Judgment No. 31/2019/DS-PT dated april 16, 2019 on dispute over land use right and cancellation of land use right certificate

PEOPLE’S COURT OF HAU GIANG PROVINCE

JUDGMENT NO. 31/2019/DS-PT DATED APRIL 16, 2019 ON DISPUTE OVER LAND USE RIGHT AND CANCELLATION OF LAND USE RIGHT CERTIFICATE

On April 11 and 16, 2019, at the head office of the People’s Court of Hau Giang Province, the appellate trial was conducted to hear the case No. 36/2019/TLPT-DS dated January 17, 2019 on “Dispute over land use right and cancellation of land use right certificate”, as First Instance Civil Judgment No. 26/2018/DS-ST dated October 29, 2018 of the People’s Court of District C1, Hau Giang Province was appealed.

According to the Decision to Bring the Case to Appellate Trial No. 39/2019/QDPT-DS dated March 5, 2019, parties concerned include:

1. Petitioner:  Mr. Bui Nhu T (present)

Address: Dergotan 5 Go Nosjo 33533 Sweden.

Temporary residential address: Village 4A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang.

Defender of rights and legitimate interests of Mr. Bui Nhu T: Mr. Mai Quang T2

Address: Village T, Town M, District C1, Hau Giang Province (with Request for Trial in Absentia)

2. Respondent:  Mrs. Bui Thi T3

Address: Village 3A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang Province (present).

Authorized representative of Mrs. T3: Mr. Dang Loi N

Address: Village T, Town R, District C1, Hau Giang Province. (according to Authorization Contract dated January 18, 2016) (present)

3. Persons with related interests and obligations:

3.1. Mr. Le Van N1

Address: Village 3A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang Province.

Authorized representative of Mr. Le Van N1: Mr. Bui Huu G

Place of residence: Village 3A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang. (according to Letter of Authorization dated October 9, 2018) (present)

3.2. Mrs. Bui Thi L

Address: Village 3A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang Province.

3.3. Mrs. Bui Thi C

Address: Village L1, Commune V, District G, Kien Giang Province.

Authorized representative of Mrs. Bui Thi L, Mrs. Bui Thi C: Mr. Bui Nhu T (present)

Temporary residential address: Village 4A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang Province.

3.4. The People’s Committee of District C1, Hau Giang Province

Address: Village N1, Town M, District C1, Hau Giang Province (absent)

based on the appeal filed by the respondent Mrs. Bui Thi T3 and appeal issued by the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province. 

THE CASE

According to the First Instance Judgment and available documents in the case file:

Representation of the petitioner Mr. Bui Nhu T: When Mr. Bui Nhu T’s parents (Mr. Bui Nhu Y (died on July 10, 2011) and Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1 (died on December 27, 2006) were still alive, they created assets including land use right of 10,400m2 and 1 house on the area of 300m2, land and house were located in Village 2A, Tan Thuan Commune, Chau Thanh District, Can Tho Province (now is Village 3A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang Province). In 1987, Mr. T immigrated to Sweden and returned to Vietnam in 1994. Then he sponsored Mr. Y and Mrs. T1 to take them come back Sweden with him. In 1996, Mr. T’s mother, Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1, returned Vietnam and made a letter of authorization on April 15, 1996, authorizing the respondent Mrs. T3 and Mr. N1 to take care of and cultivate the land area of 9,047.1m2 located in the Village 3A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang Province on a temporary basis and may not sell it to anyone. When he returned to Vietnam, Mrs. T3 is obliged to return him the said land area. During the land custody and use process, Mrs. T3 arbitrarily applied for land use right certificate and she was granted a land use right certificate. He has just known about that in around May 2015. The letter of authorization was made by Mrs. T1 by herself and was given to him until now. After returning to Vietnam, he asked Mrs. T3 to split 2,000m2 of land and give it to Mrs. T3’s sister, Mrs. Bui Thi L. Since Mrs. T3 disagreed, he filed a lawsuit, claiming Mrs. T3 to return the entire land area of 9,047.1m2 located in Village 3A, Commune T, District C1 to him and other co-heirs, including Mr. Bui Nhu Y, Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1, and requesting cancellation of the land use right certificate No. 000221/QSDD dated March 13, 1995 issued by the People’s Committee of Chau Thanh District, Can Tho Province (now is District C1, Hau Giang Province) to Mrs. Bui Thi T3.

