supervision affiliated to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Supreme People's Procuracy in Da Nang proposes trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Supreme People's Court to appeal trực tiếp bóng đá k+ above Appellate Civil Judgment.

In trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Decision No. 53/2008/KN-DS dated March 25, 2008, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Chief Justice of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Supreme People’s Court appealed trực tiếp bóng đá k+ above Appellate Civil Judgment and requested trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Council of Judges of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Supreme People’s Court to hear trực tiếp bóng đá k+ case under cassation review, quash trực tiếp bóng đá k+ above Appellate Judgment and quash trực tiếp bóng đá k+ First Instance Judgment No. 09/2005/DSST dated August 2, 2005 of People’s Court of Quang Ngai Province; refer trực tiếp bóng đá k+ case file to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ People’s Court of Quang Ngai Province for first instance re-trial as per trực tiếp bóng đá k+ law, with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ following judgment:

“...Although there is no written agreement on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ capital contribution to do business between Mr. Binh and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon, but trực tiếp bóng đá k+ record book of Mr. Ket states that “trực tiếp bóng đá k+ total initial investment capital of 2 people, Binh's capital: VND 401,000,000, family's capital: VND 387,000,000... and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ content of “receipt” written by Mrs. Ha (Mr. Binh’s wife) when receiving 400 million VND paid by Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon paid to buy a house in Hanoi: “This is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount Mr. Binh receives from Mr. Binh’s father from Thanh Binh motel ..."; and, based on some testimonies of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ litigants and witnesses, there is enough basis to identify that Mr. Binh sent money to contribute capital to buy land, build Thanh Binh motel and run business with Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon. Therefore, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal had valid grounds for determining that Mr. Binh sent money to contribute capital with Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon to buy land, build Thanh Binh motel and run business. However, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal has not verified trực tiếp bóng đá k+ actual amount Mr. Binh has contributed capital with Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon to build trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel, but determined that Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon used all VND 454,584,500 sent by Mr. Binh to buy land, build Thanh Binh motel on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ basis that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ division of common property between trực tiếp bóng đá k+ couple and Mr. Binh. It is well-grounded, because:

- According to Mr. Ket's testimony, they received VND 454,584,500 sent by Mr. Binh, but only VND 401,500,000 was used to buy land and build Thanh Binh motel, they transferred trực tiếp bóng đá k+ rest of money to Mr. Binh's relatives at trực tiếp bóng đá k+ request of Mr. Binh;

- trực tiếp bóng đá k+ book recorded by Mr. Ket in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ process of investing in buying land, building trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Thanh Binh motel only shows: "Binh's capital: VND 401,000,000..."; meanwhile, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal have not compared trực tiếp bóng đá k+ total amount of actual land purchase, motel construction and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount of money that Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon contributed.

In addition, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal also have trực tiếp bóng đá k+ following errors:

- Mr. Binh is an overseas Vietnamese. Under trực tiếp bóng đá k+ provisions of Clauses 1 and 2, Article 3 ofDecree No. 81/2001/ND-CPdated November 5, 2001 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Government, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ State only allows a number of overseas Vietnamese, including: “an overseas Vietnamese who engages in long-term investment in Vietnam; who has meritorious contributions to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ country; who is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ great man or scientist wishing to do regular activities in Vietnam; or who wishes to live in Vietnam stably" is allowed to" own a house to live in (apartment, house, villa)". In this case, Thanh Binh motel was built for business not to live; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal has not verified whether Mr. Binh has repatriated to reside in Vietnam; if Mr. Binh is still residing in a foreign country, is Mr. Binh eligible to own a house in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ above regulations and is Mr. Binh allowed to own a motel business? but decided to give Mr. Binh trực tiếp bóng đá k+ ownership of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel and handed over trực tiếp bóng đá k+ entire Thanh Binh motel to Mr. Binh, which does not have substantial grounds.

