trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nayJudgment No. 64/2018/HNGD-ST dated June 29, 2017 on divorce and child custody dispute

PEOPLE’S COURT OF HAI PHONG CITY

JUDGMENT NO. 64/2018/HNGD-ST DATED JUNE 29, 2017 ON DIVORCE AND CHILD CUSTODY DISPUTE

On June 29, 2018, the first instance trial court was conducted at the office of People’s Court of Hai Phong province trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay hear the case No.93/2018/TLST-HNGD dated June 4, 2018 regarding divorce and child custody dispute according trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay the Decision trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay bring the case trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay trial No.1289/2018/QDXXST-HNGD dated June 18, 2018 between the following litigants:

- Plaintiff:Mrs. Trinh Thi T; place of residence: Germany; temporary residence: village 2, H commune, T district, Hai Phong city.

- Defendant:Mr. Tran Huy Th; place of residence: Germany.

Mrs. T and Mr. Th are absent with Request for Trial in Absentia.

THE CASE OF MRS. TRINH THI T

Representation of Mrs. Trinh Thi T according trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay her lawsuit petition and testimony at the People’s Court of Hai Phong city:

Mrs. Trinh Thi T and Mr. Tran Huy Th got married on a voluntary basis and had their marriage registered at the People’s Committee of Hai Phong city on July 3, 2014. After marriage, Mrs. T and Mr. Th had lived together in Germany. While living together, Mrs. T and Mr. T had conflicts resulted from their difference in views of life, as a result, they have lived separately and no longer care each other. Deeming that they do not had spousal attachment any longer, Mrs. T petitioned for divorce from Mr. Tran Huy Th.

With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay common children:  No common child is claimed, so the court is not requested trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay settle.

With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay common property: the court is not requested trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay settle.

At the petition for divorce and the request sent trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hai Phong city (certified by Vietnamese Embassy in Germany), the defendant Mr. Tran Huy Th agrees with the representation of Mrs. Trinh Thi T in terms of marriage process, reason for divorce, common child and common property.

Because Mr. Th has lived abroad, the court failed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay conduct a conciliation as prescribed in Clause 2 Article 207 ofthe Civil Procedure Code in Viet Nam.

At the court hearing, Mrs. T and Mr. Th are absent with Request for Trial in Absentia.

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT

[1] With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay legal relations and jurisdiction: Mrs. Trinh Thi T and Mr. Tran Huy Th voluntarily got married and had their marriage registered at People’s Committee of Hai Phong city dated July 3, 2014 as prescribed in Article 9, Article 11, Article 103 ofLuật vtv5 trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay nhân và Gia, so it is a legal conjugal relationship. Mrs. Trinh Thi T filed a petition for divorce trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hai Phong city from Mr. Tran Huy Th who has lived abroad, pursuant trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Clause 1 Article 28, Clause 3 Article 35 of the Civil Procedure Code, this case falls under jurisdiction of People’s Court of Hai Phong city.

[2] With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay litigants’ absence: Mrs. T and Mr. Th are absent with Requests for Trial in Absentia. The court hears the case in their absence pursuant trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Clause 1 Article 228, Article 238 of the Civil Procedure Code.

[3] With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay conjugal relationship: After marriage, Mrs. T and Mr. Th only lived together for a short time before having many conflicts. Conflicts mainly arose from their unfit characteristics and views of life and their failure trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay sympathize trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay each other and find measures trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay solve them. Regarding conjugal relationship, Mrs. T and Mr. Th have not had spousal attachments any longer, they are unable trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay reunite, the conflict has been severe, and the purpose of marriage is not achieved, so an acceptance trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay the petition for divorce is legitimate. Therefore the petition for divorce of Mrs. T should be accepted pursuant trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Article 51, 56 oftrực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay Hôn nhân và gia đình.

[4] With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay common children: Mrs. T and Mr. Th have no common child, so the court is not requested trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay settle.

[5] With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay common property: No common property is claimed, so the court is not requested trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay settle.

[6] First instance civil court fee: Because Mrs. T is a plaintiff, she must pay the first instance civil court fee as per the law.

[7] With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay right trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appeal: Mrs. Trinh Thi T and Mr. Tran Huy Th have the right trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appeal the judgment as per the law.

Pursuant trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay documents and evidence mentioned above:

HEREBY DECIDES

Pursuant trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Article 51, Article 56 of the Law on Marriage and Family 2014;

Pursuant trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Clause 3 Article 35, Point a Clause 1 Article 37; Clause 4 Article 147; Clause 1 Article 228; Article 238; Point d Clause 1 Article 469; Clause 2 Article 479 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015; Clause 5 Article 27 ofNghị quyết 326/2016/UBTVQH14 quy định về mứcdated December 30, 2016 of the Standing Committee of National Assembly on court fees and charges, remission, collection, payment, management and use thereof;

Judges:

1. With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay conjugal relationship: Mrs. Trinh Thi T and Mr. Tran Huy Th are granted divorce.

2. With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court fee: Mrs. Trinh Thi T must pay VND 300,000 of first instance court fee, which is deducted from the court fee advance according trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay the receipt No. 0010710 dated May 30, 2018 at the Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Hai Phong city. Mrs. Trinh Thi has paid the court fee already.

3. With reference trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay right trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appeal: Mrs. Trinh Thi T and Mr. Tran Huy Th have right trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appeal the judgment within 1 month from the date on which a valid judgment is received.

In case the judgment or court decision is enforced as per regulations in Article 2 ofthe Law on enforcements of civil judgments in Viet Nam, the judgment creditor and judgment debtor are lawfully allowed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay reach an agreement on judgment enforcement, request judgment enforcement, be subject trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay voluntary execution or coercive judgment enforcement in compliance with regulations in Article 6, 7 and 9 of the Law on enforcement of civil judgments, and the effective period of judgment enforcement shall comply within provisions in Article 30 of the Law on enforcement of civil judgments.