Article

Facts:

In Dec. 2016, person not involved in the case held a counterfeit “RMB L/G” to claim compensation from the Appellant II. And the Appellant II issued a report to the Huizhou Public Security Bureau, Guangdong Province, which filed a case investigation and issued a “Police Report” and “Notice of the Case” to the Appellant II.

On Dec. 29, 2016, the Appellant II received a copy of the “RMB L/G” from the Appellee for the purpose of prosecution. After verification, the Appellant II was found that the L/G and the seal on the L/G was forged, then the Appellant II complementally reported the case to the Huizhou Public Security Bureau.

The Huizhou Public Security Bureau found the case belongs to a series of criminal cases that have been investigated and dealt with. All these cases involved forgoing financial bills and contract fraud, and had been included in the scope of criminal investigation.

Legal Analysis:

Legal Issue(s): Was the jurisdiction clause in the counterfeit L/G valid, so that the Higher People’s Court of Sichuan Province has jurisdiction over the case?

Legal Rule(s):

Para. 1, Art. 37,Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China:

If a people’s court which has jurisdiction over a case is unable to exercise the jurisdiction for a special reason, the superior people’s court shall designate another court to exercise the jurisdiction.

Item 2, Para. 1, Art. 170,Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China:

If the facts were wrongly ascertained or the application of law was incorrect in the original judgment, the said judgment shall be amended according to the law.

Art.171, Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China:

The people's court of second instance shall decide in the form of written orders all cases of appeal against the written orders made by the people's court of first instance

Disposition – for each legal issue:

(was each issue affirmed, reversed, or remanded? If the issue related to a motion, was that motion granted or denied?)

The Court brought a verdict in favor of the Appellant that the Higher People’s Court of Sichuan Province was not a convenient court in this case, and the Higher People’s Court of Guangdong Province should hear the case.

Holding & Reasoning for each issue:

The “RMB L/G”, the basis of the Appellee’s litigation, stipulated jurisdiction clause.

The Appellant I and Appellant II alleged that the “RMB L/G” was counterfeit on the basis of “Police Report” and “Notice of the Case” to prove that the public security organ has already filed an investigation on the relevant criminal case. But the validity of the “RMB L/G” belong to substantive issue. Therefore, the grounds for appeal was Insufficient.

But the case involved regional series of financial crime cases, so the Higher People’s Court of Sichuan Province should not exercise its jurisdiction over the case.

COPYRIGHT OF THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL BANKING LAW & PRACTICE

The views expressed in this Case Summary are those of the Institute of International Banking Law and Practice and not necessarily those of the ICC or Coastline Solutions.