【法宝引证码】CLI.C.10476426
[CLI Code] CLI.C. 10476426 (EN)
其他
担保合同纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
本期双语案例推送青岛威乃达投资有限公司等与海尔集团财务集团有限责任公司公司借款、抵押、质押、保证合同纠纷上诉案等有关担保合同纠纷类案例。
目录
Contents
1.青岛威乃达投资有限公司等与海尔集团财务集团有限责任公司公司借款、抵押、质押、保证合同纠纷上诉案 Qingdao Weinaida Investment Co., Ltd. et al. v. Haier Group Finance Co., Ltd. (appeal case regarding dispute over contract for corporate loans, mortgages, pledges and guarantees) 2.张翼丽、中国民生银行股份有限公司石家庄分行抵押合同纠纷案 Zhang Yili v. Shijiazhuang Branch of China Minsheng Bank Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over mortgage contract) 3.四川升达林业产业股份有限公司与新加坡时正有限公司质押合同纠纷上诉案 Sichuan Shengda Forestry Industry Co., Ltd. v. Singapore Shizheng Co., Ltd. (appeal case of dispute over a pledge contract)
一、青岛威乃达投资有限公司等与海尔集团财务集团有限责任公司公司借款、抵押、质押、保证合同纠纷上诉案
【裁判要旨】
在担保物权和保证共存的情况下，债务人和保证人已经明确约定无论债权人的债权是否有其他担保，债权人均有权处置担保财产或直接要求保证人承担保证责任的，保证责任不受担保物权影响。当债权无法实现，债权人要求保证人承担责任时，保证人应对全部债务而非仅对物的担保以外的债务承担保证责任。
[Judgment Abstract]
In a case of the coexistence of security interest and guarantee, if a debtor and a guarantor have expressly agreed that the creditor has the right to dispose of the secured property, or directly requires the guarantor to assume the security liability regardless of whether any other security has been established on the creditor's rights, the guarantee liability should not be affected by security interest. Where a creditor requires a guarantor to assume liability when the creditor's rights cannot be realized, the guarantor shall bear the security liability for all debts rather than those outside the scope of guarantee on the subject matter.
Zhang Yili v. Shijiazhuang Branch of China Minsheng Bank Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over mortgage contract)
【裁判摘要】
抵押合同签订时，抵押人对抵押财产已经不享有所有权。尽管进行了抵押登记的，但债权人并不构成善意取得，故抵押权不成立。具体而言，作为专业的金融机构成立善意取得的条件是其是否尽到了审慎的审查义务。金融机构对抵押人的抵押材料进行审核时理应对房屋权属可能存在的权利冲突尽到更多的注意义务，事实是其只是进行了形式的审查且存在一定的疏漏，主观上存在过错。故金融机构未尽到审慎的审查义务，不成立善意取得，因此，抵押合同无效。
[Judgment Abstract]
When the mortgage contract is signed, the mortgagor no longer has ownership of the mortgaged property. Despite the registration, the mortgage is disconfirmed because it is deemed that the creditor does not acquire the property bona fide. For professional financial institutions, the condition for bona fide acquisition is whether it has fulfilled its review obligation in a prudential manner. When reviewing the mortgage materials provided by a mortgagor, a financial institution should pay close attention to any potential conflicts of right as to the house ownership. In practice, the financial institution only conducts review in form, leading to certain omissions, and is thus at subjective fault. Therefore, where a financial institution fails to fulfill its review obligations in a prudential manner, and bona fide acquisition has not been established and the mortgage contract should be determined to be invalid.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.9950863
[CLI Code] CLI.C. 9950863 (EN)
三、四川升达林业产业股份有限公司与新加坡时正有限公司质押合同纠纷上诉案
Sichuan Shengda Forestry Industry Co., Ltd. v. Singapore Shizheng Co., Ltd. (appeal case of dispute over a pledge contract)
【裁判要旨】
我国担保法及其司法解释并未禁止已出质股权的再出质行为，对于未经质权人同意擅自将股权再出质，从而导致质权人实现质权时额外增加成本或风险的，出质人应当对此承担相应责任。但其并不影响股权再次质押时质押合同的效力，即只要该股权质押合同系双方当事人的真实意思表示，合同的履行不会造成损害国家利益、社会公共利益或者第三人利益的后果，不属于我国合同法第五十一条规定的无权处分行为，亦不符合我国合同法第五十二条规定的法定无效情形，则该质押合同即为有效合同。
[Judgment Abstract]
The Guarantee Law and its judicial interpretations of China do not prohibit the re-pledge of the pledged equity, but where the pledger pledges the equity again without the consent of the pledgee, as a result of which the additional costs or risks are incurred in the exercise of the pledgee's right, the pledger shall bear corresponding liabilities. However, such act does not affect the validity of the pledge contract signed when the equity is pledged again. In other words, as long as the equity pledge contract is the declaration of true will of the parties, and the performance of the contract will not result in any damage to the national interest, public interest or the interest of any third party, it neither constitutes the unauthorized disposition as stipulated in Article 51 of the Contract Law nor falls under the circumstances of statutory invalidation as stipulated in Article 52 of the Contract Law, and thus the pledge contract is a valid contract.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.10026569
[CLI Code] CLI.C. 10026569 (EN)
北京北大英华
科技有限公司
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
-END-
破产纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例著作权权属、侵权纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例商标权权属、侵权纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例保险纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
机动车交通事故责任纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
房屋租赁合同纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例房屋买卖合同纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
质押合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例双语案例推送之质押合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
关注下方公众号，获取更多法律信息