Legal Evening News · view news: Ms
Xu, 44, gave an institution 1million yuan to give birth to a second child in the United States, but the surrogate mother was not implemented, and the money was also lost
The couple sued for this
This morning, the case was heard at the Chaoyang Court in Beijing
Mr
Chen and Ms
Xu claimed that Ms
Xu, 44, planned to have a second child in 2015, so the couple went to Beijing Meijia Star Education Consulting Co
, Ltd
In december2015, the two sides signed the American surrogacy single course contract, which agreed that Mr
and Mrs
Chen would pay 1million yuan to enjoy reproductive medical services and help the couple conceive a child
After the contract was signed, the couple paid 1million yuan to the personal account of Mr
Li, the head of the institution
After that, Ms
Xu went to the United States for physical examination and emission promotion
However, the institution failed to complete the first embryo transfer within one year as agreed in the contract, nor found a surrogate mother within two years, nor even paid relevant fees to the U
S
medical institution, resulting in the failure of the couple to achieve their reproductive goals
Mr
and Mrs
Chen believed that Mr
Li could not pay the expenses of American medical institutions because he misappropriated the funds, so they hoped to terminate the contract
However, because Mr
Li still owed money to many customers, he was indeed unable to continue to perform the contract
After discussing with Mr
Li, the couple decided to return 580000 yuan of medical expenses that had not been paid by Meijia star
Later, at the repeated request of the couple, Meijia star returned 300000 yuan, leaving 280000 yuan and interest unpaid
To this end, the couple appealed to the court, asking the institution to return the remaining 280000 yuan of service fee and pay interest, and asking Mr
Li to bear joint and several liabilities
The court trial plaintiff: the money was diverted into a private account for other purposes, which made it impossible to perform the contract
Today, the court session began
Both parties did not appear in court, and their agents appeared in court
Mr
and Mrs
Chen's lawyers believe that Mr
Li's personal collection behavior proves that Mr
Li's personal property and institutional property are mixed, public and private, and the money is misappropriated for other purposes, resulting in the inability to continue to perform the contract
Therefore, Mr
Li and his institution should jointly bear the responsibility for returning the contract money to Mr
and Mrs
Chen
The plaintiff's lawyer said that Mr
and Mrs
Chen had fulfilled all the payment obligations in the contract because Mr
Li diverted the funds for other purposes and was unable to pay the funds of American medical institutions, resulting in the failure to perform the contract
Both parties agreed to terminate the original contract and the supplementary agreement
Mr
Li and his institution did not perform their obligations in accordance with the new agreement, resulting in a dispute
It is understood that Li wrote an IOU to Mr
and Mrs
Chen after failing to refund in time
The lawyers representing Mr
and Mrs
Chen believe that even if the negotiation of refund and issuance of IOUS are the acts of Mr
Li's representative office, Mr
Li should also be jointly and severally liable for the refund and interest
"The institution law clearly stipulates that if a shareholder with one person limited liability cannot prove that the property of the institution is independent of the shareholder's own property, he shall be jointly and severally liable for the debts of the institution
" The plaintiff's agent said that if Mr
Li did not prove that the property of the institution and his own property were independent, there would be property confusion and he should bear joint and several liabilities for debts
The defendant was forced to write an IOU
The couple had proposed to "quit" the agency of megastar said that Li, the legal representative of the agency, admitted the 280000 yuan refund claimed by Mr
and Mrs
Chen
The reason why the agency did not perform in accordance with the contract was that during the performance of the contract, Mr
and Mrs
Chen proposed to Mr
Li to stop the performance of the agreement due to the illness of the elderly at home and other reasons
"Later, after a period of time, the couple proposed to continue to do it, but at that time, the surrogacy fee in the United States had risen, so they said they would not do it
" Said the agent of Meijia star agency
For the IOU presented by Mr
and Mrs
Chen, the agency agent of megastar did not recognize it
"This IOU was written under the compulsion of Mr
and Mrs
Chen, not out of subjective will
" In addition, in terms of surrogacy related matters, the agent of megastar said, "we act as an intermediary to help them contact the surrogacy agency in the United States
" The case was not adjudicated in court
In fact, the investigation is a one-man institution, and the business scope does not include medical treatment
The reporter learned from the enterprise query website "enterprise query" that Meijia star institution is a one-man limited liability institution, and the shareholder is Mr
Li mentioned above
The introduction of the organization in "enterprise investigation" said: "Meijia star moon center is established by Beijing Meijia Star Education Consulting Co
, Ltd
, U
S
real estate agencies and Los Angeles law firm
Weijing International Holiday Club of Meijia star moon center is a moon Center for more children to the United States
Our moon center is located in the high-end white community in Pasadena, Los Angeles, to provide you with a safe and comfortable living environment
Among them, the U
S
real estate agencies own and manage many real estates Resources, from five-star Beverly Hills mansions to country villas,
The professional operation and management system of Hong Kong Taiwan maternity center is specially introduced, with unique and exquisite nutritious meals to enable you to recover quickly before and after childbirth
Professional lawyers at home and abroad are escorting you to hold the legal identity of the United States
" It is understood that the business scope of this enterprise established in 2014 includes: education consulting, investment consulting, organizing cultural and art exchange activities, economic and trade consulting, but does not include reproductive medical services
The extended court once found that the surrogacy business was in violation of laws and regulations
The "enterprise investigation" showed that the Meijia star institution had a lawsuit related to surrogacy service in Dezhou intermediate court, Shandong Province, and had entered the implementation stage
The reporter confirmed the authenticity of the judgment documents through the court system
The court held that on january26,2016, Ms
Gao signed an agreement with the institution to set up a branch office
Both parties confirmed that the Meijia star institution carried out domestic businesses such as giving birth to children in the United States and foreign surrogacy
The institution authorized Ms
Gao to set up branches in Dezhou, Hengshui, Cangzhou, Liaocheng, Jinan, Dongying, Weifang and Binzhou and was fully responsible for the business
Later, Ms
Gao paid 50000 yuan to Meijia star
Ms
Gao complained that after signing the contract for payment, she found that the authorization content in the megastar organization was very inconsistent with the business scope of the organization's business license, and thought that the purpose of the contract could not be achieved
Therefore, she repeatedly asked for cancellation and refund, but she has been prevaricated and sued for this
Meijia star believes that the contract is true and effective, does not violate the legal provisions, and it is not a fact that the purpose of the contract cannot be achieved
It is unwilling to refund the money, and requires Ms
Gao to continue to pay the unpaid 100000 yuan of share capital
After the trial, the Dezhou intermediate people's Court of Shandong Province made a final judgment that Meijia star returned 50000 yuan of the share capital
The court held that the signing of the cooperation agreement between the two sides to carry out the business of giving birth to children in the United States and foreign surrogacy exceeded the business scope of the Meijia star institution, and the surrogacy business violated China's public order, good customs and social morality
12 departments including the national health and Family Planning Commission specially formulated the work plan for carrying out special action against surrogacy and jointly issued a notice to carry out special action against surrogacy nationwide, so the cooperation agreement between the two sides is invalid
Meijia star institution is a limited liability institution invested and established by Mr
Li, which is a one-man institution
According to the regulations, if the shareholder of a one person limited liability institution cannot prove that the property of the institution is independent of the shareholder's own property, he shall bear joint and several liabilities for the debts of the institution
As a shareholder of one-man institution, Mr
Li shall bear joint and several liabilities if he fails to provide corresponding evidence
Legal Evening News · opinion news original works refuse to be deleted or modified in any form, and opinion news reserves the right to investigate legal responsibilities
Report / feedback