- Representation of Mr. Dang Loi N, authorized representative of the respondent Mrs. Bui Thi T3 during the litigation at the court and first instance court hearing: Mrs. Bui Thi T3 rejects the lawsuit petition of the petitioner. From 1987 to February 1994, Mrs. T3 had lived together with Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1 until the state assigned a land measurement group for the purpose of granting land use right certificates, Mrs. T1 intended to give a land area to Mrs. T3 so she took Mrs. T3 to Mr. Doan Van Be Hai’s house to enable the land use right certificate to be issued. Then, Mrs. T1 transferred her household register to Go Quao District to complete paperwork to go abroad. The letter of authorization was made in April 1996 to the petitioner, at that time Mrs. T1 no longer had land and household register in Tan Thuan Commune. Mrs. T3 has continuously cultivated the land since 1987 and was granted the land use right certificate. So she refuses to return the land plot and requests the Court to recognize her land plot in dispute, Mrs. T does not make a counter-claim against the petitioner.

- Representation of person with relevant rights and obligations - Mr. Le Van N1: He and his wife, Mrs. Bui Thi T3, have cultivated on this land plot and they have earned money from that land plot. So, they refuse to return it at the request of the petitioner and request the Court to grant their family the ownership of such land plot.

- Representation of person with relevant rights and obligations, Mrs. Bui Thi L: The land plot was left by her paternal grandparents Bui Nhu Y and Nguyen Thi T1 after their death. Her paternal grandmother only handed over the land plot to Mrs. T3 for custody but not gave it as a gift. Mrs. T3 was raised and helped by paternal grandparents and uncle T since she was a little child. Then, when Mrs. T3 grew up, they married her off and let them live together in the family until paternal grandparents went abroad. And they let Mrs. T3’s family stay and take care of the house.  Mrs. Bui Thi L concurs with Mr. T’s representation and authorizes Mr. T to address every of her opinions.

- Representation of person with relevant rights and obligations, Mrs. Bui Thi C: This land plot previously belonged to their paternal grandparents, Mr. Bui Nhu Y and Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1, when they purchased it from Mr. Do Van Kham. Since the purchase, they had cultivated on this land plot. In 1987, the paternal grandparents went abroad and let Mrs. T take care of it until they return to Vietnam. Mrs. Bui Thi C concurs with Mr. T’s representation and authorizes Mr. T to address every of her opinions.

Defender of rights and legitimate interests of the petitioner Mr. Bui Nhu T,  Mr. Mai Quang T2: The petitioner and the respondent both agree that this land plot was left by Mr. Y and Mrs. T1. Mrs. T3’s parents died young so Mrs. T3 lived together with Mr. Y and Mrs. T1. So, when they immigrated to Sweden, they let Mrs. T3 stay there. Then, Mrs. T1 returned to Vietnam and made a letter of authorization on April 15, 1996. Both signature verifications show that the signature in the letter of authorization was made by Mrs. T3.  Mrs. T3 claims that Mrs. T1 gave her the land plot as a gift but she fails to give any proof. Now, at the court hearing, Mr. Bui Nhu T still upholds his lawsuit petition but agrees to pay Mrs. Bui Thi T3 the cost incurred in restoration and preservation of the estate, equivalent to the whole land area of 3,709.8m2, of land parcel 794, land type 2L, map No. 2, located in Village 3A, District C1, Hau Giang Province, to Mrs. T3 and at her disposal. With regard to the remaining land area of 5,337.3m2, of land parcel 348, land type 2L, map No. 2, located in Village 3A, District C1, Hau Giang Province, Mrs. T3 is required to return it to Mr. T and co-heirs of Mr. Y, Mrs. T1. Mr. Bui Nhu T and as authorized representative of Mrs. Bui Thi L, Mrs. Bui Thi C concur with representation of Mr. Mai Quang T without further opinions.

