Interpreting the law by case| saying "no" to deliberately concealing facts and making false statements

Recently, the Heilinpu Court of the Wuhua District People's Court tried the case of Zhou X v. You X and an insurance company's motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute, and because the defendant You X did not appear in court after being legally summoned, the judge tried the case in You X's absence.

During the trial, Mr. Li Mouguang, Zhou's entrusted agent, deliberately concealed the fact that more than 4,000 yuan of medical expenses and nursing expenses had been paid by the defendant You, and demanded that the insurance company pay them together. In the process of the mediation of the parties organized by the judge to the court, a dramatic scene occurred, and the defendant You, who rushed to the court, said that the medical expenses and nursing expenses of the case had been paid in full by him, at this time, the plaintiff's entrusted agent, Li Mouguang, had an extremely arrogant attitude, claiming that the invoice was paid by the plaintiff at the plaintiff's place, that is, the plaintiff paid for it, and after repeated questioning by the judge, the lawyer still insisted that the above expenses were paid by the plaintiff in cash.

Defendant You mou was out of control in an instant, and cried bitterly in the courtroom, and then under the reminder of the judge, the defendant You mou remembered that the above fees were paid in WeChat, and then called up the WeChat payment voucher.

After verification, the defendant's payment time, amount, counterparty and other information were completely consistent with the invoice provided by the plaintiff. The judge who undertook the case immediately reprimanded Lawyer Li Mouguang for seriously violating his good faith and deliberately making false statements, and in view of the fact that the parties had reached a mediation opinion, that Lawyer Li Mouguang's illegal conduct had not yet caused serious consequences, and that the attitude of admitting mistakes was better, lawyer Li Mouguang's illegal acts were not further investigated.

Good faith is the basic criterion of the Civil Procedure Law

Article 63 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings, which came into effect on 1 May 2020, stipulates that where a party intentionally makes false statements and obstructs the people's court's trial, the people's court shall, on the basis of the circumstances, punish it in accordance with article 111 of the Civil Procedure Law.

Article 111 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China provides that where litigation participants or other persons fabricate or destroy important evidence, obstructing the people's court's trial of a case, the people's court may impose a fine or detention on the basis of the seriousness of the circumstances.

Article 63 of the Code of Conduct for Lawyers' Practice stipulates that lawyers must not submit evidence that they know is false to judicial organs or arbitration institutions.

Both parties and lawyers have an obligation to be truthful in court. If a lawyer makes a false statement in court, he or she will not only be disciplined by the legal profession, but also face criminal liability for being fined, detained, or subjected to false litigation by the judicial authorities. Therefore, in representing cases, lawyers should adhere to the bottom line of professional discipline and professional ethics, and some lawyers only care about the interests of their clients, blatantly violate the principle of good faith, and recklessly make false statements.

Source: Kunming Wuhua District People's Court

Editor-in-charge: Zhang Xi

Editor: Li Xing

Final Judge: Qian Hongbing