Nanchong: What happened when the brother sued the younger sister?

The 64-year-old brother and the 53-year-old sister confronted each other in court, and the brother said that she had taken more than 80,000 yuan of deposits entrusted to her sister to keep; the younger sister said that she had helped her brother take 14,000 yuan and had given it all to him.

However, during the trial, the two sides not only could not produce sufficient evidence to prove their respective claims, but also began to "deviate" in the face of the evidence obtained by the judges in the investigation.

What exactly is the truth? And how will the court decide?

"Repay my 80,000 yuan deposit"

Tang Tianju (pseudonym) and Tang Jing (pseudonym) are brothers and sisters, both living in a township in Yingshan County. Tang Tianju, 64, has no wife, children, and no culture, and his sister Tang Jing, who is 11 years younger, often takes care of him. The brothers and sisters usually walk close together and have a harmonious relationship.

However, in March 2021, a news broke in the remote mountain township: brother Tang Tianju told his sister Tang Jing!

It turned out that because of his family's poverty when he was young, Tang Tianju had not read a book, and he asked his sister Tang Jing for help in many matters in daily life. "Since ten years ago, I have deposited the money I have worked hard to earn and the subsidy money I received into the bank, a total of more than 80,000 yuan, and let Tang Jing keep the deposit slip for me, but in 2019, when the New Year is approaching, I need to withdraw some money and find Tang Jing to get the deposit slip, but she ignores me, and I suspect that there is a problem with these deposits." On June 2, 2020, I went to the bank to ask, only to learn that she had taken all the deposits. Tang Tianju, who was sitting in the plaintiff's seat, turned his head to his sister Tang Jing and said angrily: "You still pay me 80,000 yuan in deposits."

"The money withdrawn was given to him"

In the defendant's seat, her sister Tang Jing was very aggrieved, and she retorted: "Tang Tianju is a five-guarantee household, usually living alone, no income, where did the 80,000 yuan deposit come from?" I did help him withdraw money twice, but both at his own behest. In 2019, he suffered a waist injury, and I helped him take 10,000 yuan to treat his injury; in 2020, I helped him take 4,000 yuan. On both occasions, he handed me the deposit slip and asked me to help him withdraw the money, and the total of 14,000 yuan withdrawn on both occasions was handed over to him. ”

Tang Jing also told the judge that in the past, she considered her brother's difficulties in life and took care of him in many ways, but her brother was not grateful and thought that she should help him, and later she no longer provided financial or other help for her brother, so her brother came to sue herself and asked the judge to reject Tang Tianju's litigation claim.

Siblings say "out of shape" at trial

In the face of the brothers and sisters' very different statements, and the evidence provided was insufficient, the judge handling the case retrieved the details of the deposit and withdrawal transactions under Tang Tianju's bank name from 2010 to 2020, and identified 5 deposits totaling 24,800 yuan, and Tang Jing took away 5 deposits under Tang Tianju's name from 2017 to 2020, totaling 24,675.38 yuan.

In this regard, Tang Tianju explained to the court that he gave Tang Jing 50,000 yuan of deposit certificates and also lent her 30,000 yuan in cash. But the evidence provided by Tang Tianju could not confirm his claim.

Tang Jing also defended to the court that the 24,675.38 yuan she took from the bank had been handed over to Tang Tianju, but also did not produce evidence to prove it.

The court therefore held that Tang Jing should return the 24,675.38 yuan taken away to Tang Tianju. A few days ago, the Huilong Court of the Yingshan County People's Court made a judgment restricting Tang Jing to return 24,675.38 yuan to Tang Tianju within 15 days after the judgment took effect.

On July 23, Shi An'an, president of the Huilong Court of the Yingshan County People's Court and chief judge of the case, told reporters that after the first-instance judgment, both parties agreed to the judgment and did not appeal, and the judgment has now taken effect. (Nanchong Daily all-media reporter He Xianfei)

Lawyer Volunteer Action

Elements constituting unjust enrichment

Ren Jing, director of Sichuan Gangxing Law Firm, ——— one of the top ten law firms in the province: Article 987 of the Civil Code stipulates: "If the beneficiary knows or should know that there is no legal basis for the benefit obtained, the person who has suffered the loss may request the beneficiary to return the benefits he has obtained and compensate for the loss according to law." ”

There are four elements for the establishment of unjust enrichment: one is that one party obtains property benefits, the second is that one party suffers losses, the third is that there is a causal relationship between interests and losses, and the fourth is that there is no legal basis for obtaining benefits. In this case, the court found that the defendant took the plaintiff's deposit and did not give it to him, that there was a causal relationship between the benefits obtained by the defendant and the plaintiff's losses, and that there was no legal basis for the defendant to obtain the benefits, so the court ordered him to return the deposits taken on behalf of the plaintiff to the plaintiff.