Hoian Court
Press releases
Small Claims Adjudication White Paper and Typical Cases
On the afternoon of October 12, the Hai'an Court held a press conference to release the 2020-2022 White Paper on the Adjudication of Small Claims Cases and Typical Cases.
Ding Peipei, deputy secretary of the party group and vice president of the academy, and Zhao Zuhua, president of the court of the development zone, attended the press conference and answered reporters' questions. Nantong Municipal People's Congress deputies Cao Jinsong and Chen Yi, Nantong CPPCC member Zhou Dongxi, special supervisor Li Yunfeng, Nantong TV and other media reporters were invited to attend the press conference. The press conference was presided over by Liu Jingjing, member of the leading party group and director of the Political Department of the academy.
At the meeting, Ma Yanan, a judicial assistant, interpreted the trial of small claims cases in the Hai'an Court from 2020 to 2022 and released typical cases. In the past three years, the Hai'an court has concluded a total of 22,592 first-instance civil and commercial cases, of which 2,440 have been concluded using small claims procedures. Small claims cases involving people's livelihood disputes have a relatively large base and a relatively high proportion. The average trial period of cases tried through small claims procedures was basically maintained within 30 days, and the proportion of cases concluded by mediation or withdrawal reached 63.65%. The white paper analyzes the main problems existing in the trial of small claims cases, and proposes relief laws in a targeted manner, hoping to raise the public's awareness of small claims and promote the "appropriateness" of small claims procedures.
Case one
Yu et al. v. Yang Labor Contract Dispute
-- Speedy trial and quick settlement help accelerate the protection of migrant workers' rights
01
Basic facts of the case
Yang is a contract foreman, who hired Yu and four other people to engage in carpentry, bricklayer and hydropower work on the project in September 2020. After the completion of the project, after settlement by both parties, Yang issued IOUs to 4 people on January 20, 2022, promising to pay their wages in December 2022, but Yang did not pay on time. In February 2023, Yu and 4 others sued Yang to court.
02
Referee results
The facts of the case are clear, the relationship between rights and obligations is clear, the dispute is not large, and the subject matter of the case is small, and the conditions for the application of small claims procedures (the minimum subject amount is 3,500 yuan, and the maximum subject amount is 8,700 yuan). During the trial, the judge fully listened to the opinions of both parties, organized the parties to mediate, and reached a mediation agreement in less than an hour, which took only nine days from the filing of the case to the conclusion of the case.
03
Typical significance
Although the subject matter of the case is not large, there is no distinction between major and minor cases in the administration of justice for the people, especially such cases are directly related to the legitimate rights and interests of workers. For the parties, the small claims procedure is efficient and convenient, and the first instance is final, which can shorten the waiting period for the legal documents to take effect, so that the rights and interests of the parties can be quickly realized. For courts, small claims procedures simplify the litigation process, which is conducive to judges focusing more on difficult cases, so as to achieve "quick handling of simple cases and precise handling of difficult cases", and improve judicial efficiency.
Case 2
Liu v. Shen Dispute over Liability for Injury of Labor Service Providers
-- Fully protect parties' right to procedural objections in accordance with law
01
Basic facts of the case
In December 2021, Liu arranged for Shen to go to a construction site to engage in belt machine installation and welding work, and Shen suffered back burns due to electric sparks splashing on his clothes during operation. Shen sued Liu for medical expenses, nursing fees, lost work expenses and other losses totaling 37,000 yuan. Liu objected to the application of small claims procedures in this case on the grounds that the case was controversial.
02
Referee results
After hearing, the court held that the subject matter of the case was 37,000 yuan, and the facts of the case were clear, the relationship between rights and obligations was clear, and the dispute was not large, which met the requirements for small claims cases, and should be tried by small claims procedures in accordance with law. The magistrate rejected Liu's objection in court, explained to him the reasons for rejecting the objection, and recorded the relevant circumstances in the record. After the trial, according to the degree of fault of both parties, Liu was sentenced to bear 70% of the compensation liability, and ten days after the judgment was served, Liu consciously fulfilled his obligation to compensate.
