trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nayHanoi-Vietnam: Precedent No. 08/2016/AL

Precedent No. 08/2016/AL

Approved by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Judicial Council of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court of Vietnam on October 17, 2016, and published under Decision No. 698/QD-CA dated October 17, 2016, of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Chief Justice of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court of Vietnam.

Source of Precedent:

Cassation Decision No. 12/2013/KDTM-GDT dated May 16, 2013, by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Judicial Council of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court of Vietnam regarding trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay commercial business case "Dispute over credit contracts" in Hanoi City between trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay plaintiff, Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade of Vietnam, and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay defendant, Kaoli Pharmacy Joint Stock Company; concerned parties include Nguyen Thi Phuong, Nguyen Dang Duyen, and Do Thi Loan.

Position of Precedent Content:

Paragraph 16 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay "Considerations" section of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay aforementioned Cassation Decision.

Overview of Precedent Content:

- Situational Context of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Precedent:

In credit contracts, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay parties have agreed on loan interest rates, including in-term interest rates, interest rates charged on overdue debts, and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay adjustment of loan interest rates by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay bank or credit institution granting loans over different periods. At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay time of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance trial, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay borrowing customer has not paid or has not paid enough principal and interest as per trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contract.

- Legal solution:

In this case, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay borrowing customer must continue to pay trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay bank or credit institution granting loans trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay unpaid principal amount, interest on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay in-term principal (if any), and overdue interest on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay unpaid principal amount at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay rate agreed upon in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay contract until trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay principal debt is fully paid. If trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay parties have agreed to adjust trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loan interest rate according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay periods of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay bank or credit institution granting loans, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay interest rate that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay borrower must continue to pay according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court’s decision will be adjusted accordingly in line with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay interest rate adjustment of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay bank or credit institution granting loans.

Legal provisions related to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Precedent:

- Articles 471, 474, and 476 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nayLaw No. 33/2005/QH11;

- Clause 2 of Article 91 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nayLaw No. 47/2010/QH12 xoilac tv trực;

- Clause 1 of Article 1 ofCircular No. 12/2010/TT-NHNNdated April 14, 2010, of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay State Bank of Vietnam guiding credit institutions to lend in Vietnamese dong to customers according to agreed interest rates;

- Clause 2 of Article 11 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Lending Regulations of Credit Institutions to Customers issued underDecision No. 1627/2001/QD-NHNNdated December 31, 2001, of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Governor of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay State Bank of Vietnam, amended and supplemented byDecision No. 127/2005/QD-NHNNdated February 3, 2005.

Keywords of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Precedent:

“Interest rate”; “Unpaid principal”; “Credit contract”; “Interest rate adjustment”; “interest rate charged on overdue debts”.

CASE CONTENT

According to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lawsuit petition dated July 20, 2010, and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay documents and evidence in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case file, it is stated as follows:

Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade of Vietnam - Thang Long Branch (hereinafter referred to as Vietcombank) and Kaoli Pharmacy Joint Stock Company (hereinafter referred to as Kaoli Company) signed four credit contracts, including: Credit Contract No. 03/07/NHNT-TL dated December 25, 2007; No. 04/07/NHNT-TL dated December 28, 2007; No. 144/08/NHNT-TL dated March 28, 2008; and No. 234/08/NHNT-TL dated May 27, 2008. These credit contracts were secured by assets, specifically trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay ownership rights of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house and homestead land use rights at:

- No. 122 Doi Can, Doi Can Ward, Ba Dinh District, Hanoi City (parcels No. 46B+39C+37C, map sheet No. 19) under trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay ownership and use rights of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong (according to Mortgage Contract No. 1678.2008/HDTC dated June 25, 2008; securing trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loan and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay maximum guarantee is 4,605,000,000 VND; trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay specific conditions for borrowing trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay said amount will be recorded in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay bank's operational documents signed between Vietcombank and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guaranteed party (Kaoli Company) at Vietcombank's headquarters (Clause 1.3, Article 1); trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay value of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgaged asset is 4,605,000,000 VND as per trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Asset Valuation Report No. 105/08/NHNT.TL; mortgage period is 5 years from trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guaranteed party receives trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loan; trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay contract is effective from trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay time of registration at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Land Use Rights Registration Office (Clause 10.1, Article 10). This contract was notarized by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Notary Public Office No. 3 in Hanoi on June 25, 2008, and certified by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Ba Dinh District Natural Resources and Environment Department registration office on July 10, 2008). On September 3, 2007, Mrs. Phuong and Vietcombank signed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Asset Mortgage Document Transfer Agreement with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay content: “Both parties proceed to hand over trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay original documents of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay secured assets to ensure trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay obligations of Kaoli Pharmacy Joint Stock Company at Vietcombank - Thang Long Branch; asset name: Ownership rights of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house and homestead land use rights at 122 Doi Can, Doi Can Ward, Ba Dinh District, Hanoi” (BL 52).

