May 31, 2010
---------------------
Monday
>>>Welcome visitor, you're not logged in.
Login   Subscribe Now!
Home User Management About Us Chinese
  Bookmark   Download   Print
Search:  serch "Fabao" Window Font Size: Home PageHome PageHome Page
 
Li Manwen v. Guoku (retrial of case regarding dispute over mining rights )
李滿文訴郭庫采礦權糾紛再審案
【法寶引證碼】
  • Type of Dispute: Civil-->Property
  • Legal document: Judgment
  • Judgment date: 04-22-2016
  • Procedural status: Trial at First Instance
*尊敬的用戶,您好!本篇僅為該案例的英文摘要。北大法寶提供單獨的翻譯服務,如需整篇翻譯,請發郵件至database@chinalawinfo.com,或致電86 (10) 8268-9699進行咨詢。
*Dear user, this document contains only a summary of the respective judicial case. To request a full-text translation as an additional service, please contact us at:  + 86 (10) 8268-9699 database@chinalawinfo.com
 
 
   Li Manwen v. Guoku (retrial of case regarding dispute over mining rights )
(retrial of case regarding dispute over mining rights )
李滿文訴郭庫采礦權糾紛再審案

[Key Terms] transfer of mining rights ; contract is invalid ; principle of bona fides ; liability ratio
[核心術語] 采礦權轉讓;合同無效;誠實信用原則;責任比例

[Disputed Issues] If the contract is invalid from the beginning due to the approval procedures of mining right transfer being unable to be reissued, the parties shall respectively bear corresponding responsibilities.
[爭議焦點] 因無法補辦采礦權轉讓審批手續合同自始無效的,雙方當事人應分別承擔相應的責任.

[Case Summary] Where two parties sign a transfer contract on the transfer of mining rights during the period of performance of the contract if the approval procedures for the transfer of mining rights are not handled the contract will not take effect. In addition to this...
[案例要旨] 雙方當事人就采礦權轉讓簽訂轉讓合同在合同履行期間未辦理采礦權轉讓審批手續合同始終未生效。且由于分井被政府部門依法關閉不可能再補辦審批手續...

Full-text Omitted.

 

李滿文訴郭庫采礦權糾紛再審案

 最高人民法院
 民事判決書
 (2015)民申字第829號
 再審申請人(一審被告、二審被上訴人):李滿文。
 委托代理人:姜小燕,北京市韜遠律師事務所律師。
 委托代理人:劉堯男,河北厚正律師事務所律師。
 被申請人(一審原告、二審上訴人):郭庫。
 委托代理人:雷明哲,河北世紀方舟律師事務所律師。
 再審申請人李滿文因與被申請人郭庫采礦權糾紛一案,不服河北省高級人民法院(2013)冀民一終字第127號民事判決,向本院申請再審。本院依法組成合議庭對本案進行了審查,現已審查終結。
 李滿文申請再審稱:(一)二審法院認定的郭庫經營蔚縣西溝煤礦開采有限責任公司(以下簡稱西溝煤礦)分井期間的采煤量,缺乏證據證明,適用法律錯誤。根據證據規則,應由原告郭庫對其采煤量承擔舉證責任。因郭庫提交證據的證明力不足,應承擔舉證不能的法律后果。李滿文對郭庫經營收益出具的抗辯證據屬于優勢證據,應予采納。在雙方當事人提供證據存在不一致的情況下,二審法院錯誤適用“自認規則”,以對郭庫一方極為有利的自述內容為定案依據。二審法院遺漏了郭庫新建立井的經營收益及簽訂《轉讓協議》前越界開采的收益這一事實。(二)李滿文對合同無效及西溝煤礦分井被關閉不存在過錯。二審法院對合同效力的認定前后矛盾。合同無效的原因為未辦理批準手續,而非西溝煤礦分井關閉,分井關閉與合同無效的過錯責任不具有因果關系。二審法院認定李滿文申請關閉分井缺乏證據證明,關閉分井的原因系政府行為,而非李滿文申請,無論李滿文是否提出申請均不可能導致分井關閉。(三)李滿文取得了國網冀北電力有限公司蔚縣供電分公司就西溝煤礦用電量予以確認的表格以及相關證人證言作為新證據,據此核算2005年至2008年西溝煤礦分井的產煤量應為369103噸,新建立井的產煤量應為447406噸,與李滿文在一、二審中提交的證人證言基本相符。李滿文依據《中華人民共和國民事訴訟法》第二百條第一項、第二項、第六項的規定申請再審。
 郭庫提交意見稱:(一)二審法院對郭庫受讓區域的煤礦產量進行了綜合考量。一審判決未扣除煤礦恢復生產的時間,以及特殊時期停工的時間。李滿文提交的證人證言存在明顯虛假成分,與采礦證及政府文件中記載的西溝煤礦產能明顯不符。(二)二審法院對無效責任的承擔進行了綜合考量。李滿文不履行煤礦轉讓的報批義務導致《轉讓協議》無效,且其為保留自建井口而報請關閉已經轉讓給郭庫的合法礦井,應由李滿文承擔全部責任。(三)李滿文在協議無效中沒有受到損失。李滿文在報請關閉郭庫受讓的分井后,使其自建北立井合法化,于2008年3月與主井一道整體轉讓給案外人楊林,由此獲利4350萬元。郭庫請求駁回李滿文的再審申請。
 ......



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, please subscribe . You can purchase a single article through Online Pay to immediately view and download this document. Should you have any questions, please contact us at:
+86 (10) 8268-9699 or +86 (10) 8266-8266 (ext. 153)
Mobile: +86 133-1157-0712
Fax: +86 (10) 8266-8268
database@chinalawinfo.com


 


您好:您現在要進入的是北大法律英文網會員專區,如您是我們英文用戶可直接 登錄,進入會員專區查詢您所需要的信息;如您還不是我們 的英文用戶,請注冊并交納相應費用成為我們的英文會員 ;您也可通過網上支付進行單篇購買,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇案例 。如有問題請來電咨詢;
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570712
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com


     
     
【法寶引證碼】        北大法寶www.ff-type0.net
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.
 
Home | Products and Services | FAQ | Disclaimer | Chinese | Site Map
©2012 Chinalawinfo Co., Ltd.    database@chinalawinfo.com  Tel: +86 (10) 8268-9699  京ICP證010230-8
tlc88 <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <蜘蛛词>| <文本链> <文本链> <文本链> <文本链> <文本链> <文本链>