03
Typical significance
The people's courts fully protect the parties' right to object to the application of small claims procedures. Where parties raise objections to the application of small claims procedures, the people's courts shall, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law and judicial interpretations, promptly review the objections raised by the parties and inform the parties of the results of the review. If the objection is not established, the parties should patiently explain the reasons for rejecting the objection to effectively protect the procedural rights and interests of the parties.
Case Three
A furniture store sued Lu for a contract dispute
——Small claims are quick and easy to optimize the business environment
01
Basic facts of the case
In October 2021, Lu booked a brand of whole-house custom furniture in a furniture store in Hai'an, including wardrobes, cabinets, wooden doors, etc., with a total price of 119,800 yuan, and the two parties agreed to pay the price before the furniture was delivered to installation. After the custom furniture entered the site one after another, Lu paid a total of 80,000 yuan, saying that the funds on hand were tight, and promised to pay the balance after the installation. The furniture was fully installed in April 2022, and Lu refused to pay on the grounds that the cabinet door panel was degummed, and the furniture store sued the court.
02
Referee results
After hearing, the court held that the subject matter of the case was 39,800 yuan, which met the applicable requirements of small claims procedures. Lu customized the whole house furniture in the furniture store, and the two parties have formed a sales contract relationship, and should perform their respective rights and obligations in accordance with the contract. After the trial, under the patient advice of the contracting judge, both parties realized their negligence in the performance of the contract and agreed to give in and shake hands and make peace.
03
Typical significance
In recent years, the furniture industry has risen a wave of "whole house customization" boom, tailored according to consumer preferences, better meet the personalized needs of consumers in appearance and function, so it is increasingly favored by consumers. However, the particularity of "one-to-one" customized goods makes it impossible to sell twice, making more and more contradictions and disputes in this field. For cases where there is no objection to the quality of customized goods and the subject matter is small, if the basic facts pointed to are not disputed, and the relationship between rights and obligations is clear, all meet the applicable conditions of small claims procedures.
Case Four
Wang v. Xu A labor contract dispute
-- The determination of labor relations affects the payment of wages
01
Basic facts of the case
From October 2019 to October 2020, Wang was engaged in online game training in Xu's studio, and Wang claimed that a labor contract relationship had been formed with Xu, and Xu should pay him 35,000 yuan in labor remuneration. Xu argued that he and Wang did not establish a labor relationship, but only cooperated to play games in a group, and as the organizer, he was responsible for settling and distributing the money obtained from the cooperation to everyone. Wang then sued the court for Xu to pay 35,000 yuan in labor remuneration and corresponding interest.
02
Referee results
After hearing, the court held that the focus of the dispute in this case was whether a labor relationship had been established between the plaintiff and the defendant. Xu arranged and assigned tasks and settled the game payment, Wang had to ask Xu for leave, and when Wang proposed to pay wages, Xu did not raise an objection, which was sufficient to determine that a labor relationship was formed between the two. The court ordered Xu to pay Wang 35,000 yuan in labor remuneration and corresponding overdue payment interest.
03
Typical significance
In practice, due to the flexible form of this kind of labor relationship, flexible wage settlement, and the fact that the two parties have not signed a written labor service contract, determining whether the two parties have a labor relationship has often become the focus of disputes. The judge reminded that workers should pay attention to collecting and preserving relevant evidence in the process of providing labor services, so as not to bear adverse consequences due to difficulties in presenting evidence in the event of disputes.
Case Five
Yu sued Chu after divorce property dispute
-- Where husband and wife divide their joint property and agree to pay off debts, they shall perform as agreed
01
Basic facts of the case
Yu and Chu were originally husband and wife. In May 2021, the two parties went to the Civil Affairs Bureau to go through the divorce formalities, signed a divorce agreement, and divided the joint property of the husband and wife according to law, which stipulated that "the husband needs to pay off the woman's credit cards of China CITIC Bank and Bank of Communications". After the reserve did not pay off the arrears, Yu returned the arrears of more than 20,000 yuan by himself. Yu sued for Chu to return the credit card compensation, but Chu did not reply.
02
Referee results
After hearing, the court held that Yu and Chu had made a clear agreement on the repayment of credit card arrears under a certain name at the time of divorce by agreement, which was a true expression of the intention of both parties and was legal and valid. The existing evidence can prove that Yu owed more than 20,000 yuan to the credit card, and the reserve should be returned. The court ordered Chu to pay more than 20,000 yuan in compensation to a credit card.
03
Typical significance
Divorce cases involve status and small claims proceedings are not applicable. However, marital property disputes and post-divorce property disputes are essentially property disputes, and if the dispute is not large and the subject matter is small, small claims procedures may be applied. The first paragraph of Article 1087 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China stipulates that in the event of divorce, the joint property of husband and wife shall be disposed of by mutual agreement; If the agreement fails, the people's court shall, on the basis of the specific circumstances of the property, make a judgment in accordance with the principle of taking care of the rights and interests of the children, the woman, and the innocent party. Divorce between husband and wife may divide the joint property of the husband and wife and reach an agreement, and the husband and wife shall perform the legal and valid property division agreement according to the agreement.
Case Six
A leasing company sued Tang for a contract dispute
- If the leased mobile phone is overdue in paying rent, the tenant shall pay the buyout price as agreed
01
Basic facts of the case
In May 2021, Tang (Party B) leased a Huawei mobile phone online, signed a leasing service agreement with the leasing company (Party A) and the platform (Party C) for a period of one year, and agreed on the rent, collection method, and buyout price. The agreement stipulates that "Party B overpays the rent for more than 7 natural days during the lease period" is one of the situations where it is leased and resold, and Party B needs to buy out the leased equipment. Tang collected the mobile phone and paid 7 rents and did not renew them, and the leasing company urged him several times. In July 2022, the leasing company asked Tang to pay for the equipment buyout.
02
Referee results
After hearing, the court held that the mobile phone rental service agreement signed by the three parties was the true intention of the parties, and the parties should perform their obligations according to the agreement. According to the contract, if Party B overdue the payment of rent for more than 7 days, Party A has the right to "resell from lease", and the contractual relationship between the two parties is changed to a sales relationship. Tang failed to pay the 8th installment of rent within the time limit and did not return the mobile phone after the expiration of the lease period, and the relationship between Tang and the leasing company was leased and resold, and the court ordered Tang to pay the mobile phone buyout according to law.
03
Typical significance
The small claims procedure implements the final trial of the first instance for cases where the subject matter of the dispute is not large, aiming to quickly resolve the disputes between the parties and restore the order of social transactions. In practice, the practice of "renting instead of buying" is not uncommon, saving costs and improving resource utilization. However, the lessee should still strictly abide by the signed lease agreement to avoid defaults such as late payment, which will lead to a credit crisis.
Case Seven
Zhou sued a clothing store over an information network sales contract dispute
- fictitious clothing components, which constitute fraud, and consumers are entitled to claim triple compensation
01
Basic facts of the case
Zhou buys a branded horn button double-sided wool coat at a clothing store. The clothing store set the product parameters for consumers on the product purchase interface, showing that the fabric material of the coat is sheep wool, and the fabric content is more than 95%. An e-commerce testing company was entrusted by Zhou to conduct a quality test on the wool coat purchased by Zhou, and the test results showed that the sheep wool content was actually 60%, which was obviously inconsistent with the commodity parameters set by the clothing store. Zhou then sued a clothing store for triple damages.
02
Referee results
Zhou and a clothing store formed an information network sales contract relationship. The garment fabricated product ingredients and constituted fraud. According to Article 55 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests, Zhou has the right to require the clothing store to compensate three times the price of the purchased goods. If the case involved a coat of false ingredients, Zhou should return it to the clothing store and provide necessary assistance to the clothing store to collect the coat.
