>>>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
 
Liu Li v. Tao Li et al. for Recognition and Enforcement of a Civil Judgment of a Foreign Court
刘利与陶莉等申请承认和执行外国法院民事判决纠纷案
【法宝引证码】

Liu Li v. Tao Li et al. for Recognition and Enforcement of a Civil Judgment of a Foreign Court 刘利与陶莉等申请承认和执行外国法院民事判决纠纷案

Intermediate People's Court of Wuhan, Hubei Province

 湖北省武汉市中级人民法院

Civil Ruling
 民事裁定书
(No. 00026 [2015], civil and commercial, foreign-related, original, IPC, Wuhan, Hubei) (2015)鄂武汉中民商外初字第00026号
Applicant: Liu Li 申请人:刘利。
Represented by Chen Guanlin, attorney of Hunan Jinqiu Law Firm 委托诉讼代理人:陈观林,湖南金球律师事务所律师。
Respondent: Tao Li 被申请人:陶莉。
Represented by Chen Hang, attorney of Hubei S&H Law Firm 委托诉讼代理人:陈航,湖北山河律师事务律师。
Respondent: Tong Wu 被申请人:童武。
Represented by Chen Hang, attorney of Hubei S&H Law Firm 委托诉讼代理人:陈航,湖北山河律师事务律师。
PROCEDURAL POSTURE 
After accepting an application of Liu Li for recognition and enforcement of a civil judgment of a foreign court against Tao Li and Tong Wu on October 19, 2015, this Court formed a collegial bench as legally required, and held two sessions to examine the application on December 25, 2015, and March 15, 2016, respectively. Liu Li and her attorney, Chen Guanlin, and Tao Li and Tong Wu and their attorney, Chen Hang, attended the sessions. The hearing of the case has been concluded. 申请人刘利与被申请人陶莉、童武申请承认和执行外国法院民事判决一案,本院于2015年10月19日受理后,依法组成合议庭,于2015年12月25日、2016年3月15日组织听证会对该申请进行了审查。申请人刘利和其委托诉讼代理人陈观林,被申请人陶莉、童武的共同委托诉讼代理人陈航到庭参加听证会。本案现已审查终结。
BASIC FACTS 
Applicant Liu Li claims that: On September 22, 2013, she entered into an equity transfer agreement with the two respondents, under which the latter should transfer 50% of the shares of Jiajia Management Inc., an American company, to the applicant for 150,000 U.S. dollars. However, after Liu Li paid 125,000 U.S. dollars according to the agreement, the respondents disappeared with the money. Liu Li called the police, but they were nowhere to be found. Later, she lodged a lawsuit with the Los Angeles County Superior Court, CA, which decided in a judgment (No. EC062608) on July 24, 2015, that the respondents should refund 125,000 U.S. dollars to the applicant, with prejudgment interest (from September 25, 2013, to May 25, 2015) of 20,818 U.S. dollars and court costs of 1,674 U.S. dollars, totaling 147,492 U.S. dollars. The judgment has taken effect, but the respondents fail to comply with the judgment. The respondents, who now live in a condo located in Jianghan District, Wuhan, Hubei province, own property for enforcement. The American court's judgment No. EC062608 does not contravene the fundamental principles of