Judgment No. 68/2017/HNGD-ST dated December 11, 2017 on divorce petition involving foreign elements

PEOPLE’S COURT OF KIEN GIANG PROVINCE

JUDGMENT NO. 68/2017/HNGD-ST DATED DECEMBER 11, 2017 ON DIVORCE PETITION INVOLVING FOREIGN ELEMENTS

On December 11, 2017, the first-instance trial court was conducted at the office of People’s Court of Kien Giang province to hear the case No. 35/2017/TLST-HNGD dated August 24, 2017 regarding a divorce petition involving foreign elements.

Pursuant to Decision to hear the case No. 77/2017/QDXX-ST dated November 30, 2017 between litigants below:

- Petitioner: Mr. H, Yao-C, born in 1980

Address: T village, L commune, N district (Taiwan).

- Respondent: Mrs. Nguyen Thi T, born in: 1996

Address: Floodproof residential cluster V ward, R city, Kien Giang province.

THE CASE OF MR. H, YAO-C

* Representation of the petitioner:

With reference to conjugal relationship: The petitioner and the respondent knew each other and then got married. They were granted a Marriage Certificate dated April 17, 2017 by the People’s Committee of R city, Kien Giang province. At first, they lived together happily for a short time. Then they started having quarrels, had difference of opinions over views of life, jobs and place of residence. The marriage is irretrievably broken, the petitioner returned to Taiwan and lost touch with the respondent since then. Now the petitioner deems that they have lacked marital harmony, have not shared the same voice and the purpose of marriage has not been achieved, so he filed for divorce from the respondent.

With reference to common children, property and liabilities: No common child, property or liability is claimed so the court is not requested to settle. Because the petitioner must return to Taiwan and be unable to attend the court hearing, he requests trial in absentia.

* Representation of the respondent:

With reference to conjugal relationship: In 2017, the respondent knew the petitioner through matchmaking and then got married on a voluntary basis and had the marriage registered as per the law. One week after marriage, the petitioner returned to Taiwan and lost touch with her since then. When they met again, they often have had quarrels, not shared the same views of life and not trusted each other. Deeming that they have not had spousal attachment any longer, the purpose of marriage have not been achieved, she consents to the divorce.

With reference to common children, property and liabilities: No common child, property or liability is claimed so the court is not requested to settle. Because of busy work, she is unable to attend the court hearing, so she requests trial in absentia.

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT

[1] In terms of court procedures: During the petition settlement process, the petitioner and the respondent both requested the trial in absentia.  As for that reason, the trial panel reaches a consensus on application of Clause 1 Article 228 of the Civil Procedure Code in Viet Nam to try the case in absence of the litigants.

[2] With reference to conjugal relationship: Deeming that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent meets marriage conditions and is granted the Marriage Certificate by the People’s Committee of R city, Kien Giang province in accordance with Article 8, Article 9 of the Law on Marriage and Family 2014 in Viet Nam, so it is considered legal.

[3] The reasons for divorce are attributed to their quarrels, conflict and difference of opinions over views of life, jobs and place of residence during a short time after marriage. The petitioner returned to Taiwan and lost touch with the respondent since then. Furthermore, the respondent consented to the divorce because one week after marriage, the petitioner returned to Taiwan and lost touch with her since then. When they met again, they often have had quarrels, not shared the same views of life and not trusted each other, they have not had spousal attachment any longer and the purpose of marriage has not been achieved. Deeming that, the conjugal relationship between the petitioner and the respondent has not met conditions prescribed in Article 19 of the Law on Marriage and Family 2014 in terms of spousal attachment, the trial panel has valid grounds to consider that their marriage falls into bad situation, the duration of marriage cannot last longer, the purpose of marriage is not reached. Moreover, they both mutually consents to the divorce. Therefore, after discussion and consideration, trial panel reach a consensus on accepting the petition for divorce.

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

[5] With reference to first-instance court fee: 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 28 , Clause 1 Article 37, Clause 1 Article 228, Point d Clause 1 Article 469, Article 479 of the Civil Procedure Code;

Apply Clause 1 Article 56 of the Law on Marriage and Family; Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 in Viet Nam dated December 30, 2016 of the Standing Committee of National Assembly on amount, remission, collection and payment, management and use of court fees and charges.

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: No common child is claimed so the court is not requested to settle.

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 first-instance court fee: The first-instance civil court cost of VND 300,000 shall be legitimately paid by the petitioner; it shall be deducted from the first-instance court cost paid in advance (paid by P) according to the court cost and fee payment receipt No.0005991 dated August 16, 2017 issued by the Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Kien Giang province.

The petitioner may rightfully appeal the judgment within 1 month from the day on which this judgment is served or publicly notified as per law provisions.  The respondent may rightfully appeal the judgment within 15 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 6, 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./.