On March 26, 2024, the Supreme People's Procuracy issued Official Letter No. 1083/VKSTC-V9 to subordinate People's Procuracies to address difficulties in supervising the resolution of civil, marriage, and family cases ("Official Letter 1083"), and to provide guidance on understanding and uniformly applying certain unclear legal provisions. Here, ATA will summarize the important guidelines mentioned in Official Letter 1083 as follows:
1. The preparation period for civil trial shall be counted for the entire case, without recalculating from the time of filing requests for supplementation, opposition, or independence
Issue: Article 203 Clause 1 of the 2015 Law on Civil Procedure sets the maximum preparation period for trial at 4 months. In cases of complex nature or force majeure events, an extension of up to 2 months is possible. However, there is no guidance on cases deemed 'complex.' Furthermore, there are no regulations on the preparation period for trial when parties submit requests for filing, opposition, or independence.
Guidance:
1.1. Cases deemed 'complex' warrant an extension of the trial preparation period, including but not limited to:
- Involvement of multiple levels, localities, or agencies, or the presence of foreign elements, requiring coordination, support, and compliance from various entities, resulting in extensive time for verification, evidence collection, and case resolution.
- Divergent opinions on evidence evaluation and legal application.
- Involvement of policy subjects (ethnic, religious, meritorious individuals, etc.), potentially leading to sensitive situations affecting local security, order, and safety.
- Indications during case resolution suggest negative conduct, irresponsibility, or lack of objectivity from litigation participants, leading to prolonged grievances.
- Emergence of new disputes or legal situations lacking specific regulations or with ambiguous, overlapping, or conflicting provisions.
1.2. Extension of the preparation period can only occur once
1.3. The preparation period is counted from the date the case is accepted and applies uniformly to the entire case:
According to VKSTC, the preparation period is designated for the entire case, regardless of the timing of individual requests. The Law on Civil Procedure also stipulates the latest deadline for parties to submit supplementary requests to ensure the court can fulfill its tasks during the preparation phase. After this deadline, the court may accept new requests only if their resolution within the same case is deemed necessary and does not require additional verification or evidence collection prolonging the trial preparation period.
If the court violates the Law on Civil Procedure regarding the preparation period, the People's Procuracy has the right to file a complaint.
2. If no party requests the application of the statute of limitations, the court retains jurisdiction even after the expiration of the statute
Issue: Article 184 Clause 2 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code stipulates that the court only applies the statute of limitations upon the request of one or more parties. However, Article 623 Clause 1 of the 2015 Civil Code states that after 30 years, unclaimed property belongs to the inheritor currently managing it. Thus, if the plaintiff initiates legal proceedings after the statute of limitations has expired, can the court still handle inheritance cases?
Guidance:
+ In cases where there is a claim for inheritance division without any party requesting the application of the statute of limitations, the court assumes jurisdiction and handles the case through standard procedures, even if the court is aware that the statute of limitations has expired.
+ If there is a request to apply the statute of limitations under Article 184 Clause 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, and the court finds that the statute of limitations has expired, it suspends the case.
+ If the statute of limitations has expired, but the parties request the court to determine the rightful inheritor, the court applies Article 623 Clause 1 of the Civil Code to determine that the property belongs to the person currently managing it.
3. Disputes regarding contracts related to land use rights may fall under the jurisdiction of the court where the defendant resides
Issue: For disputes over contracts for land use rights, it's necessary to determine the court's jurisdiction based on the location of the real estate or the defendant's residence.
Guidance: Official Letter 1083 clarifies the determination of the court's jurisdiction in this case based on the nature of the dispute:
+ For disputes over contracts for land use rights, the court's jurisdiction lies with the court where the defendant resides, works, or as chosen by the plaintiff (the court where the contract is executed).
+ For disputes involving real estate, the court with jurisdiction is the one where the real estate is located.
4. Obligations in transactions that cannot be quantified will not be subject to the provision recognizing the validity of transactions violating formalities if at least two-thirds of the obligations have been fulfilled
Issue: Article 129 Clause 1 of the 2015 Civil Code states: "...Civil transactions violating formalities are void, except in cases where the civil transaction was established in writing as required by law but the document does not comply with legal regulations, and one or more parties have fulfilled at least two-thirds of their obligations under the transaction, then upon the request of one or more parties, the court shall decide to recognize the validity of that transaction...". How are these obligations determined?
Guidance:
+ Determining whether obligations have been fulfilled depends on the agreement of the parties regarding the quantity, type of work, amount of money, etc., to be fulfilled.
+ If obligations in a transaction cannot be quantified or determined, and it's impossible to ascertain whether a party has fulfilled at least two-thirds of their obligations, Article 129 of the Civil Code will not be applicable, and the transaction will be void due to violating formalities.
5. Contracts for land use rights deposits without proof of land use rights certification by the depositor are void
Issue: In cases where the depositor does not have land use rights certification (due to land not being auctioned, not yet subdivided, etc.) or is a broker, are land use rights deposit contracts considered valid?
Guidance:
Since the purpose of the deposit is to secure the execution or performance of a land use rights transfer contract, the depositor must be a lawful holder of land use rights.
If the depositor is not a lawful holder of land use rights, the deposit contract is void due to violating the conditions regarding the parties.
However, if the depositor can prove they are either legally authorized by the landowner or have lawfully acquired the land use rights transfer contract (e.g., through a valid transfer contract or a transfer contract that doesn't comply with formalities but at least two-thirds of the payment obligations have been fulfilled), the court may recognize the deposit contract.
Comment: