The Supreme People’s Procuracy answered 11 new and important issues in the supervision of the settlement of civil, marriage and family cases.
The Supreme People’s Procuracy has just issued an official dispatch to answer 11 new and important issues encountered by many procuracies in supervising the settlement of civil, marriage and family cases.
In particular, the Institute answered questions about determining the time to start calculating the statute of limitations for initiating lawsuits and people with related interests and obligations.
Time to start calculating the statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit
Regarding the time to start calculating the statute of limitations for lawsuits, citing the case on January 1, 2017, Mr. A borrowed VND 1 billion from a bank, the loan term was 12 months, the interest rate was 12%/year. When due, Mr. A did not pay the principal and interest, but the bank did not sue.
On April 1, 2021, the bank invited Mr. A to work. Mr. A admitted that he still owed 1 billion dong of principal and 200 million dong of interest, but he still did not pay despite repeated reminders from the bank.
On July 1, 2021, the bank filed a lawsuit asking Mr. A to pay the principal and interest. In this case, is the statute of limitations for the bank’s lawsuit to be counted from the expiration date of the contract January 1, 2018 or the date Mr. A acknowledges the debt from April 1, 2021?
When the Supreme People’s Procuracy responds to the request for payment of principal, the statute of limitations for initiating a lawsuit does not apply because this is a request to protect property rights under Article 155 of the 2015 Civil Code (BLDS).
Regarding claims for interest payment, the statute of limitations for initiating a lawsuit is three years from the date the claimant knew or should have known that his/her lawful rights and interests were infringed (Article 429 of the Civil Code).
Mr. A violated his debt repayment obligation from January 1, 2018, but the bank had no opinion. On April 1, 2021, the bank invited Mr. A to work to agree on the amount of capital and interest owed and come up with a repayment plan.
Therefore, it can be understood that the bank has agreed to extend the debt for Mr. A, the two parties have a new agreement on the repayment term. Therefore, the three-year period is counted from the date Mr. A violates his debt repayment obligation after he has closed the debt with the bank.
Identification of people with related rights and obligations
Regarding the identification of people with related interests and obligations in a civil case, the Supreme People’s Procuracy answered the case where Ms. C filed a lawsuit requesting Ms. A to divide the common property which is the land use right. Both the first instance and the appellate court denied Ms. C’s request. Ms. A transferred the land to Mr. N. Mr. N was granted a certificate and mortgaged it for a bank loan. Later, both judgments were overturned by cassation.
At the first instance trial again, Ms. C still requested to be divided into property as land use rights, requested to cancel the transfer contract between Ms. A and Mr. N, cancel Mr. N’s certificate.
Mr. N’s certificate is still mortgaged to the bank, but the court did not bring the bank to participate in the proceedings. Then, in court, Mrs. C determined that she only asked for the division of the value of land use rights.
So the court’s refusal to include the bank in the proceedings is a serious violation of the proceedings?
In response, the Supreme People’s Procuracy said that when accepting the case for the first-instance trial again, the court’s failure to include the bank in the proceedings as a person with related interests and obligations is a serious violation of the prosecution procedure. chant.
However, at the trial, Ms. C determined that she only asked for the division of the land use right value. Therefore, if Ms. C’s request is accepted by the court, it will only give rise to Ms. A’s obligation to pay an amount of money to Ms. C equivalent to the value of the land use right, without affecting or giving rise to the right to use the land. , obligations of Mr. N and the bank.
Thus, it is no longer necessary to include the bank in the proceedings, so it is not determined that the court has seriously violated the proceedings.
In addition, the Supreme People’s Procuracy also answered questions about the supervision of decisions on recognition of successful conciliation results, successful dialogues in court, settlement of consequences of invalid contracts and many other new and important issues.