证券纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
本期双语案例推送哈尔滨北方资产管理公司与三亚市财政局证券回购合同纠纷申请案等证券纠纷案例。
目录
Contents
1.哈尔滨北方资产管理公司与三亚市财政局证券回购合同纠纷申请案 Harbin Beifang Asset Management Corporation v. Finance Bureau of Sanya (application for retrial of dispute over securities repurchase contract) 2. 中国建银投资有限责任公司诉江西省投资集团公司证券包销协议纠纷案 China Jianyin Investment Ltd. v. Jiangxi Provincial Investment Group Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over an underwriting agreement) 3.中国科技证券有限责任公司与张家港市农村商业银行股份有限公司、中国科技国际信托投资有限责任公司特种金融债券兑付纠纷上诉案 China Sci-Tech Securities Co., Ltd. v. Zhangjiagang Rural Commercial Bank Co., Ltd. and China Sci-Tech Intl. Trust & Investment Co., Ltd. (appeal case regarding dispute over redemption of special financial bonds)
一、哈尔滨北方资产管理公司与三亚市财政局证券回购合同纠纷申请案
【裁判要旨】
《民事诉讼法》第二百条第一项规定，当事人申请再审，有新的证据，足以推翻原判决、裁定的，人民法院应当再审。而根据最高人民法院公布的《关于适用〈中华人民共和国民事诉讼法〉审判监督程序若干问题的解释》第十条可知，所谓“新的证据”，主要包括：原审庭审结束前已客观存在庭审结束后新发现的证据；原审庭审结束前已经发现，但因客观原因无法取得或在规定的期限内不能提供的证据；原审庭审结束后原作出鉴定结论、勘验笔录者重新鉴定、勘验，推翻原结论的证据。另外，当事人在原审中提供的主要证据，原审未予质证、认证，但足以推翻原判决、裁定的，应当视为新的证据。因此，申请人以“有新的证据，足以推翻原判决、裁定的”为由申请再审的，法院应当依据上述规定，对“新的证据”进行认定。
[Judgment Abstract]
In accordance with Paragraph 1 of Article 200 of the Civil Procedure Law, where a party files a petition for retrial and holds new evidence which suffices to overturn the original judgment or ruling, the people's court shall conduct a retrial. And according to Article 10 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Trial Supervision Procedure of the Civil Procedure Law, “new evidence” refers to evidence existing before the end of the original trial but discovered thereafter, evidence discovered before the end of the original trial but unacquirable due to objective reasons or unavailable within the prescribed time, or evidence based on which the person who made the original conclusion of expert evaluation or transcript of on-site investigation overthrows the original conclusion upon reevaluation or reinvestigation after the end of the original trial. Besides, the substantive evidence provided by the party concerned in the original trial shall be deemed as new evidence if it is sufficient enough to overturn the original judgment or ruling, though it has not been cross-examined or attested in the original trial. Therefore, where an applicant files a petition for retrial on the ground of “holding new evidence which suffices to overturn the original judgement or ruling, a people's court shall determine the new evidence as specified in aforesaid provisions.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.2228695
[CLI Code] CLI.C.2228695(EN)
二、中国建银投资有限责任公司诉江西省投资集团公司证券包销协议纠纷案
China Jianyin Investment Ltd. v. Jiangxi Provincial Investment Group Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over an underwriting agreement)
【裁判摘要】
诉讼时效是指民事权利受到侵害的权利人在法定的时效期间内不行使权利，当时效期间届满后，将产生义务人可以拒绝履行相关义务的民事法律制度。其产生的法律后果是权利人丧失胜诉权。根据最高人民法院《关于审理民事案件适用诉讼时效制度若干问题的规定》第一条的规定，当事人可以对债权请求权提出诉讼时效抗辩，但对于兑付国债、金融债券以及向不特定对象发行的企业债券本息请求权提出诉讼时效抗辩的，人民法院不予支持。债券兑付请求权是基于债券发行和认购而产生的法律关系，其具有自身的特殊性。发行人在债券到期后应足额向债券持有人兑付债券本息，若债券持有人在兑付期限内未主动进行兑付，发行人可以将应兑付的债券本息进行提存，未提存的视为发行人持续占有和使用债券持有人的资本金，对此法院应认定为事实的持续发生，不能适用诉讼时效。所以，无论是在最高人民法院的上述规定出台后还是出台前，基于债券公开发行认购民事法律关系产生的债券兑付请求权都不适用诉讼时效。
[Judgment Abstract]
The limitation of action is a term in civil legal system that means the obligor may refuse to perform relevant obligations after the statute of limitations has passed in the event that the obligee with civil rights infringed fails to exercise his rights within the prescribed statute of limitations, as a consequence of which the obligee loses his right to win the case. In accordance with Article 1 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Limitation of action during the Trial of Civil Cases, a party may make an argument on statute of limitations against a claim for creditor's right, but the people's court shall not support an argument of a party on statute of limitations against a claim