Representation of the respondent, Mrs. Bui Thi T3, represented by Mr. N: Disagree with presentation of Mr. T and refuse to return the land plot because she was given by Mrs. T1 as a gift and she was granted the land use right certificate. She has used the land plot publicly and for a long time. The Land Law 1993 in Viet Nam stipulates that a vacant land plot which has not been used for 6 to 12 months shall be appropriated. Moreover, the dispatch No. 2810 of the People’s Committee of District C1 recognizes that her land use right certificate was granted in accordance with laws and regulations. On the other hand, the letter of authorization presented by Mr. T which was supposedly made by Mr. T1 bears no signature or fingerprint of Mrs. T1 and the self-management group verified “the authorization is true according to the request of Mr. Bui Van T”. So, this letter of authorization was not made by Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1. And statements of witnesses are partial. So, Mrs. Bui Thi T3 requests the Trial Panel to recognize the lawful deed of gift of land use right between Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1 and Mrs. Bui Thi T3 and let Mrs. T3 continue to use the entire area of such land plot.

Representation of person with relevant rights and obligations, Mr. Le Van N1, represented by Mr. Bui Huu G: Concur with representation of Mr. N and refuse to return the land plot to Mr. T.

In the First Instance Judgment No. 26/2018/DS-ST dated October 29, 2018, the People’s Court of District C1, Hau Giang Province judged as follows:  Accept the lawsuit petition of Mr. Bui Nhu T; compel the respondent, Mrs. Bui Thi T3 and persons with relevant rights and obligations, Mr. Le Van N1 to return to Mr. Bui Nhu T and as authorized representatives of persons with relevant rights and obligations, Mrs. Bui Thi L and Mrs. Bui Thi C (co-heirs of Mr. Bui Nhu Y and Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1) the land area of 5,337.3m2, of land parcel 348, land type 2L, map No. 2, located in Village 3A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang Province. Let Mrs. Bui Thi L take care of and preserve the land plot below on the temporary basis: the front width adjacent to irrigation channel is 22.70m; the back width adjacent to irrigation channel is 23.10m; the length adjacent to land parcel 349 is 234m; the length adjacent to land parcels 875 and 347 is 233m (enclosed map); and recognize the voluntariness of Mr. Bui Nhu T and as authorized representatives of Mrs. Bui Thi L, Mrs. Bui Thi C to pay Mrs. Bui Thi T3’s contribution in restoration, preservation and enhancement of the estate, in particular: unchange the status of the land area of 3,709.8m2, of land parcel 794, located in Village 3A, Commune T, District C1, Hau Giang Province below: the front width adjacent to irrigation channel 500 is 23.70m; the back width adjacent to land parcel 795 is 24.12m; the length adjacent to land parcel 796 is 156.80m; the length adjacent to land parcels 874 and 346 is 158m (enclosed map); cancel the land use right certificate No. G743809 in the register No. 000221/QSDD dated March 13, 1995 of the People’s Committee of Chau Thanh District, now is District C1, Hau Giang Province issued to Mrs. Bui Thi T3; split the claim for division of inheritance to another lawsuit upon request of litigants.

In addition, the First Instance Court decided the signature verification fee; fee for appraisal, measurement and valuation of asset; court fee and appeal right of litigants as per the law.

On November 7, 2018, Mrs. Bui Thi T3 filed an appeal against First Instance Judgment No. 26/2018/DS-ST dated October 29, 2018 of the People’s Court of District C1, Hau Giang Province, requesting the Court of Appeal to recognize the deed of gift of land use right between Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1 and Mrs. Bui Thi T3 with the land area of 9,202m2 according to her land use right certificate.

On November 28, 2018, the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province issued an appeal No. 39/QDNPT-VKS-DS against First Instance Judgment No. 26/2018/DS-ST dated October 29, 2018 of the People’s Court of District c1, Hau Giang Province that the jurisdiction, the kind of dispute was wrongly and the status of litigants were wrongly determined and the case has not been completely resolved.

At the court hearing, the representative of the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province announces the appeal and requests the Trial Panel to accept the appeal of the People’s Procuracy, as the jurisdiction, the kind of dispute was wrongly and the status of litigants were wrongly determined and the case has not been completely resolved. The People’s Procuracy also withdraws partial appeal concerning authorization and registration of defender of the petitioner.

At the court hearing, the respondent upholds the appeal and requests recognition of her land use right of the land plot at dispute, because she was given by Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1 as a gift in 1994 and was granted land use right since 1995.

The petitioner upholds the lawsuit request and force the defendant the return him the land area of 9,047.1m2 according to the letter of authorization that his mother, Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1, gave him in 1996. He agrees to pay Mrs. T3 contribution to preservation of land area of 3,709.8m2 and refuses the division of inheritance.

The representative of the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province affirms that the Court has complied with regulations and laws on civil procedures since the acceptance stage to the stage when the case has been brought to trial. Regarding the content of case, request application of Clause 3 Article 308 of the Civil Procedure Code to quash the First Instance Civil Judgment, accept the appeal of the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province and refuse the appeal of the respondent.

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT

After consideration of the case files assessed and the adversarial process at the court hearing, the Trial Panel hereby judges:

[1] After first-instance trial, Mrs. Bui Thi T3 duly filed an appeal and the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province duly issued an appeal within the statutory period

[2] Regarding appeals of the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province, the Trial Panel deems that:

- Jurisdiction over lawsuit acceptance and settlement: The People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province claims that Mr. Bui Nhu T and Mr. T’s parents, Mr. Bui Nhu Y and Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1, hold both Vietnamese and Swedish nationality. Mr. T has immigrated to Sweden since 1987. Then, in 1994, he sponsored Mr. Y and Mrs. T1 to live in Sweden and died in Sweden. In 2015, Mr. T returned to Vietnam. Every time he came back, he was granted a 6-month temporary residence.

On the other hand, the land on dispute was created by Mr. Y and Mrs. T1 during their marriage and it has not been distributed until Mr. Y and Mrs. T1 died in Sweden. Pursuant to Article 663 of the Civil Code 2015, Point b Clause 7 of Resolution No. 03/2012/NQ-HDPT in Viet Nam dated December 3, 2012 of Council of Justices of the Supreme People’s Court, this is the civil relationship involving foreign elements and falls under jurisdiction of provincial People’s Court according to Clause 3 Article 35 of the Civil Code 2015. With respect to this appeal, Trial Panel considers that:

Mr. Bui Nhu T holds both Vietnamese and Swedish nationality. However, at the time of lawsuit acceptance and settlement, Mr. T has presented in Vietnam and participated in legal proceedings by himself, Mr. T holds Vietnamese nationality. Pursuant to Clause 3 Article 35 of the Civil Procedure Code in Viet Nam, the case only falls under jurisdiction of the People’s Court of district when there is any litigant or property overseas or it is required to seek judicial assistance from representative body of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam overseas, from courts and competent foreign authorities. In this circumstance, litigants and property in dispute are all located in Vietnam’s territory, it is not required to seek judicial assistance from representative body of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam overseas, from courts and competent foreign authorities. Pursuant to Article 4 and Clause 2 ar13 of the Law on Vietnamese Nationality 2008, amended in 2014 in Viet Nam, Mr. Bui Nhu T is still a Vietnamese citizen (case file p. 26). Therefore, Trial Panel rightly determined the case not involving foreign elements as prescribed in Clause 2 Article 663 of the Civil Code 2015. So, the People’s Court of District C1 accepted the lawsuit within its jurisdiction.

- With respect to claim of the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province that the Court of First Instance wrongly determining the dispute over land use right in lieu of dispute over division of inheritance and wrongly cancellation of land use right certificate, Trial Panel considers that the Court of First Instance should have guided litigants to file a inheritance dispute lawsuit to completely resolve the case. However, at the appellate court hearing and according to documents available in the case file, Mr. T and Mrs. L and Mrs. C do not claim division of inheritance (including 271D, E) and are so determined to dispute the land use right. So it is well-grounded that the court accepts the lawsuit petition.

