>>>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
 
Huitong Sub-branch v. Fulida Company (Dispute over Contract on Mortgage of Real Right for Usufruct)
汇通支行诉富利达公司用益物权抵押合同纠纷案
【法宝引证码】

Huitong Sub-branch v. Fulida Company (Dispute over Contract on Mortgage of Real Right for Usufruct)
(Dispute over Contract on Mortgage of Real Right for Usufruct)
汇通支行诉富利达公司用益物权抵押合同纠纷案

Huitong Sub-branch v. Fulida Company
(Dispute over Contract on Mortgage of Real Right for Usufruct)

 

汇通支行诉富利达公司

 用益物权抵押合同纠纷案
BASIC FACTS 
Plaintiff: Bank of Communications, Harbin Branch, Huitong Sub-branch. 原告:交通银行哈尔滨分行汇通支行。
Person-in-charge: Zhu Bohua, president. 负责人:朱伯华,行长。
Authorized Agent: Chen Huaiqing and Wang Guoyun, employees of Bank of Communications, Harbin Branch, Huitong Sub-branch. 委托代理人:陈怀庆、王国云,交通银行哈尔滨分行汇通支行职员。
Defendant: Heilongjiang Harbin Fulida Public Facilities Company Limited. 被告:黑龙江省哈尔滨市富利达公共设施有限公司。
Legal Representative: Li Baojun, general manager. 法定代表人:李宝钧,总经理。
Bank of Communications, Harbin Branch, Huitong Sub-branch (the plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as Huitong Sub-branch) brought a lawsuit with the Higher People's Court of Heilongjiang Province (hereinafter referred to as Heilongjiang Higher Court) against Heilongjiang Harbin Fulida Public Facilities Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as Fulida Company) due to a dispute over a contract on mortgage of real right for usufruct. 原告交通银行哈尔滨分行汇通支行(以下简称汇通支行)因与被告黑龙江省哈尔滨市富利达公共设施有限公司(以下简称富利达公司)发生用益物权抵押合同纠纷,向黑龙江省高级人民法院提起诉讼。
Huitong Sub-branch alleged: Fulida Company borrowed CNY 6.1 million and USD 1 million from our bank, providing its management right and lease right over Fulida Underground Commerce and Trade Mall as a mortgage of the loans. After expiry of the term of the loans, our bank demanded repayment for many times, but Fulida Company has not repaid the principal and part of the interest thus far. Huitong Sub-branch pleaded the court to order Fulida Company to repay the principal and the interest. If Fulida Company failed to repay them, it should assign the management right and lease right over Fulida Underground Commerce and Trade Mall to our bank as agreed upon between us, and should bear the litigation costs for the present case. 原告诉称:被告向我行借款人民币610万元和美元100万元,以其对富利达地下商贸城享有的管理权和出租权作为借款抵押担保。借款期满后,虽经我行多次催收,被告至今仍欠本金及部分利息未还。请求法院判令被告偿还借款本金及利息。被告如不能偿还,应当按照约定将富利达地下商贸城的管理权、出租权转给我行行使,并承担本案诉讼费用。
...... 被告未作答辩。
 黑龙江省高级人民法院经审理查明:1995年10月31日,被告富利达公司为装修富利达地下商贸城,与原告汇通支行签订了两份借款合同,约定:汇通支行分别借给富利达公司人民币610万元、美元100万元。人民币借款以月利率10.98‰计息,美元借款为年利率7.2%计息。借款期限分别为4个月、5个月。双方同时签订了两份抵押合同,约定:富利达公司以其对富利达地下商贸城(面积1万平方米)拥的管理权和出租权分别为这两笔借款进行抵押担保。汇通支行于签约当日分三次向富利达公司发放了人民币610万元和美元100万元的贷款。这笔借款到期后,汇通支行仅收回利息人民币113862.60元和美元11243.84元。至1997年9月20日,富利达公司欠汇通支行借款本金人民币610万元、美元100万元,利息人民币1726128.3元、美元146860.28元。汇通支行因此提起诉讼。
 另查明:座落于哈尔滨火车站站前广场西北部的富利达地下商贸城(面积11178平方米),是哈尔滨市人民政府有关部门修建的地下设施。在修建过程中,被告富利达公司的前身哈尔滨太和珠宝有限公司曾投资约5000万元参与建设,哈尔滨市人民政府有关部门为此于1993年下达文件确定:该项设施的产权归国家所有,富利达公司对投入建设部分有长期使用管理权、出租权。市人民政府有关部门对富利达地下商贸城的长期使用管理权、出租权因现在的权利人不能履行债务而转移给他人行使一事,表示同意。
 
 黑龙江省高级人民法院认为:原告汇通支行与被告富利达公司签订的两分借款合同,符合《借款合同条例》的规定,合法有效。富利达公司未偿还到期借款,是违约行为,依照《借款合同条例》第十六条的规定,应当承担偿还借款及利息的责任。
 ......

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 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: info@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 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@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