- According to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ actual measurement results, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land area attached to Thanh Binh motel is 1,886.6m2, of which only 1,596.6m2 has been granted trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land use right certificate, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ remaining 289.76m2 has not been issued land use right certificate. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal have not consulted trực tiếp bóng đá k+ competent People's Committee on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ use of this area of ​​289.76m2; but decided to divide this whole land area to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ litigants in contravention of law provisions (in case trực tiếp bóng đá k+ competent state agency permits trực tiếp bóng đá k+ use, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court may only temporarily assign it to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ litigants for use).

- According to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ presentation of Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon, in order to have money to pay Mr. Binh VND 400,000,000, they had to mortgage trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land use right certificate of Thanh Binh motel to borrow Mrs. Thanh VND 350,000,000, borrow Mrs. Trinh VND 100,000,000, they have not repaid such amount so far. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal had not enough basis to not verify but determine that this is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ private debt of Mr. Ket and his wife and Mrs. Thanh and Mrs. Trinh; and did not did not guarantee trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legitimate rights of Mrs. Thanh and Mrs. Trinh when only forcing they to return to Mrs. Thanh and Mrs. Trinh trực tiếp bóng đá k+ principal, not trực tiếp bóng đá k+ interest.

- From December 27, 2003, Mr. Ket and his wife signed a contract with Mr. Le Va to lease out Thanh Binh motel to run business (trực tiếp bóng đá k+ contract was certified and issued with a certificate by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Finance and Planning Department of Quang Ngai Town); but trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal did not guarantee trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legitimate rights of Mr. Le Va when announcing cancellation of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease and declaring Mr. Le Va only receive trực tiếp bóng đá k+ money he has paid for trực tiếp bóng đá k+ remaining months of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease term (did not determine Mr. Le's damage due to termination of lease contract before lease term), and not forcing Mr. Le Va to pay trực tiếp bóng đá k+ money he spent on renovating and repairing trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel, it does not guarantee Le Va's legal rights.

At trực tiếp bóng đá k+ cassation court hearing, representative of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Supreme People’s Procuracy requests trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Council of Judges of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Supreme People’s Court to accept trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Appeal of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Chief Justice of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Supreme People’s Court.

CONSIDERING THAT

Based on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ testimonies of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ litigants and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ witnesses; based on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ contents of Mr. Ket's record book, it states: "trực tiếp bóng đá k+ total initial investment capital of 2 people, Binh’s capital: VND 401,000,000 and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ family capital: VND 387,000,000..."; based on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ "Receipt" written by Mrs. Ha (Mr. Binh's wife) when receiving VND 400,000,000 from Mr. Ket and his wife, it states:“This is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount Mr. Binh receives from Mr. Binh’s father from Thanh Binh motel ..."; there is enough basis to identify that Mr. Binh sent money to contribute capital to buy land, build Thanh Binh motel and run business with Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon.

In trực tiếp bóng đá k+ process of resolving trực tiếp bóng đá k+ case, Mr. Ket and his wife admitted to receive trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount of VND 454,584,500 sent by Mr. Binh; but they presented that they only borrowed VND 401 million, they transferred trực tiếp bóng đá k+ rest of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ money to Mr. Binh's relatives at trực tiếp bóng đá k+ request of Mr. Binh. This presentation is consistent with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ contents of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ book record of Mr. Ket on January 31, 2002: "Total initial investment capital of 2 people, Binh’s capital: VND 401,000,000, family capital: VND 387,000,000, totaling VND 788,500,000 ... ".  Therefore, there is only basis to determine Mr. Binh's capital contribution of VND 401,000,000; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ remaining amount, if Mr. Ket and his wife could not prove trực tiếp bóng đá k+ transfer to Mr. Binh's relatives at trực tiếp bóng đá k+ request of Mr. Binh, it is supposed to be considered a debt to force Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon to repay it to Mr. Binh. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal were wrong when determining that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount of money contributed by Mr. Binh was VND 454,584,000.