Chinese law and the national interest and security and public interest of China. To protect the lawful rights and interests of the applicant, the applicant requests the court to: (1) recognize the legal force in the territory of the People's Republic of China of the judgment No. EC062608 of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, CA; (2) enforce the payment by the respondents to the applicant of 125,000 U.S. dollars with prejudgment interest (from September 25, 2013, to May 25, 2015) of 20,818 U.S. dollars and court costs of 1,674 U.S. dollars, totaling 147,492 U.S. dollars or 940,040.26 Chinese yuan (at the exchange rate on September 12, 2015), as well as post-judgment interest from May 25, 2015, to the end of the enforcement; and (3) order the respondents to assume the enforcement costs. 申请人刘利申请称:申请人与被申请人于2013年09年22日签订股权转让协议,被申请人以150000美元的价格将其在美国JIAJIAMANAGEMENTINC50%股权转让给申请人。在申请人依约支付125000美元后,被申请人携款潜逃。申请人在当地报警未果后依法向美国加利福尼亚州洛杉矶县高等法院提起诉讼,该院于2015年7月24日作出第EC062608号判决,判令被申请人返还申请人125000美元及审判前(2013年9月25日至2015年5月25日)利息20818美元和审判成本1674美元,总共147492美元。该判决已经生效,被申请人未按判决履行。被申请人现居住在湖北省武汉市江汉区唐家墩路15号武汉菱角湖万达广场B.C区7栋4层A室并有可供执行的财产。美国法院作出的EC062608号判决不违反我国法律的基本原则和国家主权、安全、社会利益,为维护申请人的合法权益,特请求裁定:1、承认美国加利福尼亚州洛杉矶县高等法院第EC062608号判决在中华人民共和国境内具有法律效力;2、依美国加利福尼亚州洛杉矶县高等法院第EC062608号判决内容强制被申请人给付申请人125000美元及审判前(2013年9月25日至2015年5月25日)利息20818美元和审判成本1674美元,总共147492美元,计人民币940040.26元(以2015年9月12日汇率)和2015年5月25日至执行终结前的逾期利息;3、由被申请人承担本案执行费用。
...... 被申请人陶莉和童武陈述意见称,1、美国加利福尼亚州洛杉矶县高等法院第EC062608号判决在中华人民共和国境内不具有法律效力,被申请人在美国法院诉讼时并未接到参加诉讼的通知;2、申请人与被申请人所签订的《股权转让协议》真实、合法、有效,被申请人不应当向申请人返还股权转让价款。为此,请求驳回申请人的申请。
 经审查认定:被申请人陶莉与申请人刘利于2013年9月22日在美国签订《股权转让协议》一份,约定陶莉将其持有的在美国加利福尼亚州注册登记的JIAJIAMANAGEMENTINC50%股权转让给刘利。刘利先后在2013年9月22日、9月25日向被申请人付款12.5万美元。被申请人童武系被申请人陶莉的丈夫,申请人刘利提交的童武银行账户信息显示其银行账户在2013年9月14日至10月16日期间有12.5万美元的进账。后申请人刘利以两被申请人利用虚假股权转让事由获取其12.5万美元钱款为由,在2014年7月17日向美国加利福尼亚州洛杉矶县高等法院提起诉讼,案件编号EC062608。2014年10月7日,美国Rolan送达公司就被申请人陶莉、童武在美国境内的个人信息、联系地址等出具调查报告。申请人刘利在美国的委托律师按调查报告所载两被申请人地址邮寄送达诉讼资料未果。2015年1月8日,美国加利福尼亚州洛杉矶县高等法院法官WilliamD.Stewart作出公告命令,决定该案相关传票、通知通过在《圣盖博谷论坛》(SANGABRIELVALLEYTRIBUNE)上刊登公告方式送达。该送达公告随后于2015年1月15日、1月22日、1月29日和2月5日连续四次在《圣盖博谷论坛》上刊登。2015年7月24日,加利福尼亚州洛杉矶县高等法院法官WilliamD.Stewart作出缺席判决,该法庭认为两被申请人已按程序收到传票,而未出庭回应申请人之起诉,构成缺席。因此,法庭就本案所涉事项判决被申请人陶莉和童武连带偿还申请人刘利12.5万美元并承担判决前利息20818美元(自2013年9月25日至2015年5月25日,按日息34.24美元计算),且应支付费用1674美元,判决金额共计147492美元。申请人刘利在美国的委托律师在判决当日就上述判决办理了判决登记通知手续。申请人提交的《首例中国法院判决在美国得到承认与执行案》(载《中国法律期刊》2010年1月)报道记载,湖北省高级人民法院作出的湖北葛洲坝三联实业股份有限公司、湖北平湖旅游船有限公司诉美国罗宾逊直升机有限公司产品侵权纠纷案民事判决,已获美国法院承认与执行。
 ......

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
     
     
【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