trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nayCassation decision No. 100/2013/GDT-DS dated August 12, 2013 on inheritance dispute between plaintiff Vu Dinh Hung and defendant Vu Thi Tien

trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay SUPREME PEOPLE’S COURT

CASSATION DECISION NO. 100/2013/GDT-DS DATED AUGUST 12, 2013 ON INHERITANCE DISPUTE BETWEEN PLAINTIFF VU DINH HUNG AND DEFENDANT VU THI TIEN

On August 12, 2013, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay cassation trial was conducted at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay office of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court to hear trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay civil case of inheritance dispute between:

Plaintiff:

Mr. Vu Dinh Hung, born in 1938; address: 66 Dong Xuan Street, Hoan Kiem district, Hanoi City.

Defendant:

1. Mrs. Vu Thi Tien (Mrs. Hien), born 1946, address: 57, Lac Long Quan Street, Tay Ho district, Hanoi City.

2. Mrs. Vu Thi Hau, born 1950, address: 406, Buoi Street, Tay Ho district, Hanoi City.

Persons with relevant rights and obligations:

1. Mr. Vu Dinh Duong, born in 1934, address: 20 Shelly, Garden, Cambrige, England.

2. Vu Thi Cam, born in 1937, address: 117 Rue Charenton, Paris, France.

3. Vu Thi Thao, born in 1940, address: 8307 2nd ST Paramont CA 90723-USA.

4. Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh, born in 1963, address: 77 Hang Giay Street, Hoan Kiem district, Hanoi city.

5. Mrs. Ha Thuy Linh, born in 1957, address: 66 Dong Xuan, Hoan Kiem district, Hanoi city; represented by Mr. Hoang Manh Khoi.

DEEMING THAT

Representation of Mr. Vu Dinh Hung in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay petition dated July 1993:

His parent Mr. Vu Dinh Quang and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Thenh had 6 children: Mr. Vu Dinh Duong, Mrs. Vu Thi Cam, Mrs. Vu Thi Thao, Mrs. Vu Thi Tien (or Mrs. Hien) and Mrs. Vu Thi Hau. Mr. Quang and Mrs. Thenh had a house at 66 Dong Xuan Street, Hoan Kiem district, Hanoi with area of 123m2. In 1979, Mr. Quang died without a will, Mrs. Thenh and 3 children: Mr. Hung, Mrs. Hau, Mrs. Tien have lived there since then; Mr. Duong, Mrs. Thao and Mrs. Cam all have leaved Vietnam to live abroad. In trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay family meeting minutes dated October 28, 1982, Mrs. Thenh and Mr. Hung, Mrs. Tien, Mrs. Hau reached a temporary agreement to split trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house into 3 parts for them. In 1987, Mrs. Thenh died. In 1989, Mrs. Tien sneakily sold trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house temporarily divided to Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh.  On October 31, 1993, although Mr. Hung filed a petition for division of inheritance with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court, Mrs. Hau still kept selling trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house temporarily divided to Mrs. Ha Thuy Linh. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay sale of these parts of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house is illegal. Mr. Hung have obtained a document confirming that Mr. Duong, Mrs. Cam and Mrs. Thao mutually agree to cede their inheritances to him. So, he requests division of inheritance at law.

Mr. Hung presents photocopies of Letters of Authorization made on March 3, 1992 by Mr. Vu Dinh Duong, on May 1, 1993 by Mrs. Vu Thi Cam, on October 28, 1991 by Mrs. Vu Thi Thao, all confirming that they authorize Mr. Hung to take care of their property in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house 66 Dong Xuan equivalent to 1/6 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house. After filing trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay petition, Mr. Hung present additional documents: Letters of Permanent Transfer of Inheritance Rights made on April 25, 1995 by Mr. Vu Dinh Duong, on May 10, 1995 by Mrs. Vu Thi Cam, and by Mrs. Vu Thi Thao; these documents were made abroad, all confirming that: trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay parent left trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house 66 Dong Xuan to 6 children, but Mrs. Tien (Hien) and Mrs. Hau selling a part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house failed to follow trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay mother’s advice (not to sell or allow strangers to live in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house) Mr. Duong, Mrs. Thao and Mrs. Cam hereby make these documents, permanently transferring 1/6 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house 66 Dong Xuan equivalent to their inheritances to Mr. Hung in order for him to maintain ancestor worship at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house where trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay three families abroad could go to worship ancestors; besides, they request trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court to allow Mr. Hung receive trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay inheritance in kind (all documents presented by Mr. Hung are photocopies).