03
Typical significance
The facts of the case were clear and the amount of the subject matter was small. In order to quickly resolve the disputes between the parties, protect the rights and interests of online shopping consumers, and promote the benign development of the online economy, the court applied small claims procedures to conduct the trial in accordance with the law, and the clothing store made triple compensation to consumer Zhou after the judgment was served, and took the initiative to truthfully modify the product parameters of the purchase interface.
Case Eight
Door and Window Company v. Liu Dingding contract dispute
- The contract has actually been performed, and it cannot be considered that the contract has not entered into force because it is not signed and sealed in form
01
Basic facts of the case
Liu signed an aluminum door customization contract with the door and window company, and the specifications and materials of the cast aluminum door were agreed in the contract, with a total price of 30,000 yuan. After on-site measurement, the door and window company sent the aluminum door design drawings and a new sales contract to Liu's husband through WeChat. The sales contract changed the specifications, materials, amounts, etc. of the cast aluminum door, and the total price was changed to 20,000 yuan. After the aluminum door was installed, the door and window company sent a settlement list to Liu's husband through WeChat. Liu's husband did not reply to the door and window company from beginning to end, and during the trial, Liu refused to recognize the price recorded in the contract on the grounds that the total price had not yet been determined.
02
Referee results
Liu and the door and window company established a legal and valid contract, and both parties should perform their obligations in accordance with the contract. Liu had no objection to the change of the customized aluminum door by the two parties and the completion of the production and installation of the aluminum door by the door and window company, but believed that it had not signed the new sales contract, and the two parties had not reached an agreement on the contract price. In this case, the door and window company had fulfilled its obligation to customize and install the aluminum door, and Liu did not refuse to accept it, and had put the door into daily use and paid most of the payment to the door and window company. If Liu has a price objection, he should provide evidence to prove that the two parties have discussed the price, rather than refusing to recognize the contract price on the grounds that he has not bargained, which obviously violates the principle of good faith. And the quotation of the door and window company is in line with the local market conditions, which is not unreasonable and exceeds expectations. Therefore, Liu should perform the payment obligation in accordance with the contract.
03
Typical significance
If a contract concluded in the form of a contract has been performed, it cannot be assumed that the contract has not entered into force without a formal signature or seal. Whether the parties have reached an agreement on the terms of the contract should pursue the true intention of the parties in substance based on the conduct of the parties. The subject matter of this case is small, the points of dispute are concentrated, and the small claims procedure is used for trial, which is conducive to the parties' convenient resolution of disputes.
Case IX
Chen v. Jiang, a motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute
- Determination of whether the insurance company should compensate for operating losses
01
Basic facts of the case
At an intersection in Qutang Town, Hai'an City, the truck driven by Jiang collided with the car driven by Shi. The public security organ determined that Jiang bore full responsibility for the accident, and Shi was not responsible. After investigation, the vehicle driven by Shi was an online taxi booking and had the operating qualification. In order to claim the operating losses incurred by the car during the damaged repair, Shi sued Jiang and his insurance company.
02
Referee results
The vehicles owned by Shi are commercial vehicles with transportation qualifications, and he has the right to claim compensation for reasonable stoppage losses caused by his inability to engage in corresponding business activities. The evidence adduced by the insurance company can prove that Jiang has fulfilled the obligation to remind and explain that the operating loss is exempt when applying for insurance, and the exemption clause is effective against Jiang, and the insurance company has the right to exempt the compensation according to the contract. The court ruled that Jiang was responsible for the compensation himself.
03
Typical significance
The facts of this case are clear, the evidence is sufficient, and the subject matter is small, and the small claims procedure is applied in accordance with the law, achieving a speedy conclusion of the simplified case. When an insurance company concludes a contract with the applicant, the insurer shall make a reminder on the insurance policy, insurance policy or other insurance certificate that exempts the insurer from liability on the insurance policy, insurance policy or other insurance certificate, and clearly explain the content of the clause to the applicant in writing or orally, otherwise the clause shall not take effect.
END
Source丨Development Zone Court