涉港澳台案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例

北大法律信息网 2021-09-21

目录

Contents

1. 厦门市宏伟建设集团有限公司诉厦门诚毅地产投资管理有限公司等建设工程施工合同纠纷案

Xiamen Hongwei Construction Group Co., Ltd. v. Xiamen Chengyi Real Estate Investment and Management Co., Ltd. et al. (case regarding dispute over a construction contract)

2. 恒益国际企业有限公司（GOLD PROFITINTER NATIONAL ENTERPRISE LIMITED）等诉深圳湾游艇会有限公司股权转让合同纠纷案

GOLD PROFITINTER NATIONAL ENTERPRISE LIMITED et al. v. Shenzhen Bay Yacht Club Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over contract of equity transfer)

3. 盛世中国烟草国际集团（澳门）有限公司诉国家工商行政管理总局商标评审委员会商标申请驳回复审行政纠纷再审案

Shengshi China Tobacco International Group (Macau) Co., Ltd. v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of State Administration for Industry and Commerce (retrial of case regarding administrative dispute over trademark rejection review)

一、厦门市宏伟建设集团有限公司诉厦门诚毅地产投资管理有限公司等建设工程施工合同纠纷案

Xiamen Hongwei Construction Group Co., Ltd. v. Xiamen Chengyi Real Estate Investment and Management Co., Ltd. et al. (case regarding dispute over a construction contract)

【裁判要旨】

建设工程双方当事人对建设工程总价款存在争议的，若双方对争议的解决有进行过协商的，以双方最后真实意思表示即是否达成最终合意为准。但合同一方当事人主张违约损害赔偿的，应对造成损失的具体数额予以证明，无法提供充分证据证明具体损失的应承担举证不能的不利后果。

[Judgment Abstract]

Where parties to a construction project have disputes over the total price of the construction project, and they have negotiated the settlement of such disputes, the final true expression of intent of the two parties shall be the final agreement. However, if a party to the contract claims damages for breach of contract, they shall prove the specific amount of loss. If they cannot provide sufficient evidence to prove the specific loss, they shall bear the unfavorable consequences of incapacity of proof.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.10620772

[CLI Code] CLI.C.10620772(EN)

二、恒益国际企业有限公司（GOLD PROFITINTER NATIONAL ENTERPRISE LIMITED）等诉深圳湾游艇会有限公司股权转让合同纠纷案

GOLD PROFITINTER NATIONAL ENTERPRISE LIMITED et al. v. Shenzhen Bay Yacht Club Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over contract of equity transfer)

【裁判摘要】

合同签约人均是股权转让方和受让方的实际控制人，但在签订合同时所代表的当事人不同，而根据合同解释规则，签约人手写条款应优先于打印条款，在股权转让合同系当事人真实意思且获得审批机关批准的应认定为有效合同。因此应以通过批准的合同确认股权转让法律关系项下的权利义务。

合同约定当事人主要义务是支付股权转让款，当事人已履行主要义务但另一方以合同未完全履行行使履行抗辩权的可不予支持，因为附随义务的未全面履行不能成就另一当事人行使先履行抗辩权，因此构成根本违约，当事人享有单方解除权。

[Judgment Abstract]

The parties that sign a contract are the actual controllers of the equity transferor or the transferee, but they represent different parties when signing the contract. According to contract interpretation rules, the contract signer's handwritten terms should take precedence over printed terms. Where the equity transfer contract is the true intention of the parties and has been approved by the approval authority, it shall be deemed as a valid contract. Therefore, the rights and obligations under the legal relationship of equity transfer should be confirmed through an approved contract.

The contract stipulates that the party's main obligation is to pay equity transfer funds. If the party has fulfilled its main obligation, but the other party exercises the right of defense with the reason the contract is not fully performed, such a claim may not be supported. The failure to fully perform the accompanying obligations does not enable the other party to exercise the right of defense of first performance. Thus, it constitutes a fundamental breach of contract and the party has the right to unilaterally terminate the contract.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.10052545

[CLI Code] CLI.C.10052545(EN)

三、盛世中国烟草国际集团（澳门）有限公司诉国家工商行政管理总局商标评审委员会商标申请驳回复审行政纠纷再审案

Shengshi China Tobacco International Group (Macau) Co., Ltd. v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of State Administration for Industry and Commerce (retrial of case regarding administrative dispute over trademark rejection review)

【裁判要旨】

申请商标与已注册商标相同或近似而存在冲突的，商标评审委员会对其申请不予核准。但是，已注册商标因连续三年不使用被撤销，申请商标是否应予核准注册的事实基础发生了根本性变化的，商标评审委员会应当根据公平原则在已注册商标被撤销的基础上可重新考虑核准注册被驳回申请的商标。

[Judgment Abstract]

Where a trademark to be registered is same as or similar to a registered trademark, leading to conflicts, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board shall not approve the application for the proposed trademark registration. However, if a registered trademark has been revoked due to non-use of a period of three consecutive years, and the factual basis of whether or not to approve the application for the proposed trademark registration has fundamentally changed, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board may, after the revocation of a registered trademark, reconsider approving a rejected application for the registration on the basis of such revocation according to the principle of fairness.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.9703465

[CLI Code] CLI.C.9703465(EN)

-END-

责任编辑 | 吴晓婧

稿件来源 | 北大法宝英文编辑组（Mani）

审核人员 | 张文硕

更多精彩，请点击菜单栏“法宝盘点-法宝原创-双语新闻”：

▼往期精彩回顾▼