Representation of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay defendant:

Representation of Mrs. Vu Thi Tien: She agrees with Mr. Hung’s representation about consanguinity and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay origin of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house 66 Dong Xuan. In 1989, she sold trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house divided to Mrs. Oanh, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house was handed over and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house sale paperwork was completed at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Hanoi Land Department. After moving to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house, Mrs. Oanh also reached an agreement with Mr. Hung and Mrs. Hau to convert some facilities in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house for more convenient use. Subsequently, Mr. Hung filed a complaint to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Hanoi Land Department so trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house sale paperwork between Mrs. Tien and Mrs. Oanh was revoked. Mrs. Hau also sold trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay divided part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house to another person. She stated that Mrs. Thenh gave money to 3 children going abroad, so they do not make any claim for this house. She sold her part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house to Mrs. Oanh, so she assumes no liability whatsoever for trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay sold part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house.

Representation of Mrs. Vu Thi Hau: She agrees with Mr. Hung’s representation about consanguinity and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay origin of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house 66 Dong Xuan and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Mrs. Tien’s representation about division of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house. She stated that she notified her siblings living abroad of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay sale of her part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house and obtained their consent. She requests to divide trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house that she sold to Mrs. Linh and Mr. Khoi.

Representation of persons with relevant rights and obligations:

Representation of Mrs. Ha Thuy Linh and Mr. Hoang Manh Khoi: They mutually bought trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house based on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay family meeting minutes given by Mrs. Hau. They made trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay payment in full and have lived in that house up to now, so they request trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court to legalize their part of house bought from Mrs. Hau.

Representation of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh: On October 18, 1992, she bought trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house divided to Mrs. Tien for VND 30,000,000. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay sale was permitted by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay competent authority. After trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay purchase, she moved to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house, had an agreement to convert some facilities in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house with Mr. Hung, so she requests trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court to recognize trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house sale contract entered into between Mrs. Tien and Mrs. Oanh.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance civil judgment No. 20/DSST dated May 23, 1995, People’s Court of Hanoi City judged: accepting trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay petition for division of inheritance made by Mr. Hung, Mr. Duong, Mrs. Cam , Mrs. Thao with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay representation of Mr. Hung, requesting division of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay estate of Mr. Quang and Mrs. Thenh; accepting a part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay will made by Mrs. Thenh on October 28, 1982, stating that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay value of estate is VND 1,228,151,520 and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay land and house shall be divided among 3 children: Mr. Hung, Mrs. Hau and Mrs. Tien. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house sale between Mrs. Tien, Mrs. Hau with Mrs. Oanh, Mrs. Linh was conducted in accordance with regulations of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay state.

Mrs. Tien filed an appeal, requesting reconsideration of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay way to calculate trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay area of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay estate. Mr. Hung also filed an appeal, claiming that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court heard trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case in an impartial manner.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate civil judgment No. 115 dated October 10, 1995, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court in Hanoi judged: quashing trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance judgment, transferring trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case file to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hanoi City for conducting another first instance trial.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance civil judgment No. 50/DSST dated September 11, 1996, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hanoi City accepted trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay petition for division of inheritance made by Mr. Hung, Mr. Duong, Mrs. Cam, Mrs. Thao with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay representation of Mr. Hung, requesting division of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay estate of Mr. Quang and Mrs. Thenh; recognized trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay voluntary consent of Mr. Duong, Mrs. Cam, Mrs. Thao to transfer their inheritances to Mr. Hung and divide inheritance in kind to Mr. Hung, Mrs. Hau, Mrs. Tien (each person receives 1/3 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay shop and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay rear part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house), Mrs. Hau and Mrs. Tien must pay trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay difference to Mr. Hung (Mrs. Hau VND 156,824,381; Mrs. Tien VND 140,774,106). trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house sale between Mrs. Tien, Mrs. Hau and Mrs. Oanh, Mrs. Linh is considered illegal.

