The hottest lafigune company v. Dexing Shipping Co

2022-08-18
  • Detail

Lafigon company v. Dexing Shipping Co., Ltd., Hainan Qinglong Shipping Industry Corporation and its Guangzhou Branch maritime fraud case

lafigon company v. Dexing Shipping Co., Ltd., Hainan Qinglong Shipping Industry Corporation and its Guangzhou Branch maritime fraud case

plaintiff: lafilipinauygongcocorporation, Philippines

legal representative: alfonsoauy, President of the company

entrusted agents: LV jianeng, Zou Weining, lawyer of Beijing JUNHE law firm

defendant: Bana madexing Shipping Co., Ltd

defendant: Hainan Qinglong Shipping Industry Corporation

legal representative: Zhong Liang, chairman of the company

defendant: Guangzhou Branch of Hainan Qinglong Shipping Industry Corporation

legal representative: liuxuelan, manager of the company

the entrusted agents of the above two defendants: huzhengliang, Caochong, professor and graduate student of Dalian Maritime University

the plaintiff, lafigon Corporation of the Philippines (hereinafter referred to as lafigon Corporation), has a maritime fraud and infringement dispute with the defendant Banama Dexing Shipping Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Dexing Corporation), the defendant Hainan Qinglong Shipping Industry Corporation (hereinafter referred to as Qinglong Corporation), and the defendant Hainan Qinglong Shipping Industry Corporation Guangzhou Branch's crusher 0.5mm below 20HP (hereinafter referred to as Qinglong branch), File a lawsuit to Guangzhou Maritime Court

the plaintiff lafigune company sued that the defendant Dexing company forged the bill of lading as a registered owner and sold a batch of goods loaded by the plaintiff on the "Golden Sunshine" to others. The defendant Qinglong head office is the actual owner of the "Golden Sunshine" wheel, and the defendant Qinglong branch is the actual operator of the "Golden Sunshine" wheel. Qinglong head office verified the fake bill of lading issued by Dexing company, and Qinglong branch stamped and annotated the fake bill of lading to confirm its validity. The acts of the two defendants have constituted joint infringement with Dexing company. It is requested that the three defendants be ordered to return the goods with a total value of $1.69 million purchased by the plaintiff and compensate for all economic losses caused to the plaintiff

the defendant Qinglong Corporation argued that it was Dexing company, the owner of the "Golden Sunshine" and the defendant in this case, who hoped to sign the voyage charter contract with the charterer of the "Golden Sunshine" by Athens radial shipping company. The company is neither the actual owner of the "Golden Sunshine" nor has anything to do with it. The fax with the company's mark on the head provided by the plaintiff to the court was sent by Qinglong branch using the company's notepaper, which was not sent by the company and should not be binding on the company. The plaintiff believed that the freight involved in this case was collected by our company, and our company verified the second bill of lading issued by Dexing company, which was inconsistent with the facts. The plaintiff has been unable to prove that the company has committed fraud subjectively and objectively, so the company should not be held liable. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the company has neither legal basis nor factual basis, and should be rejected

the defendant Qinglong branch argued that there was a shipping agency relationship between the company and the defendant Dexing company, not a ship leasing relationship. The company is authorized by Dexing company to urge, collect freight and verify the bill of lading on its behalf. When verifying the bill of lading on behalf of Dexing company, our company did not know that the bill of lading was fake, there was no malicious intention of cheating the plaintiff, and there was no connection with the plaintiff's fraud. The company only performed its duties as the agent of Dexing company, which neither intentionally deceived the plaintiff subjectively nor objectively. The court shall reject the plaintiff's claim against the company

the defendant Dexing company did not reply

the Guangzhou Maritime Court found that:

on July 18, 1997, the plaintiff lafegon purchased 12002 tons of urea from Sinochem (UK) Co., Ltd., at a price of $141 per ton. As a shipper, chinexpirt of Bulgaria loaded the goods on the "Golden Sunshine" at Odessa port, Ukraine, and paid the freight from Odessa port, Ukraine to Iloilo port, Philippines to radial company, the charterer of the voyage. On August 18, COSCO Odessa shipping Trading Co., Ltd., as the shipping agent of the "Golden Sunshine", issued a set of original clean on board bills of lading for the goods with the number of 4407010021799. The bill of lading records that the consignor is Azot company in novo Moscow, Russia, and the consignee is "in accordance with the instructions of the Bank of the Philippines"; The ship is "Golden Sunshine"; The loading port is Odessa port in Ukraine, and the unloading port is Iloilo port in the Philippines; The ship owner is the defendant Dexing company; The name and quantity of the goods are 12002 tons of urea; The freight is "paid according to the charter party". The seller Sinochem (UK) received the bill of lading on the same day

the defendant Dexing company issued a power of attorney to the defendant Qinglong branch on June 30, 1997. The power of attorney records that Qinglong branch is hereby entrusted as our agent to handle the entrusted loading and unloading agency of the "Golden Sunshine" on the routes between Europe and Southeast Asia or China, add fresh water, fuel and materials, urge and collect freight and other necessary agency matters. On August 20 and October 14, 1997, Xing Dezhang and Jiao Changren, employees of Qinglong branch, respectively, used the notepaper on the head of Qinglong head office to make up for the defendant's shortcomings to send a fax to radial company, the charterer of the "Golden Sunshine" voyage, to recover the freight of the voyage involved in this case. The fax number is the number of Qinglong branch

on September 30, 1997, the plaintiff lafigune company paid $1692282 for 12002 tons of urea, redeemed the full set of original bills of lading of the batch of goods endorsed by the Philippine Islands bank from the bank, and tried to seek broader international cooperation, waiting for the arrival and unloading of the "golden Sunshine" at the port of Iloilo in the Philippines. According to normal calculation, this voyage generally takes only about one month. However, until December, 1997, the "Golden Sunshine" had not arrived at the port of destination and had lost contact with the shipper and consignee

on December 11, 1997, the defendant Dexing company signed a contract with Yaquan International Co., Ltd. as the seller, agreeing that Dexing company would sell 12002 tons of urea to Yaquan International Co., Ltd. at a price of $90 per net ton, delivered CIF Zhanjiang

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI