Capital crossing the bridge is offerred before just offerring bridge financing to give borrower, after understanding " is returned, Ceng Quyin borrows " circumstance again all right, the bank is offerred to capital crossing the bridge just make the feedback with borrower good financial condition, capital crossing the bridge is offerred just be based on pair of bank reliance to had offerred bridge financing to give borrower, hind the bank has with state of borrower financial condition again those who borrow reject to continue to put for the problem, should hold a bank in the past acceptance makes the 3rd person con, the bank has answered bridge financing to offer the capital with square irrecoverable capital and accrual to assume liability to pay compensation.
Summary of details of a case:1, Xin flourishing supermarket (effective control person is Lin Wenjin) faint pay off owes those who pay Fuzhou of bank of the people's livelihood subsidiary bank to expire loan 15 million yuan.
2, Lin Wenjin Xiang Linde why (capital crossing the bridge is offerred square) loan 15 million yuan, loan utility to use afore-mentioned expiring at repaying the bank borrows money.
3, additional find out, before why has Lynd offerred bridge financing to give Lin Wenjin, " circumstance is borrowed again after ever sending a person technically to go to a bank understanding concerned " to return, bank clerk gives in yard place it is OK to recieve and was made add is borrowed, borrower financial condition is good wait for allegation.
4, why does Lynd go out after lending money, the bank extends again with refusing for occurrence problem of borrower financial condition again new loan. Bring about finally, lynd why the capital crossing the bridge of lend is irrecoverable.
5, why does Lynd accuse to the court requirement bank assumes loss liability to pay compensation.
Controversy focus:Whether ought to the bank assume loss liability to pay compensation?
The court thinks:This case loan concern happens in Lynd why to be mixed between Lin Wenjin, lynd advocates whether the decision wants to give the course that lends money to Lin Wenjin in its in, branch of Fuzhou of bank of the people's livelihood carried out fraudulent action, branch of Fuzhou of bank of reason requirement the people's livelihood is assumed return the responsibility that returns money. This kind of case, belong to the 3rd person besides the contract to carry out the lawsuit that initiates false. " general principles of civil code of People's Republic of China " the 148th regulation: "One party with fraudulent means, make the other side leaves executive civil law action in the condition that violates true meaning, suffer con Fang Youquan to request people court to perhaps arbitrate the orgnaization gives cancel " . The 149th sets: "The 3rd person carries out fraudulent action, make one party leaves the civil law action that carry out in the condition that violates true meaning, the other side knows or ought to know this are con of behavior, suffer con Fang Youquan to request people court to perhaps arbitrate the orgnaization gives cancel " . Referenced afore-mentioned regulations, lift weights according to " with bright the law of light " explains a method, in legal action in fact already cannot below the circumstance of cancel, suffer the loss that carry out legal action false and suffers to behavior person, have right of course to con person request compensation. This academy (2001) civilian inspect his word the content of the 9th reply, reflected afore-mentioned explanatory logic. " law of liability of tort of People's Republic of China " because other people of fault enroach on is civil,be a person the 6th times about " travel rights and interests, the regulation that ought to assume tort liability " is in this case but endowment applicable.
Accordingly, whether does branch of Fuzhou of bank of judgement the people's livelihood need to assume liability to pay compensation, ought to from whether to exist fraudulent action, con intended, damage sequential, causal 4 respects give think, expatiatory as follows:
Above all, existence of branch of Fuzhou of bank of the people's livelihood states the false information, fraudulent action that hides real message, and have con and intended. Next, the false statement of branch of Fuzhou of bank of the people's livelihood and concealed a fact to cause Lynd why loss. Finally, lynd He Yinmin gave birth to the fraudulent action of bank Fuzhou branch to cause a loss.
On put together, why does Lynd ask gold of repayment of capital of countervail of branch of Fuzhou of bank of the people's livelihood reachs the appeal of accrual, ought to get supportive.
Case index:(2018) top magic art civilian again 360
Relevant law:" civil code general principles "
The 149th the 3rd person carries out fraudulent action, make one party leaves the civil law action that carry out in the condition that violates true meaning, the other side knows or ought to know this are con of behavior, suffer con Fang Youquan to request people court to perhaps arbitrate the orgnaization gives cancel.
Person of the 154th behavior and opposite person ill will are colluded with, the civil law action that damages other to close right increase is invalid.
" tort liability law "
Person of the 6th behavior because other people of fault enroach on is civil rights and interests, ought to assume tort responsibility.
Solid Wu analyses:" is borrowed again after offerring bridge financing to be returned for the borrower " of the bank, abound in in reality. Bank loan gets after repaying, reject to extend to be borrowed newly, below the case of drop one's benefactor as soon as his help is not required, capital crossing the bridge is offerred square how the problem that thought fors the time being, the author once combined authoritative case to undertake to this beyond the mark case is combed. It is to evidence confirms a bank to just be offerred actively to capital crossing the bridge in the authoritative legal precedent previously just offer false information to carry out becloud behavior, perhaps mix financing of collective opposite bridge offers borrower to just be carried out cheat. Article cite case, it is to cross bridge financing to offer just give out actively to the bank seek advice, enquire the circumstance that whether can after borrower is returned, borrow again, according to normal logic right now the bank does not have obligation to state relevant fact to its, the statement that because this bank is offerred to capital crossing the bridge,just provides is incongruous be thought by the court but illative bank is had con and intended, the judicatory spirit of this one newest legal precedent makes clear the highest courtyard requirement to sincere letter and esteem again, although cross bridge financing to offer Fang Mou to plant,speculation of the existence on degree pledges, but highest courtyard thinks the bank serves as the unit that is existence foundation with sincere letter, more Ying Cheng letter is managed, close compasses manage. Hope bank unit can sum up a lesson from inside a lot of case, sincere letter is managed, close compasses manage, rigorous participate in those who cross bridge financing to seek, encounter had had bridge financing to offer just undertake investigating to loan company condition, should reject to recieve, cannot issue affirmatory sex opinion more.