- Group 13 Cluster 2, Nhat Tan Ward, Tay Ho District, Hanoi City under trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay ownership and use rights of Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen and his wife, Mrs. Do Thi Loan (according to Mortgage Contract No. 1677.2008/HDTC dated June 25, 2008, securing trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loan and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay maximum guarantee is 1,250,000,000 VND; trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay specific conditions for borrowing trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay said amount will be recorded in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay bank's operational documents signed between Vietcombank and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guaranteed party (Kaoli Company) at Vietcombank's headquarters (Clause 1.3, Article 1); trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay value of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgaged asset is 1,250,000,000 VND as per trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Asset Valuation Report No. 106/08/NHNT.TL dated September 3, 2007 (Clause 3.1, Article 3); mortgage period is 5 years from trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guaranteed party receives trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loan; trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay contract is effective from trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay time of registration at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Land Use Rights Registration Office (Clause 10.1, Article 10); this contract was notarized by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Notary Public Office No. 3 in Hanoi on June 25, 2008, and certified by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Ba Dinh District Natural Resources and Environment Department registration office on July 1, 2008). On September 3, 2007, Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen and Vietcombank - Thang Long Branch signed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Asset Mortgage Document Transfer Agreement with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay content: “Both parties proceed to hand over trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay original documents of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay secured assets to ensure trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay obligations of Kaoli Pharmacy Joint Stock Company at Vietcombank - Thang Long Branch; asset name: Ownership rights of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house and homestead land use rights at Group 13 Cluster 2, Nhat Tan Ward, Tay Ho District, Hanoi” (BL 58a).

Additionally, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loans under trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mentioned credit contracts are also secured by assets, including houses and land belonging to Mr. Cao Ngoc Minh and his wife, Mrs. Doan Thi Thanh Thuy; house, and land belonging to Mr. Giang Cao Thang and his wife, Mrs. Duong Thi Sinh (already released); land use rights belonging to Mr. Chu Quoc Khanh; and house and land belonging to Mrs. Chu Thi Hong and Mr. Nguyen Van Minh.

In execution of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay contracts, Vietcombank - Thang Long Branch disbursed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loan amounts to Kaoli Company as per trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay stated credit contracts. Kaoli Company only partially repaid trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay principal and interest. Vietcombank filed a lawsuit requesting trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court to compel Kaoli Company to pay trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay remaining debt of these four credit contracts amounting to 8,197,957,837 VND (including principal debt of 5,457,000,000 VND, in-term interest of 397,149,467 VND, and overdue interest calculated until trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance trial of 2,343,808,370 VND) and to dispose of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgaged assets of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong; Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen and Mrs. Do Thi Loan to recover trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay debt.

trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay defendant’s representative, Mr. Do Van Chinh, director of Kaoli Company, stated: He acknowledged that Kaoli Company still owed Vietcombank trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay principal, in-term interest, and overdue interest per trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay four Credit Contracts as Vietcombank had presented. He committed that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay responsibility for repaying trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay debt under these four contracts was Kaoli Company’s and requested to repay in installments over five years.

If Kaoli Company failed to repay or did not fully repay trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay debt, and Vietcombank demanded trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay disposal of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong, Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen, and Mrs. Do Thi Loan’s secured properties, he suggested trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court handle it according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay law. Mr. Chinh confirmed that Vietcombank disbursed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loans before signing Mortgage Contract No. 1678.2008/HDTC dated June 25, 2008, and Mortgage Contract No. 1677.2008/HDTC dated June 25, 2008. From June 25, 2008, until now, Kaoli Company did not take any new loans or sign any new credit contracts with Vietcombank.

Interested parties provided trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay following statements:

- Mr. Nguyen Van Nghi (representing Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong) stated: He did not agree with Vietcombank’s lawsuit against Kaoli Company and request for trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay liquidation of Mrs. Phuong’s assets if Kaoli Company failed to fulfill its debt obligations, because Mrs. Phuong signed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage contract on June 25, 2008, and should not bear trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay responsibility for Kaoli Company’s loans with Vietcombank under trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay four credit contracts that Vietcombank is suing for. He requested trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court to mandate Vietcombank to release trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage and return trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Land Use Rights Certificate and House Ownership Certificate to Mrs. Phuong.

- Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen and Mrs. Do Thi Loan jointly stated: They had signed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Mortgage Contract dated June 25, 2008, but this contract only guaranteed Kaoli Company’s loans at Vietcombank and would bear all responsibilities arising from trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay period after June 25, 2008, to April 25, 2009; as for all credit contracts signed before June 25, 2008, between Vietcombank and Kaoli Company, they would not bear any responsibility. According to Vietcombank, from after June 25, 2008, until now, Vietcombank had not signed any new credit contracts with Kaoli Company. Therefore, their legal responsibility had not arisen. They requested trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court to mandate Vietcombank to release trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage assets according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage contract dated June 25, 2008, for them.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay First-Instance Judgment No. 32/2011/KDTM-ST dated March 24, 2011, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Hanoi People’s Court ruled:

“1. Partially accept trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay claim of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade of Vietnam against Kaoli Company. Compel Kaoli Company to repay a total principal and interest debt to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay bank amounting to 8,197,957,837 VND.

2. Reject trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay claim of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade of Vietnam to foreclose trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay assets, including trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house ownership right and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay right to use homestead land at parcel No. 46B + 39C + 37C, map sheet No. 19, located at No. 122 Doi Can, Doi Can Ward, Ba Dinh District, Hanoi, according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Land Use Rights Certificate and House Ownership Certificate No. 10101132587 issued by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Committee of Ba Dinh District on April 27, 2004, to Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong; and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house ownership right and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay right to use homestead land at Group 13, Cluster 2, Nhat Tan Ward, Tay Ho District, Hanoi, according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Land Use Rights Certificate and House Ownership Certificate at parcel No. 13+64A (part), map sheet No. 04 located at Group 13, Cluster 2, Nhat Tan Ward, Tay Ho District, Hanoi, according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Land Use Rights Certificate and House Ownership Certificate No. 10103090899 issued by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Committee of Hanoi on March 23, 2004, to Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen and his wife, Mrs. Do Thi Loan.

trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade of Vietnam is responsible for returning all documents concerning trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house ownership right and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay right to use homestead land and for processing trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage release procedures for Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong and Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen, Mrs. Do Thi Loan.”

Additionally, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay First Instance Court ruled on court fees and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay rights to appeal for trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay involved parties as stipulated by law.

On April 4, 2011, Vietcombank filed an appeal.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Judgment No. 148/2011/KDTM-PT dated August 17, 2011, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court of Vietnam in Hanoi, pursuant to Clause 2, Article 275, and Clause 1, Article 276 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Civil Procedure Code, ruled:

“To amend trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay First-Instance Judgment No. 32/2011/KDTM-ST dated March 23 and 24, 2011, by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Hanoi People’s Court concerning trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guarantee obligations of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong and Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen, Mrs. Do Thi Loan. Specifically:

Rule: trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Asset Mortgage Document Transfer Agreements dated September 3, 2007, between trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade of Vietnam - Thang Long Branch and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong, and Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen, Mrs. Do Thi Loan are guarantee contracts (trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay record extracts No. 52, 58a).

Compel Kaoli Pharmacy Joint Stock Company to repay trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade of Vietnam a total principal and interest debt amounting to 8,197,957,837 VND...

In trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay event that Kaoli Pharmacy Joint Stock Company fails to fulfill its obligation or inadequately fulfills its debt repayment obligation to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade of Vietnam, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade of Vietnam has trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay right to request trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Hanoi Civil Judgment Enforcement Department to dispose of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guaranteed assets according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay provisions of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Civil Judgment Enforcement Law to recover trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay debt as per trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guarantor’s guarantee obligations.

