Case Study! Legal issues Please help

The guardian has guardianship responsibility for the ward, so he has to pay back the money; However, A is at fault and must bear the responsibility for the fault. Therefore, the guardian can pay back a part less, and this part is borne by A.

Article 12 of the General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China: Minors over the age of 10 are persons with limited capacity for civil conduct, and may carry out civil activities appropriate to their age and intelligence; Other civil activities shall be carried out by his legal **person**, or with the consent of his legal **person.

The defendant was only 14 years old when he borrowed the loan, so his behavior exceeded his capacity to act, and therefore caused losses to a bona fide third party, which should be borne by his legal person (i.e., the defendant's mother in this case).

From the plaintiff's point of view, if the defendant lends money to the defendant, the creditor-debtor relationship is established, but since the defendant is a person with limited capacity, his debts should be borne by his legal guardian. The defendant's mother argued that her child's borrowing of money at that time was invalid, that as the child's guardian, she had failed to fulfill her due guardianship duties, that she was at fault, and that both parties had admitted the existence of the borrowed money, so the defendant should repay the borrowed money.

Defendant's point of view: Because the plaintiff knew that he was a minor when he borrowed the money, he was at fault and should have paid less or not repaid the money.

If you have not asserted your rights within the statute of limitations, you will be deemed to have waived your rights! This case does not involve Party C, so Party A is reasonable! If the party fails to assert its rights in time, it shall be held responsible.

The statute of limitations for personal injury is one year, so B is not entitled to claim compensation from A.

But you can negotiate with A about this.

What is lost beyond the statute of limitations is the substantive right to prevail, and the lawsuit can still be sued procedurally. The court accepts the case, but the other party can use the statute of limitations as a defense, and the court will rule against the plaintiff.

However, if the other party does not raise the defense that the statute of limitations has expired, the court will not take the initiative to review it.

Intermediate C Mediation is an act of personal mediation and does not belong to the statutory cause, so it does not belong to the interruption of the statute of limitations. So the statute of limitations has expired.

The judgment dismissed the claim.

The statute of limitations for personal injury is 1 year. The injury occurred on 1 January 2007 and the statute of limitations expired on 1 January 2008. According to Article 140 of the General Principles of the Civil Code:

The three statutory reasons for the interruption of the statute of limitations are: the initiation of a lawsuit, the obligee's request and the obligor's agreement to perform the obligation, and the obligee's claim is made against the perpetrator, and in this case, B filed compensation against C instead of against the wrongdoer A, so it cannot constitute an interruption of the statute of limitations. According to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure:

The court shall accept a case where the statute of limitations has already passed, and after acceptance, there is no reason for interrupting or suspending the statute of limitations. The judgment dismissed the claim.

1) After Liu Jie's death, his estate was inherited by his wife Han Mei, his daughter Liu Tiantian, and his parents Liu Jianmin and Song Lihua. The property is determined by the heirs through negotiation. If the negotiation fails, the people's mediation committee may mediate or file a lawsuit in the people's court.

2) After Liu Jianmin's death, according to his will, his estate was subrogated by Song Yu, the son of his daughter Liu Yu. The property is inherited according to the contents of the will.

3) After Liu Yu's death, his estate was inherited by her husband Song Shuang, her son Song Yu, and her mother Song Lihua. The property is determined by the heirs through negotiation. If the negotiation fails, the people's mediation committee may mediate or file a lawsuit in the people's court.

4) 10,000 yuan.

(1) After Liu Jie's death, his estate should be jointly inherited by his spouse Han Mei, daughter Liu Tiantian, parents Liu Jianmin and Song Lihua. In principle, it is divided equally.

2) The personal property (3 private houses, 10,000 yuan deposit) that has been disposed of in Liu Jianmin's will will be inherited by Liu Yu's son Song Yu on behalf of Liu Yu. Liu Jianmin and Liu Yu died of gas poisoning together, but the time of death cannot be determined. Both sides have heirs, and it is presumed that the elders die first.

3)) After Liu Yu's death, his estate should be jointly inherited by his spouse Song Shuang, son Song Yu, and mother Song Lihua, and in principle, it should be divided equally.

4) If Liu Jianmin makes a notarized will before the change of the will, the change is invalid. Liu Tiantian was able to share 10,000 yuan in Liu Jianmin's posthumous estate.

I won't copy it, you can see for yourself.

1. The right to defend against uneasiness.

2. Liability for breach of contract.

3. The post-payment obligor shall be notified in a timely manner, and the content of the notice shall include an expression of intent to suspend performance and a reasonable period of time for the post-payment obligor to provide appropriate security.4. Performance shall be resumed when the post-payment obligor provides appropriate security. The so-called appropriate security here refers not only to the appropriate time for the creation of the security, but also to the fact that the security created can ensure the realization of the claim of the first payment obligor. As for the type of guarantee, there is no limit, it can be a guarantee, or it can be a mortgage, pledge, etc.