Hunan million and joint law firm lawyers said Li Jian

hjwwvh41541

Indicted Maoyuan forestry companies
The reporter Wen Jian Wen / map
?
June 2012,http://t0321.biz/mtos/mt-search.cgi, Hunan Taoyuan County, Hunan Lin Wood of the business Maoyuan forestry limited liability company (the "Maoyuan Forestry") is not through public bidding,http://jiaoyou.88bangbang.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=8653014&extra=, signed a "living stumpage overall sales contract." "I did not expect so many problems found during performance of the contract." Thought he "picked up a leak," Lin Wood boss Li Jinqiu but now it and the other court. said contract called "stumpage" is actually the end of 2011 has already gone too far, as "forest fire", its price, weight and the "stumpage" disparities. In addition, the contract area of 3345.7 acres of forest, but the actual area has shrunk severely.
?
May 2013, Lin operation of the Yueyang City Intermediate People's Court Maoyuan Forestry. In March, the court Maoyuan Forestry Lin Wood of the business to pay 2,365,490 yuan. The two sides are not satisfied with the verdict, were appealed to the Hunan Provincial Higher People's Court.
?
"Forest fire" bogus "stumpage"?
?
Maoyuan Forestry is a wholly owned subsidiary of Yueyang Forest & Paper Co., Ltd., a state-owned enterprise.
?
said that in 2012,Louboutin Souliers Plat,http://www.ma-runet.jp/job_db/profile.cgi, he learned from a friend Maoyuan Forestry in County of Guangxi have harvesting rights sales eucalyptus living trees. At the recommendation of a friend,http://182.92.107.225/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=78612, when the June 13,Louboutin Bottines, has not been the case of public bidding, Maoyuan forestry and Lin Wood of the business signed a "live stumpage overall sales contract", agreed to a total price of 4.8 million yuan contract , subject to Maoyuan Forestry has legitimate right to 3345.7 acres of eucalyptus forest felling living trees (which 2686.4 acres of forest,http://taroato-hokuto.sakura.ne.jp/joyful/joyful.cgi?mode=res&no=12427, young forest 659.3 acres) of harvesting rights, located in Guangxi Pingnan think Hanwang Town Village, logging time as of 2012 11 15th.
?
After signing the contract,Louboutin Plates-forme,  found problematic.
?
"Maoyuan forestry trees to sell to us all for 'forest fire'," Li Jinqiu presented by the Pingnan forest fire prevention headquarters issued a "legend", and Pingnan think Hanwang Town Village issued a "proof" , directed Related eucalyptus forest "all excesses." The forest fire derogatory existence value, than the "stumpage" prices, the weight of a lot worse.
?
July 3, the reporter came to interview Maoyuan Forestry Yinxian Dong, general manager of the company. He explained that before signing the contract,  go eucalyptus forest survey several times on the contract area and materials have raised no objection, "woods too much, he knows."
?
The Court held that, because the forest has been burned at the end of 2011, the forest fire, not living trees, woodlands operation of 480 million price of Maoyuan Forestry contract, and the whole piece of forest by the Yueyang Municipality price certification center identification value more than 440 million only, obviously, there is an error in the operation of the Lin understanding of the subject matter of variety, quality, specifications, quantity and value. Court upheld the revocation of the contract.
?
Inflated area?
?
We agreed on the contract area of 3345.7 acres of forest (including forest 2686.4 acres,Louboutin Soirée, 659.3 acres of young forest).
?
said, according to Yueyang Municipality price certification center issued a "price certification results" shows that the actual area of forest trees to sell for Maoyuan 2504.2 mu (which identified an area of 3159.1 acres of woodland,http://marvelous21.sakura.ne.jp/enkaijoh/light.cgi?res=25370, not subtract contract No planting of eucalyptus in the red line drawing should be barren mountain range 524.1 acres, 130.8 acres subtracted before the contract has been illegal felling of trees), less than the contract area 841.5 acres.
?
In this regard,http://www.hubal.bialystok.pl, Maoyuan forestry argued that according to the contract signed by both parties, indicating the object of the contract is the live tree, the same is not necessarily equivalent to the area of live trees, so the subject matter of the contract in accordance with the live tree accumulation (referring to stand for all Total live standing wood volume) to calculate, and from beginning to end forest four border has not changed. Contract area of 3345.7 acres, the young forest area of 659.3 acres, in the contract price, the young growth is not denominated actual pricing is an area of 2686.4 acres of stumpage accumulation.
?
Lawyer: gross misunderstanding and fraud are different
?
Reporters learned that on March 6, Yueyang Intermediate People's Court on the case was the first instance verdict, revoke the contract signed by both parties. The court held that the case caused a major misunderstanding, have their own reasons for Lin operation, but did not understand Maoyuan forestry woodland were burned instead of "stumpage" the actual situation, the primary responsibility to deal with the case. Yueyang Intermediate People's Court ruling Maoyuan Forestry pay woodlands operation 2,365,490 yuan.
?
After the first trial, both sides appealed to the Hunan Provincial Higher People's Court.
?
Li Jinqiu believes Maoyuan forestry act, suspected of "fraud", according to "Contract Law" fifty-eight provisions, the contract is not valid or has been revoked after, because the contract acquired property shall be returned. Accordingly, Lee believes that the contract price shall be returned Maoyuan Forestry woodlands operation and compensation for all losses caused to its cause, a total of nearly 500 million. The Maoyuan Forestry is the primary responsibility of the decision on his dissatisfaction.
?
Hunan million and joint law firm lawyers said Li Jian, if it is because of "fraud" and withdraw from the contract,Louboutin Sandales, then the need to compensate the other party is at fault losses; if it is because of "significant misunderstanding" and withdraw from the contract, the parties are required to bear responsibility. The key reason for this case to clarify the revocation of the contract.
?
Li Jian pointed out that a major misconception refers to the act because of the nature of the behavior, size and quantity of errors recognize that the consequences of conduct contrary to the meaning of their own,http://183.62.12.15/bbs/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=11541757&extra=, and caused great loss of behavior. Fraud means the conduct of the parties and an intentional error false statements of others, on the occurrence of misconceptions made. This shows that the biggest difference is that when you make a wrong judgment whether the other party has subjective fault.
?
(Original title: burning forest and stumpage dispute)
?(Edit: SN182)