|
|
|
|
|
Xinjiang Lingang Resources Investment Co., Ltd. v. Sichuan Jinhe Mining Co., Ltd. (case of dispute over cooperative exploration in special areas)
(case of dispute over cooperative exploration in special areas)
四川金核矿业有限公司与新疆临钢资源投资股份有限公司特殊区域合作勘查合同纠纷案
|
[Key Terms]
mining activities ; the ecology ; prohibitive provisions ; null and void contract
[核心术语]
矿业活动;生态环境;禁止性规定;合同无效
|
[Disputed Issues]
The contract concluded in violation of prohibitive legal provisions on conducting mining activities in the nature ecological reserve is null and void.
[争议焦点]
自然生态环境保护区内进行矿业活动，违法法律禁止性规定，签订的合同无效
|
[Case Summary]
A contract in violation of mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations is null and void. Such activities as felling mining quarrying...
[案例要旨]
违反法律、行政法规的强制性规定的合同无效。我国法律规定禁止在自然保护区内进行砍伐、开矿、采石、挖沙等对损害自然环境和生态造成严重破坏损害环境公共利益的活动。当事人之间签订的在自然保护区的勘查、开采矿产资源合同即使已经得到国土资源主管部门批准...
|
| Xinjiang Lingang Resources Investment Co. v. Sichuan Jinhe Mining Co. (case of dispute over cooperative exploration in special areas) | | 四川金核矿业有限公司与新疆临钢资源投资股份有限公司特殊区域合作勘查合同纠纷案 |
| [Judgement Abstract] | | 【裁判摘要】 |
| A contract between relevant parties for the exploration and exploitation of mineral resources in areas such as natural reserves, tourist attractions, key ecological function zones, ecologically and environmentally sensitive areas, and vulnerable areas shall be deemed as null and void if it goes against mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, or damages environmental public interests. Even though the prohibitive provisions in laws and regulations on environment and resources do not explicitly state that a contract should be deemed null and void once it violates those provisions, the contract should be eventually deemed as null and void when its continued performance, since it's first deemed valid, is detrimental to the environmental public interests. | | 当事人关于在自然保护区、风景名胜区、重点生态功能区、生态环境敏感区和脆弱区等区域内勘查开采矿产资源的合同约定，不得违反法律、行政法规的强制性规定或者损害环境公共利益，否则应依法认定无效。环境资源法律法规中的禁止性规定，即便未明确违反相关规定将导致合同无效。但若认定合同有效并继续履行将损害环境公共利益的，应当认定合同无效。 |
| The Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China | | 中华人民共和国最高人民法院 |
| Civil Judgment | | 民事判决书 |
| (2015) Min Er Zhong Zi No.167 | | (2015)民二终字第167号 |
| Appellant (Defendant in the first instance, plaintiff in counterclaim): Xinjiang Lingang Resources Investment Co. Domicile: Room 1, 35th Floor Zhongtian Square, No. 165 Xinhua Beilu, Tianshan District, Urumqi, Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. | | 上诉人（一审被告、反诉原告）：新疆临钢资源投资股份有限公司。 |
| Legal representative: XU Xiangdong, Chairman of the Board of the Company. | | 法定代表人：徐向东，该公司董事长。 |
| Attorney: LI Yong, lawyer, Beijing JunHe Law Firm. | | 委托代理人：李勇，北京市君合律师事务所律师。 |
| Attorney: ZHENG Yuejie, lawyer, Beijing JunHe Law Firm. | | 委托代理人：郑跃杰，北京市君合律师事务所律师。 |
| Appellee (Plaintiff in the first instance, defendant in counterclaim)：Sichuan Jinhe Mining Co. Domicile: Longtan Industrial Park, Section 2, East 3rd Ring Road, Chenghua District, Chengdu, Sichuan Province. | | 被上诉人（一审原告、反诉被告）：四川金核矿业有限公司。 |
| Legal Representative: PAN Yanghui, general manager of the company. | | 法定代表人：潘杨辉，该公司总经理。 |
| Appointed Representative: LIU Bing, employee of the company. | | 委托代理人：刘兵，该公司工作人员。 |
| Attorney: DENG Xueqiang, lawyer. Sichuan Mingju Law Firm. | | 委托代理人：邓学强，四川明炬律师事务所律师。 |