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ record book of Mr. Ket on January 31, 2002 also states:“…Value of house and land: VND 1,422,160,000 - Initial investment capital of 2 sources: VND 788,500,000 = VND 633,660,000; so after deducting business expenses, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ actual profit in 2 years is: VND 633,660,000, this interest has been repaid to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ house and land with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ total value of VND 1,422,160,000... ”and according to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ tax statement with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Tax Department of Quang Ngai Province, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ business profit of Thanh Binh motel for 4 years (2000-2003) is VND 280,201,138. Thus, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal should have to verify clearly trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount of interest earned from trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Thanh Binh motel business in each period, from which to determine trực tiếp bóng đá k+ actual interest amount. However, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal determined trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount of VND 400,000,000 that Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon paid in 2003 (received by Mrs. Ha) is to pay trực tiếp bóng đá k+ interest earned from trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel business, which is not enough grounds; on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ other hand, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal have not yet considered trực tiếp bóng đá k+ contribution of Mr. Ket and his wife in buying trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land, building and managing Thanh Binh motel when determining trực tiếp bóng đá k+ total value of Thanh Binh motel, which does not guarantee trực tiếp bóng đá k+ rights of Mr. Ket and his wife.

According to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ presentation of Mr. Ket and his wife, in order to have money to pay Mr. Binh VND 400,000,000, he and his wife had to mortgage trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land use right certificate of Thanh Binh motel to borrow from Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh 350,000,000. VND and loan Mrs. Tran Thi Trinh VND 100,000,000; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal have not verified this issue yet, but it is determined that this is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ private debt of Mr. and his wife who is not enough basis; At trực tiếp bóng đá k+ same time, forcing trực tiếp bóng đá k+ couple to return Mrs. Thanh and Mrs. Trinh to their original debt without forcing interest payment, they did not guarantee trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legal rights of Ms. Thanh and Mrs. Trinh.

Due to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ business losses, on December 27, 2003, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Ket signed a contract to lease out Mr. Le Va Thanh Binh motel to do business, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ contract was certified by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Finance - Planning Department of Quang Ngai Town and he was granted business registration certificate. Thus, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ above contract is legal, but trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal canceled trực tiếp bóng đá k+ lease contract without giving priority of continued lease to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ tenant and only let Mr. Le Va receive back trực tiếp bóng đá k+ paid amount for remaining months of lease term; moreover, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ damage suffered by Mr. Le Va due to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ termination of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ contract ahead of time, and did not consider Mr. Le Va’s money spent on renovating and repairing trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel, which is not in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ law and do not guarantee trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legal rights of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ litigants.

According to Mr. Binh's petition on June 21, 2004, in 1989, Mr. Binh was sent to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Soviet Union to study, in 1994 Mr. Binh graduated and settled in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Russian Federal Republic so far; thus, Mr. Binh is an overseas Vietnamese and according to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ provisions of Clauses 1 and 2, Article 3 of Decree No.81/2001/ND-CP dated November 5, 2001 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Government, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ State only allows some overseas Vietnamese to own a house:“an overseas Vietnamese who engages in long-term investment in Vietnam; who has meritorious contributions to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ country; who is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ great man or scientist wishing to do regular activities in Vietnam; or who wishes to live in Vietnam stably" is allowed to" own a house to live in (apartment, house, villa)";meanwhile, Mr. Binh contributed capital to buy land, build Thanh Binh motel to do business with Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon (not to live).Therefore, it must be clarified that at trực tiếp bóng đá k+ time when Mr. Binh sent money to contribute capital to Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon, whether Mr. Binh completes trực tiếp bóng đá k+ procedure for repatriation in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ law or not; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal have not clearly verified trực tiếp bóng đá k+ above issue, but assigned Mr. Binh to own and use a part of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ motel, which is not enough grounds, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court should have handed over trực tiếp bóng đá k+ entire motel to Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon and force them to repay trực tiếp bóng đá k+ property value to Mr. Binh in proportion to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ capital contribution ratio of Mr. Binh.

