Tianqiang lawyers

Case the judge handling the case, said the civil law of unjust enrichment, without a lawful basis to obtain improper benefits, causing losses to others. Unjust enrichment, people should return loss. Theft, belonging to adjust the scope of criminal law.

UNIT and Mary in the suit, argued that the defendant, a small U.S. for the purpose of illegal possession, secret theft UNIT and Mary, a relatively large amount of property. After full explanation of the court, the plaintiff still adhere to the defendant Department of secrets steal.

Basis that the claim of the plaintiff, the defendant's conduct alleged intentional crime, belonging to adjust the scope of criminal law, not the Court Civil admissible range, that does not belong to the unjust enrichment of the legal relationship. The plaintiff property damage, repaying the proceeds of crime links through criminal proceedings to be addressed.

The judge said the court is the court rejected the plaintiff sued, Mary as the plaintiff can bring a separate suit to the grounds of unjust enrichment requires a small United States to return the money obtained.

Law Review: divisions Xiao San repay most of Gao Ying

A member of the Chongqing Evening News lawyers, marriage and family lawyer of the law firm of Chongqing Senda He Tianqiang married person and small cohabitation, contrary to public order and good morals, and not subject to legal protection, not moral identity.

Marriage Law stipulates that the marital property to the introduction of the common system. Unless agreed in writing, otherwise the the spouses earned by the husband and wife co-owners, without distinction. Spouse for family life, work operations common expenses, the right to unilaterally processing.

If one party feeling derailed, buy a car to a third party, to a third party broke up fees unilaterally dispose of property, on the occupation of the other party's share of property, the party discovers occupation, the right to a third party to recover half share.

He Tianqiang lawyers combined case, said Mary could have been sued UNIT, to demand the return of 99,000 yuan jointly owned property during marriage half, or to prosecute small United States to demand the return of half of the 9.9 million, a small United States should not prosecute theft.

He Tianqiang lawyer said, under normal circumstances, the first wife sued the the small three demand the return of the money, as long as there is sufficient evidence, will the court support. It was a case of special circumstances, since Mary does not recognize the small U.S. and UNIT lovers, it can only be to deal with criminal cases of theft.

He Tianqiang lawyer said, in the city, the case is regarded as the first wife sued the small three losing the first case.