| Unsatisfied with the civil judgement (2014) Xin Min Chu Zi No.13 by High People's Court of Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region for the lawsuit concerning contractual dispute between Xinjiang Lingang Resources Co. Ltd. (henceforth Lingang Co.,Ltd.) and Sichuan Jinhe Mining Co. (henceforth Jinhe Co.,Ltd.), Ligang Co.,Ltd. the appellant, appealed to this court against Jinhe Co.,Ltd. the appellee. In accordance with the relevant law, this court established a collegiate panel, and tried the case publicly on August 8, 2015. XU Xiangdong, the legal representative of Lingang Co.,Ltd. and its attorneys LI Yong and ZHENG Yuejie, as well as LIU Bing and DENG Xueqiang, the appointed representative the attorney of Jinhe Co. were present in the litigation. The case has now been completed. | | 上诉人新疆临钢资源投资股份有限公司（以下简称临钢公司）因与被上诉人四川金核矿业有限公司（以下简称金核公司）合同纠纷一案，不服新疆维吾尔自治区高级人民法院（2014）新民二初字第13号民事判决，向本院提起上诉。本院依法组成合议庭，于2015年8月18日公开开庭审理了本案。临钢公司的法定代表人徐向东及委托代理人李勇、郑跃杰，金核公司的委托代理人刘兵、邓学强到庭参加诉讼。本案现已审理终结。 |
| Through trial, the court of the first instance found that: On October 10, 2011, Lingang Co.,Ltd. (Party A) signed a Cooperation Agreement on joint prospecting and exploration of the Uruke Pb－polymetallic Mine, Taxkorgan County, Xinjiang Autonomous Region (henceforth “Joint Prospecting and Exploration Agreement”) with Jinhe Co.,Ltd. (Party B), which stipulated the following: upon compensation of CNY 35 million from Party A, Party B shall transfer its prospecting and exploration rights on the Uruke Pb － polymetallic of Xinjiang Taxkorgan County (henceforth “mineral rights”) to a project company co－established by Party A and Party B in accordance with the consideration and other rules and terms stipulated under the agreement. With Party A agreeing to pay in cash and Party B agreeing to contribute its mineral rights, the provisional registered capital of the joint project company shall be CNY 10 million, with Party A owning 80% of the venture, and Party B owning 20% of the venture. Party A shall then fund the prospecting, general exploration and exploration of the mine, and the outcome as well as the risks thereof shall be owned and borne by the project company. Prior to the official transfer of mineral rights, Party A shall entrust Party B to hold the mineral rights. Should all conditions for the transfer of mineral rights be met, Party B shall transfer its mineral rights to the project company. Prior to the official completion of the rights transfer, Party B shall be responsible to ensure that its mineral rights are effective and legal, including but not limited to actions such as renewal of the exploration permit, passing annual inspections and submission of required documents to competent government departments. After the agreement takes effect, Party A shall fund the subsequent prospecting, general exploration and exploration of the mine, and Party B shall no longer be contributing funds until completion of the mine exploration. All outcomes from the exploration funded by Party A shall be owned by the project company. According to the agreement, the fulfillment of Party A's obligation, including compensation to Party B for its transfer of mineral rights and funding to the project company for subsequent exploration, and the fulfillment of Party B's obligation, i．