In a complex debt dispute case that lasted for more than ten years and was tried by multiple courts, Lawyer Sheng Heng, with his professional legal literacy and precise case control, successfully won a fair judgment for the bank I represented and recovered unnecessary losses.
Case review: A series of disputes have arisen due to the non transfer of the offset house
The course of the case is intricate and complex, spanning over ten years, and has been remanded for retrial four times by an intermediate people's court in a certain city. Starting from 2004, Mr. Liu purchased cement from a cement factory on credit and sold it to a trading company; Due to the commercial company's creditor's rights over a certain real estate development company, the real estate company used a property as collateral for the commercial company. The commercial company then used the property as collateral for Mr. Liu, who received it from the defense minister and used it to offset the cement payment owed to the cement plant. Afterwards, the cement plant signed a "Contract for the Sale and Purchase of Commercial Housing" with the real estate development company, but did not handle any registration and filing procedures.
No one expected that this unsold house would become the trigger for a complex dispute in the future.
The real estate company was sued by the bank for another mortgage loan guarantee responsibility. The court shall enforce the assets under the name of the real estate company, including the property involved in the case, based on the effective mediation agreement. In the end, after evaluation and auction, this house was purchased by an outsider.
As the house that had been used to offset the debt disappeared, the cement factory sued Mr. Liu's heir, Xiao Liu, and the bank: on the one hand, they demanded that Xiao Liu repay the remaining debt of over 150000 yuan; On the other hand, it is advocated that the bank compensate more than 620000 yuan for the loss of the house.
The first instance court supported all the demands of the cement plant and ruled that the bank should bear the liability for compensation for the loss of the house.
This result was difficult for the bank to accept, and they immediately entrusted my lawyer to file an appeal.
Lawyer steps in to clarify responsibility, second instance reversal to determine fate
After accepting the commission, the legal team accurately identified the focus of the dispute and developed a clear defense strategy:
From the perspective of property ownership, the establishment and change of real estate ownership require legal registration to take effect. Although the cement plant has signed a purchase contract, it has not completed registration and filing, and has not obtained ownership of the house. The house still belongs to the legal property of the real estate development company. The court has legal basis for taking enforcement measures against the property of the debtor.
In terms of legal procedures, the lawyer cited relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and pointed out that if the cement plant believes that the execution of the ruling damages its rights and interests, it should file a "third-party revocation right lawsuit" within the statutory time limit, rather than directly demanding compensation from the bank, which confuses different legal relief procedures.
From the perspective of the bank's behavior, as the applicant for enforcement, providing asset information of the executed person is a legal obligation to assist. Due to the fact that the house is not registered under the name of the cement plant, the bank has no obligation to review the fact that the house has been used to offset debts. The act of applying for execution based on effective legal documents is legal and compliant, and should not be held responsible.
After the second instance court's trial, it fully adopted the lawyer's defense opinions and made a revised judgment: uphold the first instance judgment on Xiaoliu's repayment of more than 150000 yuan in arrears; Revoke the judgment of the first instance bank to compensate for over 620000 yuan in housing losses; Reject other litigation requests from the cement plant.
Overall, this series of disputes triggered by a cement payment ultimately came to an end with the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the bank. The revision of the case not only recovered significant economic losses, but also highlighted the crucial role of professional legal services in resolving complex civil and commercial disputes. This also reminds enterprises to strengthen their awareness of legal risks in real estate transactions, debt offsetting, and other aspects, and to consult professional lawyers in a timely manner to standardize operations, in order to avoid potential risks of damage to rights and interests caused by procedural flaws.