The "Moutai pick -up list" released by Yong Ge's visit to the company is still valid after being transferred?

Introduction to the case: purchased from others to include a pick -up list of 24 bottles of Maotai, but has been delayed and delivered by the release company. Wang reluctantly complained the other party to the court. Unexpectedly, the other party proposed that the "Moutai pick -up list" could not be traded and distributed, and the authenticity could not be confirmed, and asked the court to reject the plaintiff's claim. A few days ago, the People's Court of Qinhuai District of Nanjing made a first trial of the case, determining that the transfer of the "Moutai Permit" was legal and valid. The defendant's company was delivered within a time limit. The second instance of the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court maintained the judgment.

Buy 24 bottles of Moutai "pick -up list"

The release company has been delaying delivery

In June 2021, Wang spent 60,000 yuan to buy four "Moutai pick -up lists" sold by a company from others. List of the pick -ups: "Receive the 53 -degree flying Moutai land bottle with this piece", and it is covered with the company's seal. On the day of the purchase of the pick -up list, Wang came to the company and asked to pay 24 bottles of flying Tian Maotai. The clerk said that Moutai was in stocking. Unexpectedly, the clerk has been delaying the delivery of Maotai wine on the grounds of "being in stock". Wang was helpless, sued to the Qinhuai Court, asking the company to deliver 24 bottles of 53 -degree flying Moutai wine to him, and delayed the delivery of liquidated damages. Faced with Wang's claim, the defendant's company argued that the "Moutai pick -up list" did not belong to a securities, so he could not buy and sell and circulate in the market. Wang's behavior of buying the goods from others from others was invalid. The company also said that the case was involved in the authenticity of the "Moutai Permit" and asked the court to reject Wang's lawsuit.

The judge introduced that there are two key issues in the case. The first is whether the "Moutai pick -up list" issued by the defendant company is still valid after transferring? For this issue, the defendant's company believes that the "Moutai pick -up list" does not belong to a securities, so it cannot be traded and traded in the market. Wang did not directly obtain the "Moutai pick -up list" from his company. The source of the goods involved in the case was illegal.

In this regard, the court believes that the "Moutai pick -up list" released by the defendant company is essentially a creditor's right certificate that is paid by agreed goods. certain. The transfer of creditor's credentials means that the change of the right to claim the creditor does not legal stipulate that such credits of such credits shall not be transferred. The behavior is legal and valid.

Court: The defendant's company suspected to be forged

Responsibilities should be assumed

The second question is whether the defendant's company can use the authenticity of the "Moutai's pick -up list" to refuse to deliver Moutai wine to Wang? The defendant's company believes that even if the transfer of the goods bill is valid, under the premise that its authenticity cannot be confirmed, Wang has no right to ask the defendant company to deliver Moutai. Things seem to be in a deadlock. After all, the "Moutai pick -up list" was issued by the defendant company, and it was also stamped with the defendant's official seal. As holders, Wang could not prove that the pick -up list was true. The judge said that to solve this deadlock, he must first clarify the issue of the distribution of responsibility.

The court believes that Wang has presented the "Moutai withdrawal list" that he purchased to the court and stamped the seal of the defendant's company. Then he can determine that Wang has assumed the responsibility for proof of the legal relationship. At this time, the defendant's company believed that the authenticity of the "Moutai pick -up sheet" could not be confirmed, and it should be responsible for the falsification of proof, but the defendant did not provide evidence to provide evidence. According to the relevant judicial interpretation, the court should determine the authenticity of the pick -up list according to the existing evidence.

Based on this, the Qinhuai Court ruled that the defendant delivered 24 bottles of 53 -degree flying Maotai wine to Wang Mou's 53 -degree flying Moutai within ten days from the date of the verdict, and rejected Wang's other lawsuits.After that, the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court rejected the appeal in the second instance and maintained the original sentence.The judge reminded that during the use of the pick -up coupon, pay attention to the product quality, quantity, price, and performance period of the product marked.If you are preparing to purchase a large amount of goods, you should communicate with merchants in advance to avoid subsequent disputes.Planning: Chen Dichen

Application: Ren Guoyong Zhang Bingjing

Camera: Lu Jing, Zhao Chen Jia Haojie (internship)

Editing: Jia Haojie (Internship)

Design: Xiao Tian

- END -