e., transfer of mineral rights to Party A, are preconditions for each other. Within fifteen (15) days after the signature of the agreement, Party A shall make a lump sum payment of CNY 35 million to the account provided by Party B as earnest money. Upon completion of rights transfer to the project company, the earnest money shall then be officially deemed as compensation from Party A to Party B for the price of the mineral rights under the cooperation agreement. Both parties agreed to pay respective taxes incurred in connection with the signing and execution of the agreement. All expenses incurred by the preparation, signing and execution of the agreement as well as other non － tax expenses and payments associated with the mineral rights referred to under the agreement shall be equally shared by both Parties. Party B guaranteed and promised to Party A the following: It first received its permit for reconnaissance rights for the Uruke Pb － polymetallic Mine in Taxkorgan County from the Land Resoures Bureau of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region on December 30, 2008. On January 26, 2011, the right was renewed and was upgraded to the right for prospecting, ie., the “prospecting right for the Uruke Lead Polymetallic Mine in Taxkorgan County, Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. ”， for which the Permit for Prospecting was granted, whose registration number was T65120081202022682. The permit covered a mining area of 31.28 sq.km with valid period from January 26, 2011 to January 26, 2013. Party B also undertook that the ownership of the aforementioned permit for prospecting was clear, complete and without dispute, and that there was no mortgage or collateral associated with it. Furthermore, Party B undertook that the permit was obtained in accordance with relevant laws and regulations, and that it carried with it legal rights and authorization afforded at both the national and local levels, and that it did not carry with it any of the conditions for withdrawal by the Land Resources Management Authorities, including being located in a glacier protection area, national reserve or scenic area that may affect the exploration of the mine. Party A guaranteed and promised Party B the following: It would accelerate prospecting work at the mine after the signing of the agreement, and that it would provide all finances toward the subsequent prospecting, general exploration and exploration. All funds needed after the completion of the exploration work shall be provided in proportion to the size of share in the venture. An offending party would be considered to be in breach of agreement under any of the following situations: should one party violate any of the clauses of the agreement; should one party breach any statement, guarantee or promise made in the agreement, or should the party make a false, erroneous or misleading statement, guarantee or promise in the agreement; should one party directly or indirectly sell the mineral rights to a third party without prior consent from the other party to the agreement; should one party be in breach of the agreement, the other party shall have the right to request immediate termination of the agreement，and/or request the