Judgment No. 74/2018/HNGD-ST dated july 30, 2018 on non-recognition of marriage

PEOPLE'S COURT OF HAI PHONG CITY

JUDGMENT NO. 74/2018/HNGD-ST DATED JULY 30, 2018 ON NON-RECOGNITION OF MARRIAGE

On July 30, 2018, at the headquarters, the People's Court of Hai Phong city opens a first-instance trial for hearing the case No. 120/2018/TLST-HNGD dated July 10, 2018 in the matter of “Non-recognition of marriage” under the Decision to bring the case to trial No. 2608/2018/QĐXXST-HNGD dated July 20, 2018 between:

- Plaintiff:  Mrs. Pham Thi Thu H, born in 1997; place of residence: Commune TH, District TN, Hai Phong City; and

- Respondent: Mr. LYB, born in 1981; place of residence: Korea.

Mrs. H appears in court, Mr. LYB does not appear in court but files a request for trial in absentia.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Representation of Mrs. Pham Thi Thu H in the lawsuit petition and voluntary statement: Mr. LYB and she got into a courtship through a marriage broker company in Korea for about 02 months before getting married on a voluntary basis. They held a wedding ceremony following Vietnamese customs and obtained a marriage certificate issued by the Korean competent authority on February 12, 2016. After getting married, they had lived together for a while before Mr. LYB returned to Korea and Mrs. S has stilled stayed in Vietnam. Once in a while, they made phone calls but regularly got into arguments, mainly coming from language barrier, personality differences and mismatched lifestyle. At that time, Mrs. H knew that Mr. LYB did not intend to sponsor her to Korea for reunion. Therefore, they fail to complete the procedure for marriage record as per Vietnamese law. Now, Mrs. H has not had spousal attachment any longer, she requests the Court not to recognize marriage between Mr. LYB and her.

With reference to common children and property: None, no further request.

In the petition for divorce filed with the People's Court of Hai Phong City (already consularly legalized), the respondent, Mr. LYB agrees with Mrs. H about their marriage process, divorce cause, common children and property, and request not to recognize the marriage between Mrs. H and him.

As Mr. LYB lives abroad, pursuant to clause 2 Article 207 of the Civil Procedure Code in Viet Nam, no conciliation can be conducted in this case.

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT

[1] Regarding legal relation and jurisdiction: Mr. LYB has lived in Korea, both Mrs. H and Mr. LYB file petition with the People’s Court of Hai Phong City for non-recognition of marriage, pursuant to clause 1 Article 28; point a clause 1 Article 37; point b clause 1 Article 39; point d clause 1 Article 469 of the Civil Procedure Code, this case falls under jurisdiction of the People’s Court of Hai Phong City.

[2] Regarding the absence of litigants: Mr. LYB, though not appearing in court, filed a petition for divorce and request for trial in the absentia. Pursuant to clause 1 Article 227; Article 228 of the Civil Procedure Code, the Court proceeds the trial in the absence of Mr. LYB.

[3] Regarding conjugal relationship: Mrs. H and Mr. LYB are not happy when living together and no one cares about each other. Now, they both ascertain that they not had spousal attachment any longer, so the Court finds just cause to accept their petition for non-recognition of marriage. Pursuant to clause 1 Article 9 of the Law on Marriage and Family; Article 3 of Circular No. 01/2016/TTLT-TANDTC-VKSNDTC-BTP in Viet Nam dated January 6, 2016 and Article 7 of Decree No. 24/2013/ND-CP in Viet Nam dated March 28, 2013, although Mrs. H and Mr. LYB registered marriage at a competent authority abroad, they have not completed the marriage record at the competent authority in Vietnam, so their marriage registration is not deemed legal. So, Mrs. H and Mr. LYB are just considered cohabiting couples, but not spouses as recognized by Vietnamese law.

[4] With reference to common children and property: Mrs. H and Mr. LYB do not have a common child or common property, so they did not ask the Court to settle it. Therefore, the Trial Panel does not consider it.

[5] Regarding first instance civil fee: As the plaintiff, Mrs. H has to pay the first-instance divorce fee as per the law.

[6] With reference to the right to appeal: Mrs. H and Mr. LYB have a right to appeal the judgment as per the law.

Therefore,

DISPOSITION

Pursuant to clause 1 Article 9 of the Law on Marriage and Family in Viet Nam;

Pursuant to point a clause 1 Article 37; point b clause 1 Article 39; clause 4 Article 147, clause 2 Article 207; clause 2 Article 227; clause 1  Article 228; Article 273; Article 479 of the Civil Procedure Code;

Pursuant to Article 3 of Circular No. 01/2016/TTLT-TANDTC-VKSNDTC-BTP dated January 6, 2016 of the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuracy, the Ministry of Justice;

Pursuant to Article 27 of Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 in Viet Nam dated December 30, 2016 of Standing Committee of the National Assembly, hereby:

1. Regarding conjugal relationship: Not recognize marriage between Mrs. Pham Thi Thu H and Mr. LYB.

2. With reference to common children and property: Mrs. H and Mr. LYB do not have a common child or common property, so they did not ask the Court to settle it. Therefore, the Trial Panel does not consider it

3. With reference to court fees: Mrs. Pham Thi Thu H incurs VND 300,000 (three thousand dong) of first instance civil court fee, but it is deducted from the court fee advance of 300,000 VND that has been paid, according to receipt No. 0010808 dated July 9, 2018 at the Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Hai Phong city. So, Mrs. H has fully paid the first-instance divorce fee.

4. With reference to right to appeal:

- Mrs. Pham Thi Thu H is entitled to appeal this judgment within 15 days from the date of pronouncement.

- Mr. LYB is entitled to appeal this judgment within 01 month from the date on which the judgment is duly served.

In case the court verdict or 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 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./.