Judgment No.172/2018/DS-PT dated June 29, 2018 on dispute over housing ownership

HO CHI MINH CITY SUPERIOR PEOPLE’S COURT

JUDGMENT NO.172/2018/DS-PT DATED JUNE 29, 2018 ON DISPUTE OVER HOUSING OWNERSHIP

The appellate trial court was conducted at the Office of Ho Chi Minh City Superior People's Court on June 29, 2018 to review the civil case No. 150/2016/TLPT-DS dated July 15, 2016 regarding “Housing ownership dispute” according to the protest against the first-instance judgment No.424/2015/DSST dated May 08, 2015 of Ho Chi Minh City People's Court, abiding by decision on hearing a case No. 545/2016/QĐXX-PT dated October 25, 2016. Parties concerned:

- Petitioner: Mrs. Luu Kim Y (Luu Thi Kim Y)

Residing at: 1304 Corte Maltera Costa Mesa, CA 92626, USA

Authorized representative: Mrs. Le Thi Thu H (Present)

Residing at: 204/8 DVB, Ward 14, District 4, Ho Chi Minh City

Contact address: 209/21B TTT Street, Ward 3, District 4, Ho Chi Minh City

- Respondents: Mr. Le Dinh D, Mrs. Le Ngoc B

Co-residing at: 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City

Authorized representative: Mrs. Le Ngoc B; Mr. Nguyen Th (Present)

Residing at: 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City

Defender of legitimate rights and benefits of Mr. Nguyen Th: Mr. Hoang Van M – lawyer of Ho Chi Minh City Bar Association (Present)

- Persons with relevant rights and obligations:

1/- Mrs. NLQ1 (Absent);

2/- Mr. Nguyen Th (Present);

3/- Mr. NLQ3 (Absent);

4/- Mrs. NLQ4 (Absent);

5/- Mr. NLQ5 (Absent);

6/- Mrs. NLQ6 (Absent);

7/- Mrs. NLQ7 (Absent);

Co-residing at: 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City

8/- Mrs. NLQ8 (Absent);

9/- Mrs. NLQ9 (Died in 2014)

Co-residing at: 111/9 HHT, Ward 13, TB District, Ho Chi Minh City

The person inheriting procedure rights and duties of Mrs. NLQ9: Mrs. NLQ8 (Absent)

10/- Mrs. NLQ10 residing at 1304 Corte Maltera Costa Mesa, CA 92626, USA (Absent);

Authorized representative: Mrs. Le Thi Thu H (Present)

Residing at: 204/8 DVB, Ward 14, District 4, Ho Chi Minh City

THE CASE OF MRS. LUU KIM Y

Pursuant to the lawsuit complaint dated January 21, 2010 of the petitioner-Mrs. Luu Kim y (Luu Thi Kim Y) and additional statement at the court by her representative - Mrs. Le Thi Thu H: The house and land on LVS Street, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City (previously No.534C NVT (PMG), District 3, Sai Gon) (hereinafter referred to as “the house”) is owned by parents of Mrs. Luu Kim Y - Mr. Luu D and Mrs. NLQ10. On October 01, 1975, Mrs. Y received the house ownership transferred from her parents according to the agreement on transfer of ownership notarized by the Resolution People’s Committee on October 07, 1975 and she also paid the registration fee for house ownership at the city tax office on October 20, 1975.  In 1980, Mrs. Y's parents suffered from severe sickness so she was permitted to accompany them to France for medical treatment purpose. As for that reason, she asked her housekeeper – Mrs. NLQ1 to look after the house for her and transferred all house documents to Mrs. NLQ1. She still kept in touch with Mrs. NLQ1 for a period of time after leaving but then she lost contact with her. When her parents got better, she returned to Vietnam and found out that Mr. Le Dinh D and Mrs. Le Ngoc B and their family members had been living in her house. Now, her representative - Mrs.H petitions the Court to recognize that Mr. Y has legal ownership of the house located at 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City and request Mr. D and Mrs. B and all people living in that house to return the house to Mrs. Y right after the judgment takes effect.

According to representation by Mr. Nguyen Th- the representative authorized by the respondents - Mr. Le Dinh D and Mrs. Le Ngoc B: His parents – Mr. Le Dinh C and Mrs. NLQ4 have bought the house for Mr. Le Dinh D. The house was purchased under hand-written agreement but then such sales documents, including the original house documents, documents made by Mrs. NLQ1, Mrs. NLQ9 and Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1, the declaration made in 1999 and annual land levy payment proof have been presented to the People’s Committee of ward.  As the previous owner of the house (Mrs. Y) has gone abroad, her family members and her husband – Mr. Nguyen Th, who are people with meritorious services to the revolution and have served for regulatory agencies but not granted any official residence, now do not accept the request of the petitioner.

According to the statement made by Mrs. Le Thi Thu H - representative of Mrs. NLQ10: Mrs. NLQ10 has given the house to her daughter – Mrs. Y, so she concurs with the statement by Mrs. Y.

As stated by Mr. Nguyen Th: The previous owner of the house has transferred the house and original copies of house documents to Mrs. NLQ9, who died years ago. The residence of her family was notified to the ward People's Committee since 1979. In 1990, Mrs. NLQ9 transferred the house to the family of Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1 under the hand-written agreement; however; Mrs. Hoang Y1 still permitted Mrs. NLQ9 to use a room of area of about 30 m² on the third floor of such house. Then Mrs. Y transferred the whole fourth floor of the house to Mr. Nguyen H1 who is a teacher coming from Hai Phong.  In 1933, his family found that the house was offered for sale and its previous owner had left for overseas country and acquired a foreign nationality. For the purpose of giving an accommodation to his parents - Mr. Le Dinh C and Mrs.NLQ4, who are retired officials and people with meritorious services to the revolution, Mr. D – a doctor working at Ho Chi Minh City Health Department has bought the house at the price equal to the market price and such sale has been notified to the competent authority. His family members have served for regulatory agencies but not granted any official residence. Although his family is not the legal owner of the house but they have used and managed the house for more than 30 years since such house was transferred to Mrs. NLQ9.  Pursuant to law provisions, any person managing a property for more than 30 years will be recognized as the legal owner of such property. Mrs. Y received the house from her parents but she neither used nor managed the house; moreover; she transferred the house documents to Mrs. NLQ9. In addition, the fact that Mrs. Y left Vietnam with her parents for France since 1975 for medical treatment purpose then going to America for work and permanently residing in America is against the law, so her property is supposed to be confiscated by the State as regulated. Thus, she has no right to the house now. As for that reason, he and his family petitions for recognization of their legal ownership of the house.

His family has spent lots of money on repairing the shabby house and the house value defined at that moment is only 30% of its current value. And as there is no document on request for returning the house given to his family, he does not accept Mrs. Y’s petition.

Mr. NLQ3, Mrs. NLQ4, Mr. NLQ5, Mrs. NLQ6, Mrs. NLQ7, Mrs. NLQ9 (died) and her inheritor of rights and duties for procedure – Mrs. NLQ8 (Mrs. Oanh), who have relevant rights and duties have been summoned to appear in the court for statement making and conciliation but no one showed up.

According to first-instance civil judgment No.424/2015/DSST dated May 08, 2015 of the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court:

Pursuant to Clause 2 Article 25, Article 34, 35, 131 and 245 of the Code of Civil Procedure 2004 (amended in 2011) in Viet Nam, Article 164 and 169 of the Civil Code 2005 in Viet Nam, Article 125 and 126 of the Law on Housing 2005 in Viet Nam, Decree No.71/2010/ND-CP in Viet Nam dated June 23, 2010 of the Government on enforcement of the Housing Law and Resolution No.01/2012/NQ-HDTP in Viet Nam dated June 13, 2012 providing for guidance on implementation of a number of regulations on court fees and charges. 

Hereby judges: Accept the lawsuit petition of Mrs. Luu Kim Y whose representative is Mrs. Le Thi Thu H

1) Accept that the house located on LVS Street, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City (previously 534C NVT Street (PMG), cluster 4, Tran Quang Dieu ward, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City) belongs to Mrs. Luu Kim Y

2) Not accept the sales and transfers of the house among Mrs. NLQ9, Mrs. NLQ8 and Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1 under the agreement dated July 30, 1990 and between Mrs. NLQ9 and Mr. Le Dinh D under the agreement dated November 05, 1993. 

3) Compel Mr. Le Dinh D and his family, who reside at 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City and Mr. Nguyen Th, and Mrs. Le Ngoc B and their family, who reside at 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City and Mrs. NLQ3, Mrs. NLQ5, Mrs. NLQ6 and Mrs. NLQ7 to return the entire house to Mrs. Luu Kim Y within 3 months from the effective date of this judgment.  

4) Recognize that Mrs. Luu Kim Y is willing to give Mr. Le Dinh D and his family an assistance of VND 840 million.

The money and the house shall be given at the same time under surveillance of the enforcement body.

5) After giving the money to the family of Mr. D and Mrs. B, as decided in this judgment, Mrs. Luu Kim Y is entitled to contact the competent authority to go through the paperwork for house ownership and land use rights and fulfill financial obligations as regulated by laws.

In addition, the judgment stipulates court fees during the enforcement of this judgment as prescribed in Article 2, 6, 7 and 9 of the Law on Judgment Enforcement and right of appeal of the parties concerned.

On May 18, 2015, Mr. Nguyen Th, who has relevant rights and duties and is the authorized representative of the respondent - Mr. Le Dinh D and Mrs. Le Ngoc B appealed against the whole first-instance judgment No.424/2015/DSST dated May 08, 2015 of the Ho Chi Minh City People’s Court.

On May 21, 2015, Mrs. Le Thi Thu H, who is the authorized representative of the petitioner – Mrs. Luu Kim Y appealed to the Court that the assistance of VND 840 million will be given only if Mr. D and Mrs. B willingly return the house and the house and the money must be given at the same time.

At the appellate court hearing, Mr. Nguyen Th and Mrs. Le Thi Thu H did not change their appeal; The parties concerned have failed to solve the dispute and request for settlement of the Court as per law provisions.

Mr. Nguyen Th and the defender of his legitimate rights and benefits deem that the act in which Mrs. Luu Kim Y went abroad is against the law and she has no right to ask him to return the house as regulated in Resolution No.1037/2006/UBTVQH11 in Viet Nam.  As a result, the first-instance judgment which recognizes that Mrs. Luu Kim Y has legal ownership of the house is not conformable to law provisions.

The representative of Ho Chi Minh City People's Supreme Procuracy who has analyzed all items of evidence concerned believes that the first-instance judgment that recognizes the Mrs. Luu Kim Y has legal ownership of the house and does not accept the sales and transfers of the house among Mrs. NLQ9, Mrs. NLQ8 and Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1 under the agreement dated July 30, 1990 and between Mrs. NLQ9 and Mr. Le Dinh D under the agreement dated November 05, 1993 is based on legal documents.  The money amount of VND 840 million given to Mr. Le Dinh D and his family is recognized as the willing assistance offered by Mrs. Luu Kim Y according to the first-instance judgment. Hence, the appeals of Mr. Nguyen Th and Mrs. Le Thi Thu H cannot be accepted as there is not legal base provided and they should be rejected, and the first-instance judgment shall be upheld.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

Upon consideration of all documents and evidence provided in the case profile which is verified at the court and the result of discussion at the court and recommendation of the representative procurator, the Court finds that:

 Mrs. Le Thi Thu H said that the house originally owned by Mr. Luu D and Mrs. NLQ10 was transferred to Mrs. Luu Kim Y in 1975 and she also paid the house ownership registration fee on July 20, 1975. By 1980, Mrs. Luu Kim Y, as permitted by the State, accompanied Mr. Luu D and Mrs. NLQ10 to France for medical treatment purpose and transferred all original copies of house documents to her housekeeper - Mrs. NLQ1 and asked Mrs. NLQ1 to look after the house for her. After returning to Vietnam, Mrs. Luu Kim Y found out that Mr. D and Mrs. B and their family and other people had been living in the house. As for that reason, Mrs. Luu Kim Y filed a lawsuit to ask Mr. D and Mrs. B and other peoples who had been living in the house to return such house to her. On the other hand, Mr. Nguyen Th - the authorized representative of the respondents - Mr. D and Mrs. B refused the request by the petitioner and said that Mrs. Y had gone abroad so she had no right to ask them to return the house.

[2] Pursuant to consistent statements provided by the litigants and housing declaration dated December 17, 1977, Official Dispatch No.1016/QLDT-CS of the Urban Management Office affiliated to People’s Committee of District 3, Ho Chi Minh City regarding response to the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court and written response given to Mrs. Luu Kim Y on January 25, 2010 by People's Committee of District 3, Ho Chi Minh City, there are enough grounds for defining that the house located at 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3 (previously 534C NVT, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City) is owned by Mr. Luu D and Mrs. NLQ10. And by October 1975, Mr. Du transferred such house to her daughter - Mrs. Luu Kim Y.

According to the written response by People’s Committee of District 3, Ho Chi Minh City, there has been no State's decision on house expropriation issued so far.  Moreover, the act in which Mr. Luu D, Mrs. NLQ10 and Mrs. Luu Kim Y went abroad is permitted by the State, not illegal evacuation or exit.  Hence, the house mentioned above is not under the State's management as requested by Mr. Nguyen Th.

[3] Regarding the statement of Mrs. Luu Kim Y which is, when going abroad, she had Mrs. NLQ1 to look after the house for her.  Pursuant to the copy of house receipt document presented at the first instance trial court by Mr. Nguyen Th on April 27, 2015, such receipt document was written by Mrs. NLQ9 on March 05, 1996 which proves that Mrs. NLQ1 is only the house-keeper and there is no house sale or transfer between Mrs. Y and Mrs. NLQ1 as stated by Mr. Thanh.  As for that reason, there are grounds to claim that Mrs. NLQ1 is only the housekeeper and all house documents are transferred to Mrs. NLQ9, which is consistent to the statement provided by Mrs. Luu Kim Y.

[4] Mr. Nguyen Th also deems that Mrs. NLQ10 transferred the house to Mrs. NLQ9, and such transfer is recorded in the hand-written document dated March 05, 1996. However, the appellate trial panel for civil cases finds that such document fails to prove that Mrs. NLQ10 (Mrs. Y's mother) permits Mrs. NLQ9 to own the house.  Moreover, this document was written by Mrs. NLQ9 herself without verification of Mrs. NLQ10 and Mrs. Y. As a result, there is no ground to accept the statement by Mr. Nguyen Th, which claims that Mrs. NLQ10 gave the house to Mrs. NLQ9.

[5] Upon consideration of the agreement dated July 30, 1990 (the copy) among Mrs. NLQ9, Mr. Pham Van Vinh. Mrs. NLQ8 and Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1, the agreement dated November 05, 1993 between Mrs. NLQ9 and Mr. Le Dinh D and other agreements presented by Mr. Nguyen Th during the appellate trial court, the sales and transfers of the house among the parties were based only on hand-written agreement.   The house was sold and transferred in presence of neither Mrs. NLQ10 nor Mrs. Y- the owner of the house and there was no consent to the aforesaid agreements by Mrs. NLQ10 and Mrs. Y.  As Mrs. NLQ9 and Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1 have no legal ownership of the house but sold such house to Mr. D without permission of Mrs. Luu Kim Y, such sale is considered against the law and cannot be accepted.

 [6] Mrs. Luu Kim Y went abroad in 1980 and had Mrs. NLQ1 to look after the house for her. By 1996, Mrs. NLQ1 left for an overseas country then the house was transferred to Mr. D and his family in 1999 by Mrs. NLQ9. As for that reason, such transfer is not considered housing transfer before July 01, 1991 and this case is about dispute over ownership of house and land for residence.

[7] Pursuant to Article 125 and 127 of the Housing Law No.56/2005/QH11 dated November 29, 2005, Article 126 of the Law on amendments to the Housing Law No.34/2009/QH12 of National Assembly, Article 121 of the Land Law in Viet Nam (which comes into force on September 01, 2009), Article 65, 66 and 67 of Decree No.71/2010/ND-CP dated June 23, 2010 of the Government providing for enforcement of the Housing Law, the ownership of people who are living abroad and permitted to stay within such country for at least 3 months is accepted by the State.  According to the record of temporary residence at 215A Hoang Van Thu, Ward 8, Phu Nhuan District, Mrs. Luu Kim Y has returned to Vietnam three times and her latest return lasts from November 06, 2009 to February 06, 2010. Therefore, upon consideration of the aforesaid information, the act in which Mrs. Luu Kim Y petitions for recognization of her ownership of the house located 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City is based on legal documents and conformable to the law.

[8] Regarding sales and transfers of the house among Mrs. NLQ9, Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1 and Mr. Le Dinh D: During the case settlement, the court of first instance has duly summoned the respondents and persons with relevant rights and duties many times but none of them showed up for evidence and statement provision or conciliation. The court of first instance has even issued decision No.2218/QD-CCCC and duly requested them to provide evidence for consideration but they failed to comply with such request.  On the other hand, during the first trial of first instance court, Mr. Nguyen Th failed to present the original copy of documents on house sale and transfer among Mrs. NLQ9, Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1 and Mr. Le Dinh D, so the Court of first instance must temporarily suspend the trial and post up an announcement of request for submission of original version of the aforesaid documents. However, Mr. Nguyen Th still failed to provide the original documents as required at the second court hearing on April 27, 2015 and he neither asked for consideration nor settlement of such documents. As for that reason, the act in which the court of first instance did not take such documents into account is not against the laws.  

[9] Furthermore, as specified in Article 91 and 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure 2015 in Viet Nam, the party involved in a lawsuit must provide evidence as obliged. Hence, Mr. Nguyen Th and other parties concerned must face the consequence if failing to provide evidence or providing insufficient evidence.  Therefore, the Mrs. Luu Kim Y has justifiable grounds to petition for recognization of house ownership and request Mr. D and Mrs. B and their family as well as people living in the house to return such house to her as accepted by the court of first instance.  Consequently, if there is any dispute about the house sale agreement or house transfer agreement arising among Mrs. NLQ9, Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1 and Mr. Le Dinh D and request for settlement of contract consequence, the parties concerned may file another civil lawsuit.

[10] Regarding repair of the house: Mr. Nguyen Th said that he had spent totally VND 2,500 million on repairing the house; however; he neither presented evidence for such repair nor requested for settlement during the court hearing.

 [11] As persons permanently or temporarily living at 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City failed to be present at the court and Mr. Nguyen Th failed to provide the evidence for the number of family members recorded in his family household book and information on persons temporarily living in the house, the court of first instance has legitimate grounds to conclude that persons living in the house including Mr. NLQ5, Mrs. NLQ6, Mrs. NLQ7, Mrs. Le Ngoc B, Mr. Nguyen Th, Mr. Le Dinh D and Mr. NLQ3 and compel such persons to return the house to Mrs. Luu Kim Y.  Although Mr. Nguyen Th presented the original family household record at the first instance trial court, he refused to provide the copy of such family household record as required and said that his two daughters - Nguyen Le Van and Nguyen Le Hang had gone abroad for 7 years and Mrs. Nhi- the wife of Mr. D was no longer living in the house.  As for that reason, the act in which the court of first instance did not compel the aforesaid persons to return the house to Mrs. Luu Kim Y is proper. Other people who stay in such house during the judgment enforcement must return the house to Mrs. Luu Kim Y as obliged.

[12] Regarding the appeal of Mrs. Le Thi Thu H, which specifies that an assistance of VND 840 million will be given only if Mr. D and Mrs. B and their family move out and return the house to Mrs. Luu Kim Y: The appellate trial panel for civil cases finds that Mrs. Luu Kim Y is willing to offer such assistance and the house and the money will be returned and received, respectively, during the judgment enforcement.

[13] As analyzed above, as Mr. Nguyen Th and Mrs. Le Thi Thu H fail to provide any additional document or new evidence at the appellate court, the appellate trial panel for civil cases has no ground for accepting their appeals and preserve all decisions stated in the first-instance judgment as recommended by the representative procurator.

[14] As the appeal is rejected, Mr. Nguyen Th and Mrs. Luu Kim Y must pay the appellate court fee for civil cases as regulated.

[15] Other decisions stated in first-instance judgment No.424/2015/DSST dated May 08, 2015 of the Ho Chi Minh City People’s Court shall remain as there is no appeal against them.

Pursuant to documents and evidence mentioned above;

HEREBY DECIDES:

Pursuant to Clause 1 Article 308, Article 27, 147, 148 and 273 of the Code of Civil Procedure 2015, Article 164 and 169 of the Civil Law 2005, Decree No.71/2010/ND-CP dated June 23, 2010 of the Government on enforcement of the Housing Law; Resolution No.326/2016/UBTVQH14 in Viet Nam dated December 30, 2012 providing for guidelines on court fees and charges;

Not accept the written appeal of Mr. Nguyen Th and Mrs. Le Thi Thu H, and uphold decisions specified in first-instance judgment No.424/2015/DSST dated May 08, 2015 of Ho Chi Minh City People's Court.

* Hereby judges: Accept the petition of Mrs. Luu Kim Y whose representative is Mrs. Le Thi Thu H.

1/ Recognize that the house located on LVS Street, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City (previously 534C NVT Street NVT (PMG), cluster 4, Tran Quang Dieu ward, district 3, Ho Chi Minh City) is legally owned by Mrs. Luu Kim Y.

2/ Not accept sales and transfers of the house among Mrs. NLQ9, Mrs. NLQ8, Mrs. Nguyen Hoang Y1 under the agreement dated July 30, 1990 and between Mrs. NLQ9 and Mr. Le Dinh D under the agreement dated November 05, 1993. 

3/ Compel Mr. Le Dinh D and his family, who permanently reside at 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City and Mr. Nguyen Th, Mrs. Le Ngoc B and their family, who reside at 534C LVS, Ward 14, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City and Mrs. NLQ3, Mrs. NLQ5, Mrs. NLQ6 and Mrs. NLQ7 to return the entire house to Mrs. Luu Kim Y within 3 months from the effective date of this judgment.

4/ Recognize that Mrs. Luu Kim Y is willing to give Mr. Le Dinh D and his family an assistance of VND 840 million.

The money and the house shall be given at the same time under surveillance of the enforcement body.

5/ After giving the money to the family of Mr. D and Mrs. B, Mrs. Luu Kim Y, as specified in this judgment, is entitled to contact the competent authority to carry out the procedure for house ownership and land use rights and fulfill financial obligations as regulated by laws.

6/ In terms of court fees:

Mr. Le Dinh D and Mrs. Le Ngoc B shall pay the first instance civil court fee of VND 200,000.

Mrs. Luu Kim Y is not required to pay the ad valorem civil court fee and the money amount of VND 56 million paid in advance according to the payment receipt No.014139 dated March 09, 2010 issued by the Ho Chi Minh City Department of enforcements of civil judgments will be refunded to her

The appellate civil court fee of VND 200,000 shall be paid by Mr. Nguyen Th and Mrs. Luu Kim Y each; it shall be deducted from the court fee paid in advance by Mr. Nguyen Th and Mrs. Luu Kim Y according to the payment receipt No.08669 and 08670 issued by the Ho Chi Minh City Department of enforcements of civil judgments.

The judgment debtor shall pay monthly interest for the lateness of court fee payment calculated based upon the money unpaid according to the basic interest determined corresponding to the time of failing to enforce the judgment published by the State Bank under regulations in Clause 2 Article 305 of the Civil Code in Viet Nam from the day on which the request for judgment enforcement is issued by the enforcement creditor to the day the enforcement debtor fully pays all the money required.

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 and 9 of the Law on enforcement of civil judgments, and the effective period of judgment enforcement shall comply with provisions in Article 30 of the Law on enforcement of civil judgments

The judgment made at the appellate open court for civil case comes into force from the day on which it is passed.