Mr. Hung filed an appeal thereafter.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay decision No. 82/TDC dated July 15, 1997, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court of Hanoi City suspended settlement of this case.

After effective date ofResolution No. 1037/2006/NQ-UBTVQH11dated July 27, 2006 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Standing Committee of National Assembly on housing-related civil transactions established before July 1, 1991 involving foreign Vietnamese, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court of Hanoi resumed settlement of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate civil judgment No. 142/2007/DSPT dated July 3, 2007, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court of Hanoi quashed trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance judgment and transferred to case file to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hanoi City to conduct another first instance trial: While trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay petition was solely written and signed by Mr. Hung, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Letters of Authorization made by Mr. Duong, Mrs. Thao, Mrs. Cam fail to present trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay authorization to file for a petition for division of inheritance (except for trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Letter made by Mrs. Thao), litigants involve their heirs to participate in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay legal proceedings; and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay estate must be re-valued appropriately.

After trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case was re-accepted, litigants stated that Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao died in 2002. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance court requested Mr. Hung to present their death certificates and file another lawsuit petition in accordance with Clause 2 Article 164 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Civil Procedure Code (full name, address, nationality of children of Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao; name and address of persons living in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay disputed part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house) but Mr. Hung failed to present them with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Decision No. 04/2008/QDST-DS dated January 17, 2008, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hanoi City terminated settlement of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case and returned trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court fee to Mr. Hung.

On January 29, 2008, Mr. Hung filed an appeal, claiming that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay aforesaid termination is improper.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Decision No. 168/2008/DS-QDPT dated September 4, 2008, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court of Hanoi accepted trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appeal made by Mr. Hung, overruled trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first-instance judgment with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay following reason: trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance court applying Clause 2 Article 192 to terminate settlement of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case is wrong, depriving litigants of their right to file trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay lawsuit.

After re-accepting trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hanoi City requested Mr. Hung to present documents containing name, age, address of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay heirs of Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao; letters to authorize acceptance or refusal of their inheritances; name and address of persons who live in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house of Mrs. Oanh. Mr. Hung failed to present above documents.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Decision No. 54/DS-ST dated September 30, 2009, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hanoi City judged: Terminate settlement of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case, return trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay petition and evidence enclosed to Mr. Hung.

trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Mr. Hung filed an appeal thereafter.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Judgment No. 44/2010/QD-PT dated March 9, 2010, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court in Hanoi judged: Uphold trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance judgment.

Mr. Hung filed for cassation trial thereafter.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Decision No. 35/2013/KN-DS dated January 22, 2013, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Chief Justice of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court appealed Decision No. 44/2010/QD-PT dated March 9, 2010 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Appellate Court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court of Hanoi. Request trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Council of Judges of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court to adjudicate cassation trial, override above appellate civil judgment and override trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay decision on termination of first instance settlement No. 54/2009/DS-ST dated September 30, 2009 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hanoi City; transfer trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case file to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hanoi City to conduct another first instance trial as per trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay law.

At trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay cassation trial court hearing, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay representative of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Procuracy consents to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appeal made by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Chief Justice of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court.

DEEMING THAT

trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house at 66 Dong Xuan Street, Hoan Kiem district, Hanoi City was built by Mr. Vu Dinh Quang (died in 1979) and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Thenh (died in 1987). They had 6 children, 3 children Mr. Vu Dinh Duong, Mrs. Vu Thi Cam and Mrs. Vu Thi Thao have lived abroad since 1979, 3 children Mr. Vu Dinh Hung, Mrs. Vu Thi Tien (Hien), Mrs. Vu Thi Hau have lived in Vietnam. After Mr. Quang died, only Mrs. Thenh, Mr. Hung, Mrs. Tien and Mrs. Hau have lived in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house.

After Mrs. Thenh died, Mr. Hung, Mrs. Tien and Mrs. Hau arbitrarily divided in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house into 3 parts for them.  On October 18, 1992, Mrs. Tien sold her part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house to Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh and on October 31, 1993, Mrs. Hau sold her part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house to Mrs. Ha Thuy Linh.