other side to assume legal liability and provide compensation for all damages (including, but not limited to litigation and attorneys' fees). The agreement may be terminated or canceled for any of the following reasons: upon written agreement by both parties on the termination of the contract in a situation of force majeure; upon mutual agreement by both parties to terminate the contract; should one party be in breach the agreement and affect the ability of the other party to achieve its goals under the agreement, the complying party may request termination of the agreement. In addition, both parties have reached consensus regarding secrecy, notification and other issues relating to the agreement. The agreement shall come into force upon written signature by both parties. | | 一审法院经审理查明：2011年10月10日，临钢公司（甲方）与金核公司（乙方）签订《新疆塔什库尔干县乌如克铅多金属矿普查探矿权合作勘查开发协议》（以下简称《合作勘查开发协议》），双方约定，甲方补偿乙方3500万元后，乙方愿意以本协议规定之对价及本协议所规定的其他条款和条件将其持有的新疆塔什库尔干县乌如克铅多金属矿普查探矿权（以下简称矿权）注入甲乙双方设立的项目公司，该项目公司甲方以现金出资、乙方以持有矿权出资共同设立，公司注册资本暂定为1000万元，其中甲方占80%，乙方占20%。之后由甲方出资对该矿进行普查、详查、勘探工作，相关成果由项目公司享有，相关风险由项目公司承担。在标的矿权未办理过户手续之前，甲方委托乙方代为持有该矿的矿权；在该标的矿权达到办理过户条件后，乙方直接将该标的矿权过户给项目公司。未办理过户手续之前，乙方负责标的矿权的维护工作，包括但不限于矿证有效期限的延续、年检、向有关部门报送相关资料等。本协议生效后，标的矿权的后续普查、详查、勘探工作均由甲方出资进行，在勘探阶段工作结束之前，乙方不再投入资金；由甲方出资进行的勘查工作成果由项目公司享有。甲方支付乙方标的矿权合作补偿款并向项目公司注入后续勘查资金与乙方将标的矿权转到项目公司并合作开发是不可分割的部分，两者互为条件。协议签订后15日内，甲方一次性支付定金3500万元到乙方指定账户；在标的矿权过户到项目公司的登记手续完成之日，该定金即直接转为甲方支付给乙方的矿权合作补偿价款。双方按法律法规的规定各自负担因订立和履行本协议而发生的税赋。因准备、订立及履行本协议而发生的费用及本协议所述的矿权发生的税务以外的费用和支出由甲乙双方均摊。乙方向甲方保证和承诺：乙方于2008年12月30日首次取得由新疆维吾尔自治区国土资源厅颁发的新疆塔什库尔干县乌如克铅多金属矿预查探矿权，2011年1月26日正常延续并升级为普查，现名称为新疆塔什库尔干县乌如克铅多金属矿普查探矿权，《探矿权许可证》证号为：T65120081202022682，矿区面积为31.28平方公里，该探矿证有效期自2011年1月26日至2013年1月26日止。乙方保证取得的上述探矿证权属清晰、完整，不存在其他权利争议，亦不存在任何抵押等情况，该探矿证符合法律法规的取得条件，也拥有国家法律和地方法规所应具备的权利和许可，不存在可能被国土资源管理部门吊销《探矿许可证》等不确定事项，不在冰川保护区、自然保护区、风景区等可能影响矿山开发的区域范围内。甲方向乙方保证和承诺：甲方保证在本协议签订后即加快标的矿权的勘查工作，甲方保证标的矿权的后续普查、详查、勘探阶段的全部资金投入，在该矿完成勘探阶段之后的后续投入资金由全体股东按照股权比例承担。如发生以下任何一事件则构成该方违约：任何一方违反本协议的任何条款；任何一方违反其在本协议中作出的任何陈述、保证或承诺，或任何一方在本协议中作出的任何陈述、保证或承诺被认定为不真实、不正确或有误导成分；一方在未事先得到另一方同意的情况下，直接或间接出售所持有的标的矿权给第三方；如任何一方违约，另一方有权要求即时终止本协议及／或按照法律规定要求其承担违约责任，赔偿由此而造成的一切损失（包括但不限于诉讼费、律师费等）。本协议因下列原因而终止或解除：因不可抗力导致本协议无法履行，经双方书面确认后本协议终止；双方协商一致终止本协议；一方严重违反本协议，导致另一方不能实现协议目的，守约方有权解除本协议。同时，双方还对保密、通知等其他事项进行了约定。本协议在双方签字盖章后生效。 |
| On October 25, 2011, Lingang Co.,Ltd. paid Jinhe Co.,Ltd. in the amount of CNY 35 million through bank transfer, for which Jinhe Co.,Ltd. provided receipt. | | 2011年10月25日，临钢公司通过银行转账方式向金核公司支付3500万元，金核公司向其出具了收据。 |
| On April 28, 2012, Lingang Co.,Ltd. signed a Contract for Geological Prospecting Project with the Sichuan Provincial Institute of Nuclear Geology (henceforth Geology Institute), which stipulates the following: Lingang Co.,Ltd. would entrust the Geology Institute to conduct a geological survey of the Uruke iron polymetallic mining site in Taxkorgan, and provide a final written report, original materials, results, photographs and graphics and electronic copies to Lingang Co. rights to all of which belong to the Lingang Co. The reports shall not be shared with a third party. The contract shall be effective from December 20, 2011 to December 30, 2012, and the total amount of the contract shall be CNY 10,960,500. The contract also contains stipulations regarding settlement and payment of accounts, technical standards, potential breach of contract, changes to the contract as well as dispute settlement mechanisms. The contract was carried out as stipulated. | | 2012年4月28日，临钢公司与四川省核工业地质调查院（以下简称地质调查院）签订《地质勘查项目合同书》，约定：临钢公司委托地质调查院对新疆塔什库尔干县乌如克铁多金属矿进行地质勘查，并提交终审成果报告、原始资料、成果、相关图件及电子文档，所有资料的所属权归临钢公司，地质调查院不得向任何第三方泄露；合同工期：2011年12月20日至2012年12月30日止；合同价格：预算合同价款10960500元（壹仟零玖拾陆万伍佰元整）。同时，双方还对结算与付款、技术标准和要求、违约责任、合同的变更和终止及争端的解决等事项进行了约定。该合同已实际履行。 |
| On July 1, 2013, the Lingang Co. signed another Contract for Geological Prospecting Project with the Geology Institute, stipulating the following: that the Lingang Co. would entrust the geology institute to conduct a geological survey of the Uruke iron polymetallic mining site in Taxkorgan, Xinjiang Autonomous Region and provide a final written report, original materials, results, photographs and graphics and electronic copies to Lingang Co. rights to all of which belong to Lingang Co. The reports shall not be shared with a third party. The contract shall be effective from January 1, 2013 to December 30, 2013, and the total amount of the contract shall be CNY 10,484,200. The contract also contains stipulations regarding settlement and payment of accounts, technical standards, potential breach of contract, changes to the contract as well as dispute settlement mechanisms. | | 2013年7月1日，临钢公司与地质调查院签订《地质勘查项目合同书》，约定：临钢公司委托地质调查院对新疆塔什库尔干县乌如克铁多金属矿进行地质勘查，并提交终审成果报告及完整的所有原始资料，勘查工作所形成的所有原始资料、成果、报告及电子文档归临钢公司所有，地质调查院不得向任何第三方泄露；合同工期：2013年1月1日至2013年12月30日止；合同价格：预算合同价款10484200元（壹仟零肆拾捌万肆仟贰佰元整）。同时，双方还对结算与付款、技术标准和要求、违约责任、合同的变更和终止及争端的解决等事项进行了约定。 |
| On July 23, 2013, the Taxkorgan County Jinhe Kunlun Resources Investment Co. (henceforth the Project Company) was established. | | 2013年7月23日，塔什库尔干县金核昆仑资源投资有限责任公司（以下简称项目公司）成立。 |
| On November 22, 2013, Lingang Co. submitted to Jinhe Co. a Letter on the termination of the “Cooperation Agreement on joint prospecting and exploration of the Uruke Pb － polymetallic Mine, Taxkorgan County, Xinjiang Autonomous Region ” (henceforth the Letter on Termination). The letter stated the following: that recently, Lingang Co. was shocked to learn from relevant authorities that the site of the Uruke mine project was located in the central part of the Xinjiang Taxkorgan Wildlife Nature Reserve (henceforth Nature Reserve), a fact which, up to that point, Jinhe Co. had not informed Lingang Co. According to Articles 6 and 7 of the Joint Prospecting and Exploration Agreement, this constitutes a breach of agreement by Jinhe Co. By then, Lingang Co. has made the down payment for cooperation of CNY 35 million in accordance with the agreement, and the investment of around CNY 17 million for the construction of roads, mining equipment, geological prospecting. Other relevant expenses by Lingang Co. have added up to nearly CNY 10 million. Through deliberation, Lingang Co. decided to terminate the agreement with the expectation that Jinhe Co. would assume legal liability in accordance with the contract. | | 2013年11月22日，临钢公司向金核公司出具《关于解除﹤新疆塔什库尔干县乌如克铅多金属矿普查探矿权合作勘查开发协议﹥的函》（以下简称《解除函》），主要内容为：近期，临钢公司从有关部门惊悉案涉合作开发的项目位于新疆塔什库尔干野生动物自然保护区（以下简称保护区）中心区域，金核公司自合作至今未告知临钢公司。根据《合作勘查开发协议》第六条、第七条的规定，金核公司的行为已构成违约。为履行协议，临钢公司已向金核公司支付合作定金3500万元，并投入约1700万元用于矿山的道路建设、矿山建设、地质勘查、道路通行费等项目，相关支出资金成本也近1000万元。经研究，临钢公司决定终止合作，解除双方之间签订的《合作勘查开发协议》，望金核公司依《合作勘查开发协议》相关规定，承担相应责任。 |
