In accordance with information from On-line dataOn January 13, the Supreme Folks’s Procuracy determined to situation a petition, requesting the Judicial Council of the Supreme Folks’s Court docket to rethink the choice on cassation assessment of the divorce case between Mr. Dang Le Nguyen Vu and Ms. Le Hoang Diep Thao.
Particularly, the Procuracy proposed to cancel the appellate judgment dated December 5, 2019 and the first-instance judgment dated March 27, 2019 associated to the division of widespread property for first-instance trial once more in accordance with the procedural order. The rationale given by the Procuracy was that the above judgments contained many errors.
Most notably, the joint property valuation of Mr. and Mrs. Dang Le Nguyen Vu and Ms. Le Hoang Diep Thao, the deed and the report on valuation outcomes associated to the case are all expired by the trial date. first occasion on February 20, 2019.
>> See extra: Madame Le Hoang Diep Thao marks a “sensible milestone” within the “dream metropolis” of Dubai
As well as, the deed and report on valuation outcomes are solely based mostly on the monetary statements and the checklist of property given by Mr. Vu, not confirmed by Ms. Thao, so it’s essential to re-valuate. Nonetheless, the appellate and first occasion ranges of the divorce case ignored this.
Additionally within the suggestion of the Supreme Folks’s Procuracy acknowledged within the first occasion court docket, the plaintiff agreed with the valuation outcomes, however then the plaintiff appealed your complete first-instance judgment. After that, the appellate court docket didn’t re-assess the property, however used the valuation outcomes on the first occasion degree to settle the case.
The choice from the cassation officer stated that within the opinion of Ms. Le Hoang Diep Thao dated February 21, 2019 and throughout the preparation for the appellate trial in addition to on the court docket, the concerned events didn’t request a re-evaluation. After that, the appellate court docket authorised this to be inconsistent with the content material of the appellate enchantment and the opinion of the defender of Ms. Thao’s pursuits.
>> See extra: The particular place of Mrs. Le Hoang Diep Thao shines within the ‘dream metropolis’ of Dubai
As well as, on the suggestion of the Procuracy, Ms. Thao is a businessman and has requested to be divided into shares and contributed capital. Nonetheless, the courts in any respect ranges divided the cash for her, and Mr. Vu was allowed to obtain shares, which violated Ms. Thao’s proper to do enterprise.
Concerning the assertion that there is no such thing as a doc to show that if Ms. Thao continues to be a managing shareholder, the operation of Trung Nguyen Group can be tough, affecting the soundness and jobs for hundreds of staff, the Folks’s Procuracy The Supreme Court docket considers this assertion to be unfounded. By corporations, shares and capital contributions in corporations could be divided in type.
Proposal of the Procuracy affirmed that, along with being a housewife, Thao can also be straight engaged in enterprise, contributing to the creation of widespread property and the event of Trung Nguyen Group. However within the divorce case, the court docket didn’t absolutely take into account Mr. Vu’s accountability when “performing the husband’s obligations” beneath the Legislation on Marriage and Household. Due to this fact, the Procuracy believes that it’s mandatory to extend the proportion of Ms. Thao’s property divided within the above-mentioned widespread property. At present, Ms. Thao is receiving 40%, and Mr. Vu is receiving 60%.
>> See extra: Madame Le Hoang Diep Thao immediately publicly talked about her ex-husband Dang Le Nguyen Vu
After the wedding of Mrs. Thao, Mr. Vu’s enterprise started to develop and type Trung Nguyen Group. The businesses in dispute had been all registered for the primary time from 2006 onwards, a few years after Mr. Vu and Ms. Thao obtained married in 1998.