...From trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judgment takes legal effect and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judgment creditor files a request for judgment enforcement, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judgment debtor must also pay interest on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay delayed judgment enforcement amount at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay basic interest rate announced by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay State Bank corresponding to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay time of delayed judgment enforcement.”

Additionally, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court ruled on court fees and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judgment enforcement.

After trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate trial, Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong; Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen and Mrs. Do Thi Loan submitted multiple petitions for reconsideration of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate judgment under trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay supervisory review procedure.

At Supervision Complaint Decision No. 34/2012/KDTM-KN dated October 15, 2012, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Chief Justice of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court of Vietnam proposed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Judicial Council of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court of Vietnam adjudicate trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case under trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay supervisory review procedure, thereby annulling trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Judgment No. 148/2011/KDTM-PT dated August 17, 2011, by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court of Vietnam in Hanoi; and return trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case files to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court of Vietnam in Hanoi for a re-appellate trial in compliance with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay law.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay supervisory review session, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay representative of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Procuracy agreed with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Chief Justice’s complaint decision.trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Judicial Council of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court determines:

Considering trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Land Use Rights and Attached Assets Mortgage Contracts to secure third-party bank loans (Notarized Number: 1677.2008/HDTC and 1678.2008/HDTC both dated June 25, 2008), it is observed:

Both mortgage contracts for land use rights and attached assets to secure third-party bank loans do not clearly state to secure which loan under which credit contract and were signed after four Credit Contracts (No. 03/07/NHNT-TL dated December 25, 2007; No. 04/07/NHNT-TL dated December 28, 2007; No. 144/08/NHNT-TL dated March 28, 2008, and No. 234/08/NHNT-TL dated May 27, 2008) had been disbursed by Vietcombank - Thang Long Branch. According to Clause 1.3, Article 1 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay two above-mentioned Mortgage Contracts: “trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay detailed terms and conditions regarding borrowing and lending trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay above-mentioned amount (Secured obligation is trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay highest loan and guarantee amounting to VND 4,605,000,000; - Clause 1.2 Article 1 Mortgage Contract) will be specifically recorded in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Banking operations documents that Party B (Vietcombank - Thang Long Branch) and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guaranteed party will sign at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay headquarters of Party B (Vietcombank - Thang Long Branch)” can be understood that Ms. Phuong, Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan's household only guaranteed Kaoli Company’s loans under credit contracts signed at Vietcombank's headquarters after trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date of signing trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage contract (June 25, 2008), not trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loans under trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay four Credit Contracts signed before.

Vietcombank, based on Clause 6.2, Article 6 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay four above-mentioned Credit Contracts, which records (handwritten) trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay contents: “trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay detailed agreements on assets, rights, and obligations of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay parties will be specifically determined in...Mortgage Contract No. 1677.2008/HDTC dated June 25, 2008, and Mortgage Contract No. 1678.2008/HDTC dated June 25, 2008” to request trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Court to compel Ms. Phuong, Mr. Duyen, and Mrs. Loan’s household to be responsible for guaranteeing Kaoli Company’s loans under trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay four aforementioned Credit Contracts. However, this content, according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay representation of Vietcombank at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance trial is “written by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Bank’s accountant.” At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance trial, Mr. Do Van Chinh - Director of Kaoli Company stated: “Kaoli Company did not know about this additional writing” and “Did not agree with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Bank's foreclosure request. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay assets of Ms. Phuong and Mr. Duyen, Mrs. Loan's household were added to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contracts by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Bank.”

Moreover, at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate trial, Ms. Nguyen Thi Phuong's authorized representative stated that she did not receive any credit contract from Vietcombank; while Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household did receive trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contract from Vietcombank. Thus, Mr. Chinh, Ms. Phuong, and Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household did not know trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handwritten content by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Bank’s accountant within trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contracts, did not sign trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contracts, so there is no basis to determine that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay aforementioned credit contracts are secured by Mortgage Contracts No. 1677.2008/HDTC and 1678.2008/HDTC both dated June 25, 2008.

In addition to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay two above-mentioned mortgage contracts, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case file includes two sets of documents related to asset mortgages: one set by Ms. Phuong and one set by Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household; each set includes: Valuation Minutes of assets and Handover Minutes of assets all dated September 3, 2007; Registration request for mortgage (dated January 29, 2008, by Ms. Phuong; dated June 25, 2008, by Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household). However, these Minutes and Registration Request Forms also do not specify securing which loan under which credit contract.

trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court determined (briefly): “trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handover minutes of mortgage, pledge, guarantee assets file between Vietnam Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade - Thang Long Branch, and Ms. Phuong, Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household dated September 3, 2007, all contain contents of pledging, mortgaging, guaranteeing Kaoli Pharmaceutical Joint Stock Company’s obligations to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Bank...thus determining this is one contract...” And trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court adjudicated: “trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handover minutes of mortgage, pledge, guarantee assets file dated September 3, 2007, between Vietnam Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade - Thang Long Branch and Ms. Nguyen Thi Phuong and Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen and Mrs. Do Thi Loan’s household are guarantee contracts (records No. 52, 58a)” and “In trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case that Kaoli Pharmaceutical Joint Stock Company does not fulfill or fully fulfill its obligations of debt repayment to Vietnam Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade, then Vietnam Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade has trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay right to request trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Hanoi Civil Judgment Enforcement Department to handle trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guaranteed assets in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay provisions of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement to recover trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay debt according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guarantor's guarantee responsibility.”

trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay determination and decision of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court above are baseless and unlawful. Because:

- trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handover minutes of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage, pledge, guarantee assets file dated September 3, 2007, between Ms. Nguyen Thi Phuong (as well as Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household) and Vietcombank - Thang Long Branch is not a guarantee contract as determined by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate trial on August 17, 2011, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Vietcombank representative also only determined: “trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handover minutes of assets, and asset valuation minutes are inseparable parts of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage contract.”

- According to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handover minutes of mortgage assets, pledge, guarantee, asset valuation minutes, and representation of Vietcombank at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate trial, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date of file handover and asset valuation was September 3, 2007. While trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage contract between Ms. Phuong (as well as Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household) with Vietcombank - Thang Long Branch was signed on June 25, 2008 (after trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date of handover minutes and asset valuation minutes), so these minutes cannot be considered inseparable parts of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mentioned mortgage contract. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court also determined: “trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage contract dated June 25, 2008...is not related to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handover file minutes...”.

- According to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date recorded in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay minutes and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay representation of Vietcombank at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate trial, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date of file handover (original Certificate of house ownership and homestead land use rights) and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay date of asset valuation was September 3, 2007, but in these asset valuation minutes, it states: “Based on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay land price table at Hanoi districts issued with Decision No. 150/2007/QD-UBND dated December 28, 2007, by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Hanoi City People’s Committee” and this minute is an inseparable part of Mortgage Contract No. 1678.2008/HDTC and No. 1677.2008/HDTC dated June 25, 2008. Specifically, regarding Ms. Phuong's case, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay homestead land use right value is determined based on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay actual land price determination minute dated September 4, 2007, and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Mortgage Registration Request form dated January 29, 2008, by Ms. Phuong stating: “Mortgage Contract No. 1678.2008/HDTC signed on June 25, 2008.” Additionally, according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay representation and documents provided by Ms. Phuong, Mr. Duyen, and Mrs. Loan’s household, on September 3, 2007, Ms. Phuong's house and land were mortgaged at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Quang An Branch, Tay Ho District, released on January 11, 2008; and Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household’s house and land were mortgaged at Vietnam Prosperity Joint Stock Commercial Bank - Thang Long Branch, released on January 16, 2008.

With trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay evidence above, it can be concluded: trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handover minutes of mortgaged, pledged, guaranteed property files, and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay asset valuation minutes were not made on September 3, 2007, and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Certificate of house ownership and homestead land use rights was not delivered on September 3, 2007, nor was trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay valuation done on September 3, 2007, as represented by Vietcombank and accepted by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court.