[3] With respect to appeal of the respondent Mrs. Bui Thi T3, the Trial Panel considers that:

[3.1] Regarding the origin of land plot in dispute: The petitioner, Mr. Bui Nhu T, is the son of Mr. Y and Mrs. T1 and Mrs. Bui Thi T3, Bui Thi L are succeeding heirs of Mr. Bui Nhu H3 (the son of Mr. Y and Mrs. T1) and Mrs. Bui Thi C is succeeding heir of Mr. Bui Nhu Ba (the son of Mr. Y and Mrs. T1) all declare that the origin of land plot was created by Mr. Bui Nhu Y and Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1 before their death.  Witnesses, Mr. Bui Van B, Mrs. Do Thi H, children of Mr. K, Mrs. Tam, Mrs. Duong Thi X, Mrs. Nguyen Thi H, Mrs. Le Thi K1, Mrs. Bui Thi N2, Mrs. Pham Thi V, witnesses living in locals, all declared that the origin of land plot was created by Mr. Y and Mrs. T1.

Mr. Bui Nhu T determines that Mr. Y and Mrs. T1 only allocated Mrs. T the land plot for custody without mortgage or sale. So, he claims Mrs. T3 to return the land plot according to the letter of authorization dated April 15, 1996. The content of letter of authorization is as follows: “authorize grandchild Bui Thi T3 and grandchild-in-law Le Hoang N1 to preserve and take care of the property on a temporary basis while we are abroad without mortgage or sale to anyone else”. There are signatures of Mrs. T3 and Mr. N1 at the bottom of the paper. However, Mrs. T3 does not confirm that is her signature but the expertise conclusion No. 193/KLGD dated September 29, 2016 of Criminalistics Department of Public Security of Can Tho City and conclusion No. 152A/C54-P5 dated July 3, 2017 of Institute of Criminal Science affiliated to General Department of Public Security states that: The signature “T3” below the section “Authorized person” in the “letter of authorization dated April 15, 1996” and the sample signature of Mrs. T3 were made by the same person.  Other the other hand, Mr. Ho Van Thanh, the witness in the letter of authorization, confirms that Mrs. T1 authorized Mrs. T3 to take care of the said land plot without sale or mortgage. So, there are substantial grounds for determining that Mrs. T3 was fully aware of this matter and signed the letter of authorization dated April 15, 1996. Therefore, her appeal for recognition of her land plot in dispute is poorly-grounded to be accepted.

[3.2] Regarding the lawsuit petition of the petitioner, Mr. Bui Nhu T, the Court of First Instance was poorly-grounded when accepting the lawsuit petition of Mr. Bui Nhu T and compelling Mrs. T3 to return the land plot to Mr. T. Based on analyzed facts and matters, the land plot in dispute between Mr. T and Mrs. T3 was left by Mr. Bui Nhu Y and Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1 after their death without division. So this is their estate, Mr. T does not have any right to the whole land plot. Moreover, this land plot has been under custody of Mrs. T3, one of co-heir. So, Mr. T is only entitled to claim division of estate of Mr. Y and Mrs. T1. It is not well-grounded that Mr. T claims the entire estate only based on the letter of authorization that Mrs. T1 gave it to him. He confirmed that this is property that was created by Mr. Y and Mrs. T1 during their marriage. In 1996, Mrs. T1 made the letter of authorization by herself and without consent of Mr. Y. So this letter is not the will of Mr. Y and Mrs. T1 but only Mrs. T1 allocated the land plot to him without sufficient legal bases. So, it is required to refute the lawsuit petition concerning dispute over land use right between Mr. T and Mrs. T3 and request Mr. T to file another lawsuit claiming division of estate as prescribed.

