trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euroJudgment No. 46/2017/HNGD-ST dated December 25, 2017 on divorce

PEOPLE’S COURT OF DA NANG CITY

JUDGMENT NO. 46/2017/HNGD-ST DATED DECEMBER 25, 2017 ON DIVORCE

On December 25, 2017, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first instance trial was conducted at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro office of People’s Court of Da Nang City to hear trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case No. 37/2017/TLST-HNGD dated November 7, 2016 on trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro divorce; according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Decision to Bring trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Case to Trial No. 55/2017/QDXXST-HNGD dated September 21, 2017 between litigants:

- Petitioner:Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P, place of residence: Street O, Ward N, District H, Da Nang City.

- Respondent:Mr. Dao Van L; place of residence: Silver Spring, MD 20903, USA.

trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro CASE

Representation of petitioner Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P:

- With reference to conjugal relationship: Being introduced by acquaintances, Mr. Dao Van L and she had a romantic relationship and then voluntarily proceed to marriage and have registered marriage under trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro law of Vietnam; they were granted Marriage Certificate by trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People's Committee of Da Nang City on February 28, 2014. A short time after trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro marriage, Mr. L returned to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro United States and promised to complete trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro paperwork to sponsor her for reunion with him, but he failed to do so. By June 2014, Mr. L totally broke off a connection with her. Now she is aware that they have no strings attached anymore, so she requests trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court to obtain a divorce from Mr. L.

- With reference to common children: She claims that Mr. Dao Van L and she have no common child.

- With reference to common property and liabilities: She claims that Mr. Dao Van L and she have no common property or liability.

During trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro process of settling trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case, Mr. Dao Van L did not provide trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro court with any written response to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro petition for divorce filed by Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P, and did not show up at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro court trial.

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 hereby judges:

JUDGEMENT OF trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro COURT

[1] At trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro court hearing today, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Prosecutor assigned to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro trial of first instance is absent, but trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Trial Panel still conducts trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro trial as prescribed in Clause 1, Article 232 oftrực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code in Viet Nam.

[2] Considering that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro petitioner Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P is a Vietnamese citizen with place of residence at Road O, Ward N, District H, Da Nang City and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant Mr. Dao Van L is a US citizen with place of residence in Silver Spring, MD 20903, USA, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro divorce case falls under trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro jurisdiction of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro People's Court of Da Nang City, as provided for in Articles 37, 40 and 469 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code; Article 123, Article 127 oftrực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay Hôn nhân và gia đình 2014 Số hiệu 52/2014/QH13. trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro provisions of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro law on marriage and family of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Socialist Republic of Vietnam apply to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro petition for divorce involving foreign elements of Mrs. Phuc and Mr. L in accordance with Article 122 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on Marriage and Family.

[3] After accepting trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court has served trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judicial documents of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro overseas litigant, who is trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant Mr. Dao Van L, via diplomatic channel under trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro law on mutual legal assistance. Specifically, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court has entrusted trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro foreign competent agency to both serve trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Notice of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Acceptance of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Mrs. Phuc’s Petition for Divorce to Mr. L and request him to give a written response to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court; and notify him of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro time and venue of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro meeting to examine trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro delivery, access to evidence and conciliation; as well as trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro time and location of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro court hearing, as provided for in Article 474 and Article 476 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code.

[4] During trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case settling, Mr. Dao Van L did not show up at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court as notified and also failed to submit to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court a written opinion on Mrs. Phuc’s petition; on trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro other hand, until trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro date of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first hearing October 6, 2017, Mr. L is still not present and trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court has not received a written notice of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro results of service of judicial documents, so trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court delayed trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro court hearing sent a written request to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Ministry of Justice to inform Mr. L of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro service of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro procedural documents of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro provisions of Clause 4, Article 477 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code. On November 1, 2017, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Ministry of Justice issued Document No. 3306/BTP-PLQT regarding judicial assistance results; enclosed with trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Document No. 0018972053 dated September 7, 2017 of ABC Legal Company, USA, which confirms that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judicial documents of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court have been served to Mr. L on September 6, 2017 at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro address Silver Spring, MD 20903, USA. Thus, Mr. N knew that trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court summoned him to participate in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro proceedings at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro court hearing at 08:00 on October 6, 2017 and another court hearing at 08:00 on October 24, 2017, but he were present both times. Therefore, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court reopened trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro court hearing at 08:30 on December 25, 2017 to hear trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro case in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro absence of Mr. L in accordance with Point b, Clause 2, Article 227 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code.