In 1993, Mr. Hung file a petition for division of inheritance from Mr. Quang and Mrs. Thenh as per trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay law. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay settlement of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case lasted from 1993 to 1996 and was suspended at trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate trial stage in 1997. In 2007, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case was re-accepted.

Before settlement of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case, before suspended proceedings (1997), Mr. Hung presented documents and letters of authorization made in 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 by Mr. Duong, Mrs. Cam, Mrs. Thao, stating that they authorized Mr. Hung to take care of their inheritances in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house at 66 Dong Xuan; after that, Mr. Hung presented documents made in 1995 by Mr. Duong, Mrs. Thao and Mrs. Cam, stating that they permanently transfer their inheritances in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay disputed estate. All documents bear stamps and seals of home countries (Mr. Duong lives in England, Mrs. Cam lives in France and Mrs. Thao lives in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay USA), but they are solely photocopies.

However, all litigants clearly state house number, address of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay writers. During trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay initiation of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay re-settlement of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case after trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay suspension period, Mr. Hung, Mrs. Tien, and Mrs. Hau all declared that Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao died in 2002, Mr. Hung determined that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay address of Mrs. Cam and Mrs. Thao remains unchanged but he failed to receive a reply from children of Mr. Duong (trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case file page No. 376, 377, 382). trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance court requested Mr. Hung to present trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay death certificates of Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao; because Mr. Hung failed to provide name and address of children of Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao, he requested trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay court to take evidence for settlement as prescribed by law (case file page No. 390). Deeming that trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case file has address of persons living abroad and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay three persons living in Vietnam all certify trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay death of Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao, so such a request for death certificate is unnecessary. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance court was supposed to conduct trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay judicial assistance as prescribed, taking evidence to clarify trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay death time of Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao and ask their heirs (if any) to give opinions about trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case. Then it shall hear trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay evidence as trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case may be as prescribed. If it failed to take any new items of evidence, it must deal with trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay request made by Mr. Hung to claim inheritance by operation of law, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay inheritances of Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao will be temporarily managed by trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay persons living in Vietnam in order for their heirs to receive them by operation of law, it is supposed to be trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay definite resolution of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case. Regarding to persons living in trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house sold by Mrs. Tien, trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay obligation to give their names and ages falls under Mrs. Tien. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance court requesting Mr. Hung to provide details about these persons was wrong because he is not required by law. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance court was wrong when terminating trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case based on trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay basis that Mr. Hung failed to provide names and addresses of children of Mr. Duong and Mrs. Thao, and of persons buying Mrs. Oanh’s part of house. trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court upheld trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance judgment while it was supposed to quash trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance judgment to conduct another first instance trial.

In addition, according to trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case file and deposition of Mr. Hoang Manh Khoi dated October 17, 2007 (case file page No. 373) and “Letter of House Sale” dated October 31, 1993 (case file page No. 18), Mrs. Hau sold her part of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay house to Mrs. Ha Thuy Linh (Mr. Hoang Manh Khoi’s wife). trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay first instance judgment and appellate judgment all mentioning her as Mrs. Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh is incorrect that needs modification.

According to facts and matters, pursuant to Clause 3 Article 297 and Article 299 ofLaw No.24/2004/QH11 trực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay June 15;

HEREBY DECIDES

1. Overrule Judgment No. 44/2010/QD-PT dated March 9, 2010 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay appellate court of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay Supreme People’s Court of Hanoi and overrule Decision on termination of settlement of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay case No. 54/2009/DS-ST dated September 30, 2009 of trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay People’s Court of Hanoi City concerning trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay inheritance dispute between trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay plaintiff Mr. Vu Dinh Hung and trực tiếp bóng đá euro hôm nay defendant Mrs. Vu Thi Tien, Mrs. Vu Thi Hau; person with relevant rights and obligations Mr. Vu Dinh Duong, Mrs. Vu Thi Cam, Mrs. Vu Thi Thao, Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh, Mrs. Ha Thuy Linh.