>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Sichuan Shengda Forestry Industry Co., Ltd. v. Singapore Shizheng Co., Ltd. (case of dispute over a pledge contract)
四川升达林业产业股份有限公司诉新加坡时正有限公司质押合同纠纷案
【法宝引证码】
*尊敬的用户,您好!本篇仅为该案例的英文摘要。北大法宝提供单独的翻译服务,如需整篇翻译,请发邮件至database@chinalawinfo.com,或致电86 (10) 8268-9699进行咨询。
*Dear user, this document contains only a summary of the respective judicial case. To request a full-text translation as an additional service, please contact us at:  + 86 (10) 8268-9699 database@chinalawinfo.com

Sichuan Shengda Forestry Industry Co., Ltd. v. Singapore Shizheng Co., Ltd. (case of dispute over a pledge contract)
(case of dispute over a pledge contract)
四川升达林业产业股份有限公司诉新加坡时正有限公司质押合同纠纷案
[Key Terms]
equity pledge ; pledge contract ; validity of a contract
[核心术语]
股权出质;质押合同;合同效力
[Disputed Issues]
The validity of the equity pledge contract shall not be affected if the equity is pledged again without the consent of the pledgee.
[争议焦点]
未经质权人同意擅自将股权再出质的,不影响股权质押合同的效力。
[Case Summary]
The re-pledge of a pledged equity is not prohibited in China's Guarantee Law and its judicial interpretations but the pledger shall assume the corresponding liabilities for any additional cost or risk incurred in the exercise of the pledgee's right due to his re-pledge without the consent of the former pledgee. However the validity of the pledge contract signed when the equity is pledged again shall not be affected by such act. Therefore as long as the equity pledge contract is the true will of both parties...
[案例要旨]
我国担保法及其司法解释并未禁止已出质股权的再出质行为对于未经质权人同意擅自将股权再出质从而导致质权人实现质权时额外增加成本或风险的出质人应当对此承担相应责任...

Full-text Omitted.

 

四川升达林业产业股份有限公司诉新加坡时正有限公司质押合同纠纷案


北京大学互联网法律中心法宝

 ——股份重复出质的行为不因未经前顺位质权人同意而当然无效

 关键词 股份 重复出质 未经 前顺位质权人同意
 不当然无效
 裁判规则
 1.出质人将已依法设定质权的股份进行重复质押,并不会影响前顺位质权的合法存续及权利的合法行使,股份重复出质的行为不因未经在先质权人同意而当然无效,权利人得依登记的先后确立竞存权利之间的优先顺位。
 2.后顺位质权人不知道股份已重复出质,且已尽到合理、必要注意义务的,在其实现质权落空时,可依据合同要求出质人承担相应的违约赔偿责任,赔偿金额应以实现质权时,落空部分的股份市场价值为依据确定。
 相关法条
 1.《中华人民共和国担保法请你喝茶》第七十八条
 2.《中华人民共和国合同法北京大学互联网法律中心》第一百一十三条第一款
 3.最高人民法院《关于适用<中华人民共和国担保法>若干问题的解释》第三十八条第一款
 案件索引
 一审:四川省成都市中级人民法院(2013)成民初字第1244号(2014年5月13日)
 二审:四川省高级人民法院(2014)川民终字第588号(2015年2月26日)
 基本案情
 2007年9月,四川锦丰纸业股份有限公司(以下简称锦丰纸业公司)为偿还中国光大银行成都分行(以下简称光大银行成都分行)的贷款,向光大银行成都分行申请人民币950万元借新还旧专项贷款,并请四川升达林业产业股份有限公司(以下简称升达公司)提供担保。2007年11月1日,锦丰纸业公司与光大银行成都分行签订人民币950万元的《借款合同》,借款期限一年。同日,升达公司与光大银行成都分行签订《保证合同》,为锦丰纸业公司的人民币950万元贷款提供连带责任保证担保。新加坡时正有限公司(以下简称时正公司)董事会同意以公司持有的四川玻璃股份有限公司(以下简称川玻股份公司)22163942股股份(股权证编号:00000246)为锦丰纸业公司向升达公司提供反担保。《反担保质押合同》约定:时正公司用其在川玻股份公司的22163942股股份及其派生的权益为锦丰纸业公司提供反担保,担保范围为升达公司代锦丰纸业公司清偿的全部债务,以及应由锦丰纸业公司支付给升达公司的代偿资金占用费。反担保期限从合同签订并办理质押手续起至2009年6月止。
 ......

Dear visitor, you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases. If you are not a subscriber, you can pay for a document through Online Pay and read it immediately after payment.
An entity user can apply for a trial account or contact us for your purchase.
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570712
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com

 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法律英文网会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容;
单位用户可申请试用或者来电咨询购买。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570712
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:database@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
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