Two days ago, when I was about to get off work last Friday, I received a withdrawal ruling from the court on my mobile phone through the service platform, although I knew that it must be such a result, but I was still a little disappointed.
The legal relationship of my ** case is simple, the facts are very clear, and the process of handling it is not easy at all.
1. Briefly describe the circumstances of the case
My client owes him three years of wages because Company A, which is about a little more than 600,000 yuan. Because of the three-year epidemic situation of Company A, it has not eased at all, and there are a lot of debts owed outside, and some creditors have sued Company A and applied for compulsory enforcement in the court, and the court has sealed and frozen all the accounts of Company A, and some accounts have been seized and frozen more than once.
The client learned that the money owed by a state-owned enterprise in the city to Company A was due, and after negotiation with Company A, Company A transferred the creditor's rights of the state-owned enterprise to the client for 600,000 yuan, and issued the Notice of Assignment of Creditor's Rights to the state-owned enterprise.
After negotiating with this state-owned enterprise, the feedback is that you should go to the lawsuit, because we are a state-owned enterprise, and no one dares to pay the money owed to Company A reflected in the accounts to individuals.
II. The trial of the case
After the case was filed in the court, after four months of waiting, it was finally time to wait. The judge announced that the summary procedure would be applied and that the case would be heard by a single court, and the original defendant had no objection.
The defendant's lawyer's defense mainly focused on three points: 1. The payment terms were not met, because the contract signed between the defendant and Company A stipulated that Company A would issue a receipt to the defendant before payment, but it had not been issued so far;2. Whether the plaintiff and Company A's claim of 600,000 yuan exists?Evidence of existence is not seen;3. Company A owes a lot of money to creditors, and now transfers the 600,000 claims it enjoys to the defendant to the plaintiff, which is suspected of evading debts.
The judge asked me to respond to the defendant's defense, and I said: 1. Company A has issued a full invoice;2. Whether the plaintiff and Company A have claims and debts of 600,000 yuan has nothing to do with this case, and the law does not stipulate that such a precondition must be met for the transfer of creditor's rights3. Company A did owe money to some creditors, but the amount owed to these creditors has nothing to do with this case.
After investigation, the facts became clearer: the defendant received the full invoice from Company A;The terms of payment to Company A were also met.
What people didn't expect was that the judge turned the focus of the investigation to how many cases of Company A had applied for enforcement, and how many of them were in this courtHow many are there in other courts?I said that we didn't have statistics on this, but we know that there are cases of applying for enforcement of Company A in two courts in this city, and some of the cases have been finalized.
So: no matter how well prepared your lawyer is, you don't know from which angle the judge will investigate or be interested in those facts.
To this end, the judge added Company A to participate in the second ** according to his authority, and Company A reconfirmed the fact that the plaintiff's wages were owed 600,000 yuan, and also stated to the judge that Company A was enforced by two courts in the city and one court in other places, and the account was seized and frozen.
3. Judges' opinions
After the second **, the judge left me and the plaintiff. Tell us: There is a case in the Executive Bureau of our court, the plaintiff defaulted on a lot of debts, and after winning a case, in order to avoid being enforced, he immediately transferred the creditor's rights to other people, and the other debtors applied for enforcement in our court, and the other debtors reacted strongly and suspected that there was a problem, and now the Commission for Discipline Inspection is investigating.
The judge went on to say: In your case, since the defendant also admitted that he should pay Company A, he also expressed his willingness to pay Company A in court, but he was unwilling to pay you. As an employee of Company A, can't you let Company A receive the money and pay you immediately?Why do you have to go around in such a circle?
I told the judge: When you were in court just now, you also knew that Company A had many cases going on, and all accounts had been seized and frozen, so if the defendant paid the money to Company A's account, do you think we would still be able to get it?
The judge said: Then your case is indeed suspected of Company A evading debts, not to mention that our court discipline inspection committee is also investigating the case of transfer of creditor's rights, this kind of case is more sensitive to us.
I said: 1. It is true that Company A owes the plaintiff's wages, and this is not a false creditor's right and debt;2. Since the defendant is willing to pay Company A, why can't it pay the plaintiff?3. Even if many creditors of Company A know about the transfer of creditor's rights of Company A, according to the law, they can sue separately to require Company A to revoke the transfer to the plaintiff, which is not within the scope of this case.
The judge waved his hand and said, "Think about it."
Fourth, the client cannot withstand the pressure and wants to withdraw the lawsuit
Two days after the second time, the client called me, saying that the judge had called her, saying that her case would be dismissed, and that she could withdraw the lawsuit and refund half of the litigation fees.
I asked her: Did the judge tell you what the reasons for the dismissal were?The client said: That is to say, Company A is suspected of evading debts by transferring its creditor's rights in the case of many enforcement cases.
I said: He will never dare to make a judgment on this ground, there is no legal basis for this reason, you let him sentence it, and we will appeal to the Intermediate People's Court.
Client: Appeal to the Intermediate Court, can you guarantee to win?
Me: I can't guarantee this, but it's okay legally, another lawyer of our firm just got a case of assignment of creditor's rights in another judge, and the judge asked: Is it true to owe money?Isn't it time to pay?Has the notice of assignment of claims been received?The judgment against the plaintiff is in favor, and you let him judge it to see if he dares or not.
In the following half month, the client contacted me almost every day on WeChat**, and I could feel her anxiety and uneasiness, because the judge had already mobilized her to withdraw the lawsuit more than two or three times.
Finally, the client could not resist the pressure and decided to withdraw the lawsuit.
5. Give me some thoughts
1. As the last line of defense for fairness and justice, judges must abide by laws and regulations, not so-called other things
2. The judge should not exert pressure on the parties. Since the client has appointed a lawyer, the judge can communicate with the lawyer if he has any questions, after all, the client is not familiar with the legal judge, and does not even know what kind of provisions the law has on some facts.
3. The judge is the judge, you are not the first to maintain stability, what you should consider is how to try and judge the case in your own hands well, rather than considering how to protect the interests of creditors in other cases, and even consider whether all creditors can be gathered together and how to divide the money.
4. The judge's strict implementation of the law is the biggest ZZ, which is to maintain D's authority, because laws and regulations are the embodiment of D's will!