>>>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
Zhao Ziwen v. Pan Riyang (Case about Disputes over Property Infringement)
  • Type of Dispute: Civil-->Property
  • Legal document: Ruling
  • Judgment date: 03-24-2010
  • Procedural status: Trial at Second Instance
  • Source: SPC Gazette,Issue 7,2010

Zhao Ziwen v. Pan Riyang (Case about Disputes over Property Infringement)





Supreme People's Court

Civil Ruling 民事裁定书
No. 17 [2010] Civil Division I, Final (2010)民一终字第17号
Appellant (defendant in the trial of first instance): Pan Riyang, male, Han Chinese, born on October 27, 1956, domiciled at Suite 302, Entrance 1, Building 18, Summit Residences, East Shangyi Street, Yuquan District, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. 上诉人(一审被告)潘日阳。
Appellee (plaintiff in the trial of first instance): Zhao Ziwen, male, Han Chinese, born on January 12, 1961, domiciled at Apartment 14, Entrance 3, 85th Building, Zhenhua Street, Datong, Shanxi Province. 被上诉人(一审原告)赵子文。
The appellant, Pan Riyang, lodged an appeal with this Court against the civil ruling (No.2 [2009] Civil Division I, First Instance, Higher People's Court of Shaanxi Province) rendered by the Higher People's Court of Shaanxi Province for the case about disputes over property infringement between him and the appellee, Zhao Ziwen. This Court formed a collegial panel according to law to try this case. So far, the trial of this case has concluded. 上诉人潘日阳为与被上诉人赵子文财产侵权纠纷一案,不服陕西省高级人民法院(2009)陕民一初字第2号民事裁定,向本院提起上诉。本院依法组成合议庭对本案进行了审理。本案现已审理终结。
...... 一审法院认为,本案诉讼标的额在 5000万元,双方当事人住所地均不在陕西地区,本案是否属于本院管辖的第一审民商事案件是双方当事人争议的焦点问题。根据最高人民法院《关于调整高级人民法院和中级人民法院管辖第一审民商事案件标准的通知》(法发[2008]10号)第一条第二款规定,该院可管辖诉讼标的额在1亿元以上的第一审民商事案件,以及诉讼标的额在5000万元以上且当事人一方住所地不在本辖区或者涉外、涉港澳台的第一审民商事案件。该条款的第二个案件管辖标准,既排除了可能存在的地方保护的因素,在一定程度上亦减少了当事人的诉讼成本,体现了司法的公正性。但对该条款中“且当事人一方住所地不在本辖区”,不能单纯地理解为只有一方当事人不在本辖区的情形,因为该条并未排除当事人双方均不在本辖区的情形。当事人双方住所地均不在本辖区的诉讼标的额在5000万元以上的民商事案件由该院审理,更有利于摆脱地方保护主义的影响。另,赵子文曾以法人名义就同一法律事实将潘日阳诉至该院,该院曾对此案进行过审理,结合本案实际情况,由该院审理此案更有利于查明案件事实,提高司法效率,依法保护当事人双方的合法权益,实现司法公正。综上,潘日阳要求将本案移送到榆林市中级人民法院审理的管辖权异议不能成立。依照《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第三十八条的规定,裁定驳回潘日阳对本案管辖权提出的异议。

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

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 13311570712
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
【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