for payment of the principal and interest of government bonds, financial bonds or enterprise bonds issued to non-specific objects. The claim for payment of bonds is a legal relation arising from subscription for bonds in the public offering, with its own particularity. The issuer shall pay the principal and interest of bonds to bondholders in full after the maturity of bonds, but if the bondholders themselves fail to make the bonds redeemed within the period of redemption, the issuer may draw the principal and interest of the bonds payable, while the money undrawn should be deemed as the capital of the bondholders continuously held and used by the issuer. The court should hold it as a continuation of the fact, for which the statute of limitations does not apply. Therefore, no matter whether a claim for the payment of bonds arising from the civil legal relations in the public offering and subscription of bonds is filed before or after the promulgation of the aforesaid provisions, the statute of limitations does not apply.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.290691
[CLI Code] CLI.C.290691(EN)
三、中国科技证券有限责任公司与张家港市农村商业银行股份有限公司、中国科技国际信托投资有限责任公司特种金融债券兑付纠纷上诉案
China Sci-Tech Securities Co., Ltd. v. Zhangjiagang Rural Commercial Bank Co., Ltd. and China Sci-Tech Intl. Trust & Investment Co., Ltd. (appeal case regarding dispute over redemption of special financial bonds)
【裁判要旨】
最高人民法院《关于审理与企业改制相关的民事纠纷案件若干问题的规定》第六条规定，企业以其部分财产和相应债务与他人组建新公司，对所转移的债务债权人认可的，由新组建的公司承担民事责任；对所转移的债务未通知债权人或者虽通知债权人，而债权人不予认可的，由原企业承担民事责任。原企业无力偿还债务，债权人就此向新设公司主张债权的，新设公司在所接受的财产范围内与原企业承担连带民事责任。因此，对原企业债务的承担问题应尊重当事人的约定，债务人通知债权人并同债权人达成协议确定债务主体的应依当事人的约定。否则，债权人有权向组建的新公司主张权利。
[Judgment Abstract]
In accordance with Article 6 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases of Civil Disputes Related to Enterprise Restructuring, where an enterprise establishes a new company by part of its property and corresponding debts with the others, and the creditors recognize the transferred debts, the newly established company shall assume civil liabilities thereof; where the creditors haven't been notified of the transferred debts or refuse to recognize such debts in case of notification, the former enterprise shall assume the civil liabilities thereof. Where the former enterprise is unable to repay debts and the creditors claim rights to the newly established company, the newly established company shall assume civil liabilities within the scope of the property that it has received. Accordingly, the agreements between the parties should be respected in the determination of repayment of the original enterprise's debts. Where the debtor notifies the creditor and they reach an agreement to determine the obligor, the agreements thereon shall apply; otherwise, the creditor should be entitled to claim rights to the newly established company.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.182570
[CLI Code] CLI.C.182570(EN)
北京北大英华
科技有限公司
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
-END-
最高人民法院公报案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
最高人民法院公报案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
无因管理类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
质押合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
知识产权类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
租赁合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
技术合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
票据类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例商业秘密类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
涉港澳台案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例证券案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
涉外商事案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
物权案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例最高院公报案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
涉垄断类案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
点击相应图片识别二维码
获取更多信息
北大法宝
北大法律信息网
法宝学堂
法宝智能