Judgment No. 18/2017/HNGD-ST dated March 27, 2017 on divorce petition involving foreign elements

PEOPLE’S COURT OF KIEN GIANG PROVINCE

JUDGMENT NO. 18/2017/HNGD-ST DATED MARCH 27, 2017 ON DIVORCE PETITION INVOLVING FOREIGN ELEMENTS

On March 27, 2017, the first-instance trial court was conducted at the office of People’s Court of Kien Giang province to hear the case No.12/2017/TLST-HNGD dated March 2, 2017 regarding a divorce petition involving foreign elements. Pursuant to Decision to hear the case No. 08/2017/QDST-HNGD dated March 10, 2017 between litigants below:

* Petitioner: Mr. Truong Hoang S, born in: 1964.

Address: C Street, V ward, R city, Kien Giang province.

* Respondent: Mrs. Le Thi S, born in 1970.

Address: S, C, I, USA. Permanent residence: N street, V ward, R city, Kien Giang province. (Mr. Truong Hoang S: present, Mrs. Le Thi S: request for trial in absentia)

THE CASE OF MR. TRUONG HOANG S

* Pursuant to the petition for divorce dated February 20, 2017 and the representation made at the first-instance court hearing by the petitioner:

The petitioner and the respondent lived together from 1999, they registered marriage at the People’s Committee of L ward and were issued with Marriage Certificate dated August 19, 1999, recorded in the marriage register No. 105 of volume 01 dated August 19, 1999.

They used to live happily, but the respondent have regularly lived abroad so they rarely have kept touch with each other and no longer taken care of each other since 2008. As for that reason, the petitioner deemed that they have stayed in an unhappy marriage which cannot last longer. Recently, the petitioner contacted the respondent to petition a divorce from her and gain her consent. Accordingly, the petitioner filed for a divorce from the respondent.

With reference to conjugal relationship: The petitioner filed for a divorce from the respondent.

With reference to common children: A common child is claimed, who is Truong Hoang T, born in November 7, 2000. He has lived with mother at the USA. At the statement made on March 8, 2017, deeming that T wishes to live with mother, the petitioner agrees that the child will keep living with the respondent. The petitioner is exempt from child maintenance.

With reference to common property and liabilities: No common property or liability is claimed so the court is not requested to settle.

* The respondent, at the Letter of Consent to Divorce, claims custody of Truong Hoang T until he attains the age of majority without requiring child maintenance from the petitioner. They have no common property or liability so the court is not requested to settle.  Furthermore, the respondent requests the duly authorized court to hear the case in her absence and authorizes Mr. Ho Thanh A to receive the court’s judgment.

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT

After consideration of the case files assessed and the adversarial process at the court hearing, the trial panel judges as follows:

[1] In terms of court procedures: The respondent submitted the Request for Trial in Absentia during the divorce proceedings with petitioner, this document was made at the People’s Committee of L ward and authenticated by the President of the People’s Committee of L ward. Therefore, the request is consider legitimate. Therefore, the trial panel applies Clause 1 Article 227 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015 in Viet Nam to hear the case in the absence of the respondent.

[2] In terms of content of the case: The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent meets marriage conditions and is granted the Marriage Certificate by the competent authority. Therefore, pursuant to Article 9 of the Law on Marriage and Family 2014 in Viet Nam, it is considered legal.

At the first-instance trial hearing, the petitioner still kept his petition for divorce. The petitioner stated that they have separated since 2008 and the respondent has regularly lived in the USA, lost touch with him and they have not taken care to each other. As for that reason, the petitioner deemed that they have stayed in an unhappy marriage which cannot last longer.

Regarding the common child, the petitioner confirms that they have a common child named Truong Hoang T, born in November 7, 2000, and he have been living with the respondent in the USA.

In the affidavit dated February 27, 2017, the respondent mutually agrees with the petitioner about conjugal relationship and common child. She consents to the divorce and claims sole custody of Truong Hoang T until he attains the age of majority as he wishes without requiring child maintenance from the petitioner.

The trial panel deems that, the petitioner and the respondent have a short duration of marriage before they lived apart and the respondent has regularly lived abroad, so the couple have not taken care to each other since then. Therefore their marital relationship does not meet requirements prescribed in Article 19 of the Law on Marriage and Family 2014 regarding spousal attachment. The trial panel has valid grounds to consider that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent falls into bad situation, the duration of marriage cannot last longer, the purpose of the marriage is not reached, and moreover they both voluntarily consent to divorce.

Therefore, after discussion and consideration, trial panel reach a consensus on accepting the petition for divorce.

[3] With reference to common children: In the statement dated March 8, 2017, Truong Hoang T raises his opinion: If the parent divorces, he wishes to live with his mother. At the first-instance court hearing, the petitioner consents to the request of the respondent, so the trial panel acknowledges that the respondent is awarded child custody and the petitioner is exempt from child maintenance.

[4] With reference to common property and liabilities: No common property or liability, so the court is not requested to settle.

[5] With reference to court fee: apply to Clause 4 Article 147 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015; Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 in Viet Nam dated December 30, 2016 of Standing Committee of the National Assembly.

The first-instance civil court cost of VND 300,000 shall be paid by the petitioner; it shall be deducted from the advance of first-instance court cost.

Pursuant to documents and evidence mentioned above:

HEREBY DECIDES:

Pursuant to Clause 1 Article 227, Article 28, Point a Clause 1 Article 37, Point d Clause 1 Article 469 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015.

Apply Clause 1 Article 56 of the Law on Marriage and Family 2014;

Hereby judges:   Accept the petition for divorce of the petitioner.

1. With reference to conjugal relationship: The petitioner is judged to lawfully divorce the respondent.

2. With reference to common children: Acknowledging the voluntary consent of the petitioner that the respondent gets custody of Truong Hoang T, born in November 7, 2000. The petitioner is exempt from child maintenance.

The petitioner has the right of access; no one may prevent him from exercising such right.

3. With reference to common property and liabilities: No common property or liability is claimed so the court is not requested to settle.

4. With reference to marriage and family first-instance court fee: VND 300,000 of marriage and family first-instance court fee incurred by the petitioner shall be deducted from her court fee advance pursuant to the receipt No. 0009342 dated February 28, 2017 of Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of K province.

Litigants may rightfully appeal this judgment within 15 days from the judgment announcement. The respondent may rightfully appeal the judgment within 30 days from the day on which this judgment is served or publicly notified as per law provisions.

In case the judgment or court decision is enforced as per regulations in Article 2 of the Law on enforcements of civil judgments in Viet Nam, the judgment creditor and judgment debtor are lawfully allowed to reach an agreement on judgment enforcement, request judgment enforcement, be subject to voluntary execution or coercive judgment enforcement in compliance with regulations in Article 7, 7a and 9 of the Law on enforcement of civil judgments, and the effective period of judgment enforcement shall comply within provisions in Article 30 of the Law on enforcement of civil judgments./.