[5] Considering Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P’s petition for divorce from Mr. Dao Van L, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court finds that after returning to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro United States, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro couple gradually had no strings attached due to geographical distance, separate place of residence, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro caring for each other cannot be fulfilled; on trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro other hand, Mr. L promised to sponsor Mrs. Phuc to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro United States for reunion but he broke trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro promise and since June 2014 Mr. L has deliberately disconnected all contact with Mrs. Phuc, so their marriage has been broken, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro purpose of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro marriage is not reached, trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro petition for divorce from Mr. L of Mrs. Phuc is in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro provisions of Article 56 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on Marriage and Family, so it should be accepted.

[6] With reference to common children, property and liabilities: Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P claims that they have no common child, property or liability, so trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Court does not take further consideration.

[7] Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P has to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro marriage and family first instance court fee in accordance with Article 147 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code.

[8] Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P has to pay trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro cost incurred in trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judicial assistance as prescribed in Article 153 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code.

Based on trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro above-mentioned facts and matters,

HEREBY DECIDES

Pursuant to Articles 56, 122, 123 and 127 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Law on Marriage and Family; Article 37, Article 40, Article 147, Article 153, Point b, Clause 2 of Article 227, Clause 1 of Article 232, Article 469 and Point a, Clause 5 of Article 477 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Civil Procedure Code;Nghị quyết 326/2016/UBTVQH14 quy định về mứcdated December 30, 2016 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Standing Committee of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro National Assembly on court fees and charge, exemption, reduction, collection, transfer, management and use thereof;Ordinance on court fees and charges in Viet Nam. 

Accept Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P’s petition for divorce from Mr. Dao Van L.

Hereby judges:

1.With reference to conjugal relationship: Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P is granted divorce from Mr. Dao Van L.

2.With reference to court fees: Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P has to pay a marriage and family first instance court fee of VND 200,000 (two hundred thousand Vietnamese dong), which is deducted from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro first-instance fee paid in advance according to Receipt No. 000939 dated November 2, 2016 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Da Nang City; Mrs. Phuc has paid full marriage and family first instance court fee.

3.With reference to judicial assistance fee: Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P has to pay a judicial assistance fee of VND 150,000 (one hundred fifty thousand dong), which is deducted from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro juridical assistance fee paid in advance according to Receipt No. 000987 dated February 9, 2017 of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Da Nang City; Mrs. Phuc has paid full judicial assistance fee.

4.With reference to translation fee: Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P has to pay VND 1,360,000 (One million, three hundred and sixty thousand dong), Mrs. Phuc has paid for trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro translation fee to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Justice Department of Hai Chau District, Da Nang City according to Sales Invoice No. 0081693 dated March 2, 2017; Receipt of fees and charges No. 0039253 dated March 2, 2017;

Sales Invoice No. 0081699 dated March 6, 2017; Receipt of fees and charges No. 0039273 dated March 6, 2017; Sales invoice No. 0073140 dated May 24, 2017 and Sales Invoice No. 0068978 dated November 23, 2017 of Justice Department of Hai Chau District, Da Nang City.

5.Regarding trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro actual cost incurred in execution of judicial request paid to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro judicial trustee: Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P has to pay VND 2,161,725 (Two million, one hundred sixty one thousand, seven hundred and twenty five dong), Mrs. Phuc has paid for such cost to ABC Legal Services, USA, according to trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Voucher No. 05290110000025 dated May 29, 2017 of Vietnam Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development.

6.trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro plaintiff Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong P present at trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro trial 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 date of pronouncement of trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment; trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro defendant Mr. Dao Van L not present at court has trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro right to appeal trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment within 01 month from trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro date on which trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro Judgment is served properly in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay euro law.