As of September 3, 2007, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage, guarantee contract for assets as land use rights and attached assets must be notarized and registered as secured transactions under point a, Clause 1, Article 130 of Land Law 2003; point a, Item 1, Article 12Decree 163/ND-CPdated December 29, 2006, and Subsection 2.4, Section 2Joint Circular No. 03/2006/TTLT-BTP-BTNMTdated June 13, 2006; it is not required to be notarized and it is not required to register as a secured transaction as determined by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court.

trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court did not clarify if there were any other documents or evidence other than trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay above-mentioned materials to refer to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mortgage contracts signed by Ms. Phuong and Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household being guarantees for Kaoli Company’s four credit contracts or not but concluded that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handover file minutes are guarantee contracts, which is not correct. Because these minutes cannot be guarantee contracts when considering both trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay formality and content of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay document.

- If there is a basis to assert that Ms. Phuong’s and Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s mortgage contracts dated June 25, 2008, secure trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay above-mentioned credit contracts, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guarantee contract of Ms. Phuong only secures trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loan and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay highest guarantee amount of VND 4,605,000,000; trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guarantee contract of Mr. Duyen and Mrs. Loan’s household only secures trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay loan and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay highest guarantee amount of VND 1,250,000,000. Meanwhile, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court concluded trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay handover minutes of mortgage, pledge, guarantee assets file dated September 3, 2007, are guarantee contracts and adjudicated: “In trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case that Kaoli Pharmaceutical Joint Stock Company does not fulfill or fully fulfill its obligations of debt repayment to Vietnam Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade, then Vietnam Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade has trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay right to request trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Hanoi Civil Judgment Enforcement Department to handle trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guaranteed assets in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay provisions of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement to recover trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay debt according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guarantor's guarantee responsibility” meaning that Ms. Phuong, Mr. Duyen, and Mrs. Loan’s household must be responsible for guaranteeing all trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay debts of Kaoli Company without clearly defining trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay guarantee responsibility of Ms. Phuong, Mr. Duyen, and Mrs. Loan's household, which is not correct.

Additionally, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance court and appellate court ruled: “From trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay effective date of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judgment and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay requesting for execution of a judgment, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judgment debtor must also pay interest on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay late judgment execution amount based on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay basic interest rate announced by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay State Bank corresponding to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay late execution period" is also incorrect. For bank loan amounts, besides trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay principal debt, due interest, overdue interest, and fees that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay borrower must pay to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lender as defined in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contract up to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance trial date, from trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay day following trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance trial date, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay borrower must continue to shoulder overdue interest on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay unpaid principal amount at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay interest rate agreed upon in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay contract until trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay principal amount is fully paid. If trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contract has an agreement on adjusting loan interest rates from time to time by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lending Bank, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay interest rate that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay borrower must continue to pay to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lending Bank based on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Court’s decision will also be adjusted according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay interest rate adjustments of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lending Bank.

Given these reasons, based on Clause 3 Article 291, Clause 3 Article 297, and Article 299 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nayCivil Procedure Code(amended and supplemented in 2011),

DECISION:

1. Annul trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Commercial Business Appellate Judgment No. 148/2011/KDTM-PT dated August 17, 2011, of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court in Hanoi on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay commercial business dispute over trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contract between trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay plaintiff is Vietnam Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Foreign Trade and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay defendant is Kaoli Pharmaceutical Joint Stock Company, and involved parties are Mrs. Nguyen Thi Phuong, Mr. Nguyen Dang Duyen, and Mrs. Do Thi Loan.

2. Remand trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case file to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People's Court in Hanoi for re-examination in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay law.

PRECEDENT CONTENT

“trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance court and appellate court ruled: “From trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay effective date of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judgment and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay request for trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay execution of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judgment, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judgment debtor must also pay interest on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay late judgment execution amount based on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay basic interest rate announced by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay State Bank corresponding to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay late execution period" is also incorrect. Regarding bank loan amounts, besides trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay principal debt, due interest, overdue interest, and fees that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay borrower must pay to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lender as defined in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contract up to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance trial date, from trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay day following trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance trial date, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay borrower must continue to shoulder overdue interest on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay unpaid principal amount at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay interest rate agreed upon in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay contract until trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay principal amount is fully paid. If trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay credit contract has an agreement on adjusting loan interest rates from time to time by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lending Bank, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay interest rate that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay borrower must continue to pay to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lending Bank based on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Court’s decision will also be adjusted according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay interest rate adjustments of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lending Bank.”

CLICK HERE TO READ THIS ARTICLE IN VIETNAMESE