To take back to the bride price Association court dismissed the claims of Beijing channel — people. candy boy

To take back to the bride price Association court dismissed the claims of Beijing channel — people.com.cn original title: communication cost to bride going back to the court of Final Appeal dismissed the claim in Washington Mr. and Ms. sun love during intercourse spent property for the woman, after breaking up, I want to return to the court on the grounds of betrothal gifts. After the court of first instance dismissed the lawsuit, Mr. Guan appealed to the Beijing intermediate people’s court. Recently, the Beijing intermediate people’s Court of Final Appeal ruling rejected the appeal request. Mr. Guan 67 year old and 62 year old Ms. sun, men and women friends, the two sides in September 2015 through the company website acquaintance. According to Mr. Guan said, Ms. sun had agreed to marry, but also to discuss the wedding photo shoot. In the 3 months of communication, with Ms. sun to play once in Shijiazhuang, with its implant teeth 3 times, after the purchase of several pieces of clothing for the sun, a computer, spent a total of $20 thousand. The two sides broke up because of trivia in January 2016. Mr. to the marriage of property disputes on proper court, requesting the court to return Ms. sun 70% engagement gifts 14 thousand yuan. Ms. sun did not agree with Mr. tube’s claim, said Mr. tube has no discussion about marriage, to put forward by Mr. implants, the purchase of computer and other expenses are denied. After the trial of the court of first instance, the court rejected all claims. Mr. Guan appealed against the judgment of the first instance. Second instance court that: marriage is agreed in advance and the two married in the future for the purpose, because of the dissolution of marriage and betrothal gifts to each other to reclaim the disputes, property disputes belongs to marriage. In this case, Mr. tube claims that there are oral engagement between it and the sun, but the sun is not recognized, Mr. tube failed to further proof, so the related expenses claim generated during the interaction and Ms. sun returned to purchase goods, there is no factual and legal basis. Wu Qingyu J195 (commissioning editor Chen Yinuo and Gao Xing)相关的主题文章: