>>>welcome 河南大学, You have logged in.
Logout History Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Italy Pozzuolo Ship Material Supply Company v. Hong Kong Bay Oriental Ship Management Co., Ltd. (Case of Italy Pozzuolo Ship Material Supply Company's Petitioning for Seizure of Hong Kong “Bay Grain” Ship)
意大利波佐罗船舶物料供应公司申请扣押香港“海湾谷物”号轮案
【法宝引证码】

Italy Pozzuolo Ship Material Supply Company v. Hong Kong Bay Oriental Ship Management Co., Ltd. (Case of Italy Pozzuolo Ship Material Supply Company's Petitioning for Seizure of Hong Kong “Bay Grain” Ship)
(Case of Italy Pozzuolo Ship Material Supply Company's Petitioning for Seizure of Hong Kong “Bay Grain” Ship)
意大利波佐罗船舶物料供应公司申请扣押香港“海湾谷物”号轮案

Italy Pozzuolo Ship Material Supply Company v. Hong Kong Bay Oriental Ship Management Co., Ltd.
(Case of Italy Pozzuolo Ship Material Supply Company's Petitioning for Seizure of Hong Kong “Bay Grain” Ship)

 

意大利波佐罗船舶物料供应公司申请

 扣押香港“海湾谷物”号轮案
BASIC FACTS 
Petitioner: Italy Pozzuolo Ship Material Supply Company. 申请人:意大利波佐罗船舶物料供应公司。
Petitionee: Hong Kong Bay Oriental Ship Management Co., Ltd. 被申请人:香港海湾东方船舶管理有限公司。
Italy Pozzuolo Ship Material Supply Company (hereinafter referred to as Pozzuolo Company), the petitioner, filed a petition with the Dalian Maritime Court of the People's Republic of China for seizure of ship, claiming that: from August 24th to September 28th, 1990, at Marghera Port and other ports of Italy, the petitioner supplied food, deck materials, wheel machine materials and other materials totally valuing 2,955,112 Italian Lira to the petitionee for many times. The above-mentioned facts can be proved by the documents officially signed and stamped by the capital of the ship involved in this case. Although being urged by the petitioner on many occasions, the petitionee still did not pay the said amount of money. The ship “Bay Grain” was now berthing at Dalian Port, the petitioner hereby petitions the court to seize the vessel and order the petitionee to provide cash of USD 40,000 as guarantee or reliable and satisfactory guarantee in other forms. The petitioner is willing to assume all legal liability for the wrong seizure of ship. 申请人意大利波佐罗船舶物料供应公司于1991年3月9日向中华人民共和国大连海事法院提出诉讼前扣押船舶的申请。申请称:申请人于1990年8月24日至9月28日期间,在意大利的奇基亚、马格拉和那瓦拉等港口,多次向被申请人香港海湾东方船舶管理有限公司所属的“海湾谷物”号轮供食品、甲板物料和轮机物料等多种物资,价款达295.5112万意大利里拉。上述事实有该轮船长正式签字并加盖印章确认的单证为凭。虽经申请人多次催促,被申请人未支付此款。“海湾谷物”号轮停泊在大连港,请求予以扣押,责令被申请人提供4万美元的现金担保或其他形式的可靠和满意的担保。申请人愿意承担因扣船错误引起的一切法律责任。
JUDGMENT 
After receiving the petition, the Dalian Maritime Court held upon investigation that the petition conformed to the provision of Article 1 (8) of the Specific Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Seizure of Ships before Litigation, so, upon the approval of the president of the court, the court decided on March 11th, 1991 that: 1. the petitionee's ship “Bay Grain” shall be seized from this very day; and 2. the petitionee is requested to provide cash of USD 40,000 as guarantee or reliable guarantee in other forms within 30 days from this very day. 大连海事法院接到申请后,经审查认为,申请人的申请符合《最高人民法院关于诉讼前扣押船舶的具体规定》第一条第8项的规定,经院长批准,于1991年3月11日裁定:一、自即日起扣押被申请人的“海湾谷物”号轮。二、责令被申请人自即日起30日内提供4万美元的现金担保或其他形式的可靠担保。
After the ruling and the seizure order signed by the president of the court were issued, the petitionee did not provide any guarantee. The petitioner thus, before the time limit of 30 days expired, filed a lawsuit for the dispute over the fees concerned in the materials supply contract with the Dalian Maritime Court on April 8th, 1991. Upon examination, the Dalian Maritime Court held that this case fell under the circumstances prescribed by the provision of Article 6 (3) of the Specific Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Seizure of Ships before Litigation爬数据可耻, so it decided to place it on file on April 9 and issued a notice of responding to action to the defendant on April 11. 裁定书和经院长签发和扣押船舶命令发出后,被申请人未提供任何形式的担保。申请人在30日扣船期限届满前,以被申请人为被告,于1991年4月8日向大连海事法院提起供应物料合同费用纠纷的诉讼。大连海事法院审查认为,该案符合《最高人民法
After receiving the notice, the defendant reached a mediation agreement with the plaintiff upon negotiations. The defendant paid off all owed money. Thereafter, on the ground that the creditor's right had been realized, the plaintiff submitted an application for withdrawal of litigation to the Dalian Maritime Court on April 12. 关于诉讼前扣押船舶的具体规定》第六条第三款的规定,于4月9日决定立案审理,并于4月11日向被告发出应诉通知书。
Upon examining the application for withdrawal of litigation, the Dalian Maritime Court believed that the right and obligation of both parties have been fully realized, therefore, pursuant to the provision of Article 131 (1) of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, on April 12, the court decided to approve the plaintiff to withdraw the lawsuit, and the president of the court issued an order of releasing the seizure of the ship “Bay Grain.”

 被告接到应诉通知书后,经与原告协商,双方达成和解协议,被告付清了全部欠款。随后,原告以其债权已得到满足为由,于4月12日向大连海事法院递交了撤诉申请书。
 大连海事法院审查了原告的撤诉申请后,认为当事人双方合法的权利义务已经实现,依照《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第一百三十一条北大法宝,版权所有第一款的规定,于4月12日裁定准予原告撤诉,同时由院长签发了解除扣押“海湾谷物”号轮的命令。
 

     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese