Song Yahong and Du Shuanghua talked about divorce in name many times, but they all failed. 20 10 On September 20th, Song Yahong, who had failed to talk about divorce with Du Shuanghua, filed a divorce lawsuit with Haidian District People's Court. Surprisingly, Du Shuanghua told the court: "There is no divorce, and our feelings are very good!"
Because Du Shuanghua refused to appear in court, the Haidian District Court warned him: "If you don't respond, you will be judged by default and divide the property." As a result, on the day of the trial, Du Shuanghua's attorney first raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing that the case should be tried in the local court in Hengshui, Hebei.
Then, the lawyer took out the judgment of Hebei Hengshui Intermediate People's Court 200 1 that Du Shuanghua and Song Yahong divorced. It reads impressively: "First, the plaintiff Du Shuanghua is allowed to divorce the defendant Song Yahong. Second, the married boys Du Qiulong and Du Zelong were raised and paid by the plaintiff Du Shuanghua ... "What made her even more indignant was that before the prosecution, Du Shuanghua seemed to think that she had not dissolved the marriage relationship-"In 2002, 2008 and 2009, the marital status recorded on the temporary residence permit registered by Du Shuanghua was' married', and she also told her son to prepare for divorce. "
Many years ago, Du Shuanghua sued for divorce on the grounds that 1997 separated from his wife. For three and a half years, he didn't even have telephone contact, and his whereabouts were unknown. The evidence is a visit to Beijing by Hengshui Intermediate People's Court-Li, a staff member of the Property Management Office, was told that Song Yahong had not lived here for 1 years and could not find anyone.
20 1 1, Song Yahong's lawyer Chen Xu once again found the retired old Li Man. Li said that she did not see anyone who claimed to be a judge of Hengshui Intermediate People's Court come to the property management office to make the so-called investigation record. "Never."
Haidian Court held through trial that Ms. Song had divorced in the civil judgment of 200 1 made by Hengshui Court, and now the case is retried by Hengshui Court. Under this circumstance, the identity relationship between the two parties has been decided by the court, and Ms. Song filed a divorce lawsuit again, which is unfounded in the law. Accordingly, Haidian Court dismissed the prosecution of the plaintiff, Ms. Song. Ms. Song refused to accept the appeal.
Du Shuanghua and his family's attitude towards divorce.
On May 6th, the reporter called 200 1 Judge Cao, who decided the divorce. In response to the rumors of "false judgment" in society, he retorted, "This judgment can't be false. There is such a thing as divorce, and the time is too long, and the specific details can't be remembered. " Du Shuanghua, a mysterious rich man, and his family kept silent about the story of Song Yahong's sudden divorce. This print repeatedly called Du himself, but no one answered. And his sister stubbornly prevented reporters from entering Du Shuanghua's home: "How do you know our home address? We don't know anything. You listen to her (Song Yahong)! "
Property disputes will be tried again.
Is the marriage relationship between the two parties conclusive? Ms. Song entered the court accompanied by two lawyers, but Mr. Du did not attend the court because of "going out". During the trial of the second instance, Ms. Song, the appellant's attorney, claimed that the civil judgment of Hengshui Court involved in the case was wrong and had entered the retrial stage. The execution of the judgment was suspended and the marriage relationship between the two parties was inconclusive. It is wrong for the court of first instance to reject Ms. Song's lawsuit based on the judgment of Hengshui Court. Ms. Song asked the court of second instance to revoke the ruling of the court of first instance, and she also asked the court of second instance to rule that the court of first instance should continue to hear the case.
Lawyer Chen Xu said that there were many mistakes in Hengshui Court's decision. Because Ms. Song's name was wrongly written in the verdict of Hengshui Court, there was no ID number and date of birth of the defendant Ms. Song, so it was impossible to prove that Ms. Song in the two cases was the same person. Lawyer Chen suggested that if the retrial of this case really needs the retrial result of the civil judgment involved in Hengshui Court as the basis, the appropriate way to deal with it is to suspend the lawsuit in this case instead of dismissing Ms. Song's lawsuit.
Mr. Du's agent said that although the Hengshui court's judgment involved in the case was suspended, it still had legal effect, indicating that the marriage relationship between the two parties had been dissolved. Regarding the retrial of Hengshui Court, the agent said that Mr. Du had objections to the property part involved in the judgment of Hengshui Court, and Hengshui Court decided that the property part of the retrial judgment did not involve the dissolution of the marriage relationship.
Doubt 1 Judgment Wrote Wrong Name Wife: Lawyer Chen Xu believes that the defendant's name is "Song Yahong", not Song Yahong; In addition, the birthdays of Du Shuanghua, the eldest son and the second son are all wrong; In addition, Song Yahong has not lost his job, but has been working in Beijing Hengliantong Radiation Co., Ltd. ... Lawyer Chen Xu said that the court made such a wrong judgment to dissolve the identity relationship in divorce proceedings, indicating that the court did not see the identity cards and marriage certificates of both husband and wife to prove the marriage relationship at all.
Husband: Lawyer Liu Hongzan believes that the inconsistency between the records in the judgment and those in other documents does not mean that the judgment result is wrong. "Many of the birth dates and names registered in the household registration book are inconsistent with the actual birth dates and names," he said, taking out his lawyer's card and ID card. "Look at my macro." Coincidentally, his lawyer's card says "Hong" and his ID card says "Hong", which he thinks is very common.
& gt& gt suspected twice that the child's name was wrong.
Wife: Hebei Hengshui Intermediate People's Court 200 1 When hearing this case, their second son's name was Du Zegang, not Du Moumou. This name was changed by the public security department in March 2007. 200 1, a few years before the second son changed his name, the judgment issued by Hebei Hengshui Intermediate People's Court recorded the renamed "Du Moumou". Lawyer Chen Xu thinks, "This is ridiculous. How can the court not know the prophet? "
Husband: As for the name of the second son in the judgment, it will be used six years later. Lawyer Liu Hongzan explained that the name changed in the household registration office six years later does not mean the name taken at the time of change. "This name is the father of the child. As soon as the child is born, he already has a good name. "
In addition, lawyer Chen Xu questioned three doubts. First, the court did not provide enough evidence to prove that Song Yahong's whereabouts were unknown, nor did it use any other means of service. The day after filing the case, it was decided to take the form of public announcement, which seriously violated the law. Song Yahong's residence, mobile phone number and work unit have not changed for many years. Second, the announcement date does not match the actual date. Third, the court of first instance of ordinary divorce cases should be the grass-roots courts, and it is against the norms for the intermediate court to directly hear ordinary divorce cases as the court of first instance.
Is the marital status of temporary residence permit true?
In the second trial, Mr. Du's agent submitted two new evidences, including Mr. Du's new temporary residence permit. Mr. Du's agent said, "Mr. Du's new temporary residence permit shows that he often lives in Hebei and has been divorced." Ms. Song's attorney retorted that the other party submitted Mr. Du's temporary residence permit in Haidian Court, showing that he was married, indicating that Mr. Du himself did not consider 200 1 divorce, and Mr. Du changed his marital status to divorce after Ms. Song sued. Obviously, the new temporary residence permit is not true.