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land area attached to Thanh Binh motel is 1,886.6m2, of which only 1,596.6m2 has been granted trực tiếp bóng đá k+ land use right certificate, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ remaining 289.76m2 has not been issued land use right certificate. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal have not consulted trực tiếp bóng đá k+ competent People's Committee on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ use of this area of ​​289.76m2; but decided to divide this whole land area to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ litigants in contravention of law provisions (in case trực tiếp bóng đá k+ competent state agency permits trực tiếp bóng đá k+ use, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court may only temporarily assign it to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ litigants for use).

In addition, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal also have trực tiếp bóng đá k+ following procedural errors:

- According to documents at trực tiếp bóng đá k+ case file, on July 5, 2003, Mrs. Ha (Mr. Binh's wife) received VND 400,000,000 from Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon; while Mr. Binh said that this is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount of interest he gets from trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Thanh Binh motel business, Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon claimed that this is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sum of money they repaid to Mr. Binh; but trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal made errors when not taking Mrs. Ha into trực tiếp bóng đá k+ proceedings.

- Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh and Mrs. Tran Thi Trinh asked Mr. Ket and Mrs. Ngon to repay trực tiếp bóng đá k+ loan with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ same interest rate, this is an independent request of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ person with related rights and obligations in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ case; but trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance did not require Mrs. Thanh and Mrs. Trinh to pay trực tiếp bóng đá k+ advance of court fees, but both trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal still resolved trực tiếp bóng đá k+ request of Mrs. Thanh and Mrs. Trinh, which is not compliant with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ law.

- After trực tiếp bóng đá k+ first instance trial, Mrs. Thanh and Mr. Le Va filed appeals; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal has not yet completed trực tiếp bóng đá k+ procedure to summon Mr. Le Va properly and summoned Mrs. Thanh trực tiếp bóng đá k+ wrong address (Mrs. Thanh resides at 163 Tran Hung Dao, Quang Ngai City, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ address in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ summon is"Khe Thanh, Tinh Khe, Son Tinh, Quang Ngai "), so Mr. Le Va and Mrs. Thanh are not present at trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Appellate Court session; but trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal still heard trực tiếp bóng đá k+ case, it was a violation of law.

According to facts and matters, pursuant to Clause 3 Article 291, Clause 3 Article 297 and Article 299 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+Civil Procedure Code;

HEREBY DECIDES

1.Quash trực tiếp bóng đá k+ appellate civil judgment No. 37 dated June 29, 2006 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Supreme People’s Court of Da Nang and quash trực tiếp bóng đá k+ first instance civil judgment no. 09/2005/DSST dated August 2, 2005 of People’s Court of Quang Ngai Province to resolve trực tiếp bóng đá k+ “Dispute over property right” between trực tiếp bóng đá k+ petitioner Mr. Vo Van Binh and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ respondent Mr. Vo Van Ket and Mrs. Tran Thi Phuong Ngon; persons with relevant rights and obligations Mr. Le Va, Mrs. Nguyen Thi Bich Thanh, Mrs. Tran Thi Trinh, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ married couple Mr. Vo Trong Thanh (Vu Trong Thanh), Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong Cam and Mrs. Vo Thi Lien.

2.Refer trực tiếp bóng đá k+ case file to People’s Court of Quang Ngai Province for re-conducting trực tiếp bóng đá k+ first-instance trial as per trực tiếp bóng đá k+ law.

Grounds for quashing trực tiếp bóng đá k+ First Instance Judgment and Appellate Judgment:

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of First Instance and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Court of Appeal had made many errors in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ review and evaluation of evidence leading to decisions that failed to ensure trực tiếp bóng đá k+ interests of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ litigants; there are also procedural errors.