[4] Regarding the absence of persons with relevant rights and obligations, 2 children of Mrs. T3 who have lived on this land plot, the Trial Panel considers that since Mr. T claims Mrs. T3 to return the agricultural land plot the Trial Panel does not accept the lawsuit petition of Mr. T, the interests of children of Mrs. T3 will not be prejudiced. So, it is not necessary to quash the First Instance Judgment. However, if the Court of First Instance accepts the claim for division of estate, it is required to apply regulations of Land Law regarding agricultural land. Although Mr. Bui Nhu T still holds Vietnamese nationality, he also holds foreign nationality. Therefore, it is necessary to consider his nationality when resolving the dispute over division of estate and consider Mrs. Bui Thi T3’s contribution to restoration and custody of the estate in the same case of division of estate.

[5] Regarding the withdrawal of partial appeal of the People’s Procuracy concerning that fact that the Court of First Instance did not register the defender or authorized person, Trial Panel accepts it.

[6] Regarding the decision of First Instance Judgment, the Court of First Instance applied irrelevant regulations of the Civil Code 2015 to resolve the dispute. So, the Court of First Instance should draw on experience to apply proper regulations of law relevant to the dispute of which the Court is in charge.

[7] Based on mentioned analysis, Trial Panel deems that the appeal of the respondent and  the appeal of the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province are poorly-grounded to accept. Correct the First Instance Judgment.

[8] Regarding appellate civil court fee: No litigant is required to pay the fee.

Pursuant to documents and evidence mentioned above;

HEREBY DECIDES

Pursuant to Clause 2, Article 308 of the Civil Procedure Code. Pursuant to: Articles 26 and 35 of the Civil Procedure Code 163; Clause 1 Article 166, Article 187 of the Civil Code 2015 in Viet Nam; Article 100, Article 169, Article 203 of the Law on Land 2013 in Viet Nam; Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 in Viet Nam dated December 30, 2016 of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly on court fees and charge, exemption, reduction, collection, transfer, management and use thereof.

Hereby judges: 

Do not accept the appeal of the People’s Procuracy of Hau Giang Province. Do not accept the appeal of the respondent, Mrs. Bui Thi T3.

Correct the First Instance Judgment No. 26/2018/DS-ST dated October 29, 2018, the People’s Court of District C1, Hau Giang Province as follows:

Do not accept the lawsuit petition of Mr. Bui Nhu T claiming Mrs. Bui Thi T3 to return him the agricultural land area of 9,047.1m2.

Litigants have right to file a lawsuit claiming division of estate of Mr. Bui Nhu Y and Mrs. Nguyen Thi T1 as per the law.

- Regarding expertising expense incurred in signature assessment: Mrs. Bui Thi T3 has to pay VND 9,820,000 (Nine million eight hundred twenty thousand dong). Mrs. T3 fully paid VND 5,000,000 (Five million dong). Mrs. T3 also has to pay VND 4,820,000 (Four million eight hundred twenty thousand dong) to reimburse it to Mr. Bui Nhu T.

- Regarding the fee for assessment, measurement and valuation of property: Mr. Bui Nhu T has to pay VND 5,395,000 (Five million three hundred ninety five thousand dong), he fully paid it.

- Regarding court fee:

+ First instance civil court fee:

Mr. Bui Nhu T has to pay VND 300,000 (Three hundred thousand dong), which is deducted from the fee advance which Mr. T paid earlier, VND 11,200,000 (Eleven million two hundred thousand dong) according to the receipt No. 0006386 dated December 7, 2015 and VND 100,000 (One hundred thousand dong) according to the receipt No. 0006709 dated August 10, 2016 of Sub-Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of District C1, Hau Giang Province. So, Mr. T may be refunded VND 11,000,000 (Eleven million dong).

+ Appellate court fees: No one has to pay it. Mrs. Bui Thi T3 may be refunded VND 300,000 (Three hundred thousand dong) of paid fee advance according to the receipt No. 0018543 dated November 7, 2018 of Sub-Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of District C1, Hau Giang Province.

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 6, 7, 7a and 7b and 9 of the Law on enforcement of civil judgments, and the effective period of judgment enforcement shall conform to Article 30 of the Law on enforcement of civil judgments.

The Appellate Judgment takes effect from the date of pronouncement (April 16, 2019).