Property ownership premium who assumes legal problems

In order to make a lawsuit, the plaintiff usually seizes the frozen defendant's property or bank account in the method of preservation of property preservation. But who will bear the preservation costs, but the judgment in practice is different. Among them, some judges were borne by the plaintiff, and the parties were very puzzled. They asked why they should not be borne by the defendant?

【Case number one】

On November 19, 2020, during the driving of Li's electric vehicle, he was injured by a large truck driving by An. The traffic police determined that An had the main responsibility of Annem's accident. The insurance company refused to pay because An Mou's quasi -driving model did not match. So Li sued the court. At the same time, the application for the property of the vehicle is 1620 yuan.

After hearing, the Quyang Court believes that according to Article 6 of the "Supreme People's Court on Several Issues of the People's Court's Cases of Property Intention to Preservation of Property", if you apply for property guarantee for property preservation of property or third party, a guarantee shall be issued to the people's court. Book. The guarantee book should be provided as the guarantor, guarantee method, guarantee scope, guarantee property and its value, and guarantee liability. As a result, the parties can use a variety of guarantees when applying for property preservation, which is not inevitable that the security guarantee fee is inevitable. Therefore, the preservation cost is unreasonable compensation, and the court does not determine it.

【Case 2】

He is a friend relationship with Wang. On January 25, 2021, Wang Xianghe borrowed 150,000 yuan, with a period of 2 months. After expiry, although he asked Wang many times, he pushed himself on the grounds that he had no money, so he sued the court and applied for property preservation, and the preservation cost was 1420 yuan.

On July 13, 2022, after the Qiyang County People's Court was publicly tried, the court's decision -making cost was 1,420 yuan, which was borne by the defendant Wang.

【question】

Some netizens questioned, why did the same court be inconsistent with who had the understanding of preservation costs? In this regard, Chen Shaoyong, a member of the Chinese Law Society and the Shuguang Legal Services Institute of Quyang County, believes that the current laws on property premiums have not made clear provisions, especially the jurisprudence of the Supreme People's Court also has different views. For example, the Supreme People's Court's (2021) Supreme Law Civil Shen 66 referee in January 2021 believes that the premium premiums are not the cost offending the claims. The guarantee fee shall be borne by the party applied for preservation, and there is no need to bear the defeat party.

However, in September 2017, the Supreme Court (2017) Supreme French Minfu final 437 judgment believes that the reasonable and necessary expenses of the preservation of insurance premiums in the preservation of the applicant's expenditure are Essence

According to the origin of the law, my country is not a country's country, and it belongs to the mainland law system. In judicial practice, the details of each case are very different. When dealing with similar cases, the court usually needs to be comprehensively judged in conjunction with the specific situation of the case.

Here, remind everyone that when signing the contract, we must clearly keep the full cost. At the same time, in order to unify the standards of judicial referees, the highest judicial organs are recommended to regulate.

(Chen Shaoyong)

- END -