| On December 30, 2013, Jinhe Co. submitted an official Response to Lingang Co.'s Letter on the termination of the “Cooperation Agreement on joint prospecting and exploration of the Uruke Pb－polymetallic Mine, Taxkorgan County, Xinjiang Autonomous Region” (henceforth referred to as the Response). The Response stated the following: Jinhe received the Letter on Termination from Lingang Co.. Through consultation with relevant authorities, Jinhe learned that the Reserve had been established well before Jinhe acquired its permit for mineral rights for the first time on December 26, 2008. Between December 30, 2008 and January 26, 2011, the mineral rights passed the annual inspections carried out by the Land Resoures Bureau of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, and were upgraded to general exploration (rights). The mineral rights were again renewed on April 9, 2013, which was after the signing of the Joint Prospecting and Exploration Agreement and the start of the cooperation between both parties on exploration. It had been approximately five years since Jinhe acquired the permit (during which the partnership between Lingang Co. and Jinhe Co. had lasted for over two years). During this period, no authorities notified Jinhe Co. of the issue of the mining site's location in a nature reserve, and cooperation between the two companies was never affected. Hence there was no indication of Jinhe Co.'s knowingly withholding information regarding the mine's location in a nature reserve to Lingang Co. It was because Jinhe Co. was unaware of the aforementioned situation that it signed the agreement with Lingang Co. with the language in Article 6 concerning “statements and guaranties.” Because of information failure concerning the existence of the Nature Reserve, and because that the mineral rights were acquired and renewed legally by Party B, the two sides signed the joint prospecting and exploration agreement unaware of the aforementioned situation. Jinhe Co. did not knowingly withhold information from Lingang Co. or made an unfavorable guarantee to Lingang Co. Moreover, the mining permit was obtained and renewed legally and passed all annual inspections. Thus, even if the mine was located in a protected area, as long as both sides followed local rules and regulations, it would not affect the partnership between Jinhe and Lingang. In the two years of amicable cooperation between the two companies since the signing of the agreement, Jinhe was committed to ensure the mineral rights for Uruke mine were legal and effective in good faith, and in April 2013 the rights were renewed with approval from relevant authorities. In addition, the response argued that Jinhe Co. as promised, paid the CNY 2 million for the establishment of the project company, which was then operational and running smoothly. The objective of the agreement between the two parties was to engage in mining development —neither party received any prohibitory notices from government authorities, and that therefore, the two sides shall continue the mining exploration in friendly cooperation. | | 2013年12月30日，金核公司向临钢公司出具《关于继续履行﹤新疆塔什库尔干县乌如克铅多金属矿普查探矿权合作勘查开发协议﹥的复函》（以下简称《复函》），主要内容为：临钢公司的《解除函》已收悉。经向相关部门核实，早在金核公司2008年12月26日首次取得矿权前，保护区就已设立。自2008年12月30日至2011年1月26日止，矿权通过了自治区国土资源厅的正常年检，并延续升级为普查。双方签订《合作勘查开发协议》并合作勘查后，矿权于2013年4月9日再次获得正常延续，前后将近五年的时间（双方合作勘查也已两年多时间）。在此期间，无任何部门或机构就保护区事宜告知过金核公司，双方合作两年多的矿权勘查工作也未受到任何影响。故不存在金核公司明知矿权位于保护区而隐瞒不告知临钢公司。正因金核公司不明知前述情况，才会接受临钢公司提供的合作勘查协议文本第六条中关于保护区的“陈述和保证”条款的约定。由于获知保护区相关信息渠道的不对称，加之矿权自合法取得、正常年检延续之事宜，导致双方在订立和履行《合作勘查开发协议》时均未注意到前述情形。金核公司不存在明知矿权位于保护区而隐瞒不告知临钢公司，更不会在明知的情形下还在协议中作出不利的保证。矿权从取得到正常年检、延续获得批准，其真实合法性不存在任何问题，只要双方按照相关地方性法规的规定履行相关的审批手续，则矿权位于保护区的非核心区域的状态，对双方后续的合作勘查开发，继续履行协议不构成实质性的障碍。自双方签订协议友好合作两年多以来，金核公司代为持有矿权期间，按约切实履行了对矿权的维护工作，矿权在2013年4月顺利延续。同时，金核公司按约履行了设立项目公司的200万元出资义务。现项目公司已设立，各项工作依次展开，双方订立合同的目的是为了矿权的矿产开发，到目前为止未有管理部门对该项目的矿产开发明确禁止，故双方应继续友好合作，推进矿权的矿产开发工作。 |
| On December 6, 2013, the Wildlife and Nature Reserve Administration Bureau of Xinjiang Taxkorgan County (henceforth Nature Reserve Bureau) produced documentation confirming the following: that the Nature Reserve Bureau mapped the location of the mine site according to the information provided by Jinhe Co. from Xinjiang Bureau of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation, which they found to be located within the Nature Reserve. | | 2013年12月6日，新疆塔什库尔干野生动物自然保护区管理局（以下简称保护区管理局）出具证明，主要内容为：保护区管理局根据金核公司提供的新疆维吾尔自治区基础地理信息中心新疆塔什库尔干县乌如克铅多金属矿预查转换坐标，对该坐标上图至保护区功能区划图，所属区域均在保护区范围内。 |
| It was also revealed that Lingang Co. paid CNY 200,000 in attorney fees for this litigation. | | 另查明，临钢公司为本案诉讼已支付律师费20万元。 |
| Jinhe Co. filed a suit at the court of first instance, claiming the following: After Lingang Co. signed the Joint Prospecting and Exploration Agreement with Jinhe Co. they found that the mine site's location in a Nature Reserve violated Article 6.2.3 of the Agreement, which stated that the mining site shall not be located in a glacier protection area, nature reserve or scenic area. Jinhe Co. argued that the Agreement was signed in good faith by both parties, and the project had already materialized, and that therefore Lingang Co.'s request for termination of the agreement has no grounding. Jinhe Co. therefore requested：1) that Lingang Co.'s termination of the Joint Prospecting and Exploration Agreement be nullified; and 2) and that because the agreement was still valid, Jinhe Co. was not obligated to return the CNY 35 million paid by Lingang to Jinhe. It also requested that Lingang cover all costs related to this litigation. | | 金核公司向一审法院提起诉讼称：临钢公司与其签订《合作勘查开发协议》后，认为双方合作开发的项目位于保护区，违反了协议第6.2.3条“不在冰川保护区、自然保护区、风景区等可能影响矿山开发的区域范围内”的约定，提出解除协议。金核公司认为，该协议系双方真实意思表示，且已实际履行，临钢公司此时提出解除合同的理由不能成立。请求：1、确认临钢公司解除《合作勘查开发协议》的行为无效；2、确认《合作勘查开发协议》有效，金核公司无需退还临钢公司已支付的矿权合作补偿价款3500万元。本案诉讼费用由临钢公司承担。 |
| Lingang Co. responded with the following: Jinhe Co.'s lawsuit had no legal grounding, and should be rejected by the court. It maintained that based on the clear language of Articles 6 and 7 of the Joint Prospecting and Exploration Agreement, the condition for termination of the agreement had been satisfied and that Lingang's request for termination of the agreement had solid legal grounding. Lingang also maintained that the second claim made by Jinhe was legally groundless, i．e. that because Lingang Co. had already exercised the right of termination in accordance with the agreement, Jinhe shall reimburse the CNY 35 million in full, and that the liable party for litigation fees shall be determined by the court in accordance with the law. | | 临钢公司答辩称：金核公司的诉讼请求无法定依据，应予驳回。根据协议第六条、第七条的明确约定，该协议的解除条件已经成就，临钢公司解除合同有约定依据。金核公司的第二项诉讼请求没有意义，临钢公司已依约行使解除权，金核公司应当返还3500万元合作补偿款，诉讼费用由法院依法裁判。 |
Lingang Co. filed a countersuit in the court of the first instance claiming the following: After signing the Joint Prospecting and Exploration Agreement, Lingang Co. acted in full compliance with the provisions of the Agreement, but that Jinhe Co. had not kept, in good faith, its commitment and guarantees. In 2013, Lingang Co. received notice that the site(s) of mining exploration were located entirely within the Nature Reserve. According to Article 7.1.2. of the Agreement, “if either party breaches a promise, commitment or guarantee, or if the party makes a false, inaccurate or misleading commitment or guarantee ，” the other party, according to Article 7.2, shall have the right to terminate the contract and, furthermore, the violating party shall be required to pay compensation for any economic losses incurred. Jinhe Co. should therefore be required to reimburse Lingang for losses incurred. Lingang Co. requested Jinhe Co. to: 1) officially terminate the Joint Prospecting and Exploration Agreement signed by the two parties; 2) return to Lingang Co. the compensation payment for price of the transfer of mining rights in the amount of CNY 35 million; 3) compensate Lingang in the amount of CNY 3,288,150 for prospecting costs, CNY 5,538,600 for the cost of road construction, losses in the amount of CNY 1.5 million for road maintenance, as well as project and management costs amounting to CNY 5,538,600; 4)compensate interests accrued by Lingang Co. in the amount of CNY 10,843,256.77; 5) reimburse Lingang Co. CNY 429,161.32 in attorney fees, and CNY 700,000 as security for litigation fees. In total, Jinhe Co. should pay CNY 63,001,425.09 to Lingang Co. as compensation. Lingang Co. also maintained that Jinhe Co. should pay all costs associated with litigation. Following the trial of the first instance Lingang Co. changed its request for compensation of interests from CNY 10,843,256.77 to CNY 9,465,104.15. They also removed their claim for reimbursement of CNY 700,000 in security for litigation fees.
．．．．．． | | 临钢公司向一审法院提起反诉称：《合作勘查开发协议》签订后，临钢公司依约履行了相关合同义务，但金核公司却未诚信作出陈述和保证。2013年，临钢公司得知合作矿权项下的勘查区块所属区域均在保护区范围内。依照协议第7.1.2条关于“任何一方违反其在协议中作出的陈述、保证或承诺，或任何一方在本协议中作出的任何陈述、保证或承诺被认定为不真实、不准确或有误导成分”，均构成违约以及第7.2条关于“如任何一方违约，另一方有权要求即时终止本协议及／或按照法律规定要求其承担违约责任、赔偿由此而造成的一切损失（包括但不限于诉讼费、律师费等）”的约定，金核公司应当向临钢公司承担返还财产、赔偿损失等违约责任。请求判令：1、解除双方签订的《合作勘查开发协议》；2、金核公司向临钢公司返还矿权合作补偿价款3500万元；3、金核公司赔偿临钢公司支出的勘查费用损失3288150元，修路费用损失5538600元，矿山道路通行维护费损失150万元，工程费用、管理费用等损失5702257元；4、金核公司赔偿临钢公司利息损失10843256.77元；5、金核公司赔偿临钢公司律师费用损失429161.32元、担保费用损失70万元，以上共计：63001425.09元。本案诉讼费用由金核公司承担。一审庭审后，临钢公司根据在庭审中的举证情况，将其诉讼请求第（四）项的利息损失10843256.77元变更为9465104.15元，同时放弃了第五项诉讼请求中担保费用损失70万元的部分。
．．．．．． |
|
Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.
1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.
2. Binding to the account with access to this database.
3. Apply for a trial account.
4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【￥1200.00】 for your single purchase. | |
您好：您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
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。
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|