On the afternoon of 10/9, the District 2 People's Court of Ho Chi Minh City presided over the asset dispute case between plaintiff Vu Thuy Hong Ngoc, 48, and defendant Chiem Quoc Thai, 52.
According to the plaintiff's representative, Ms. Ngoc registered her marriage with Mr. Thai in the US on 1/9/2011. This marriage was later recorded at the Ho Chi Minh City Department of Justice in 12/2015.
On 22/12/2015, Ms. Ngoc filed for divorce and division of joint assets at the District 1 People's Court (now the District 1 Regional People's Court). Due to Mr. Thai's assertion that the couple held overseas assets, the case was transferred to the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court for jurisdictional resolution.
In 7/2016, Mr. Thai filed a lawsuit in the California Superior Court, Orange County, seeking to declare his marriage to Ms. Ngoc invalid.
On 6/7/2018, the US court issued an order annulling the marriage between the two, also designating certain assets in Vietnam as Mr. Thai's separate property. This order was subsequently revoked. However, because Ms. Ngoc was unable to participate in legal proceedings while temporarily detained in Vietnam, the US court reinstated the order on 27/12/2018, which was then enforced.
Ms. Ngoc later requested the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court not to recognize the US court orders in Vietnam.
A binding judgment by the Ho Chi Minh City High People's Court on 29/12/2022 partially accepted Mr. Thai's request not to recognize the marital relationship between them. The court also partially accepted Ms. Ngoc's request not to recognize the asset division portion of the US court order.
Believing that the marital relationship had ended but the two parties could not agree on the division of joint assets, Ms. Ngoc requested the Thu Duc City People's Court to resolve the division of the couple's joint property.
Ms. Ngoc demanded the division of assets comprising 24 real estate properties and other assets, with a provisional total value of 1,264 billion VND.
Among these is a house and land use rights at 57 street 7, Thanh My Loi ward, former District 2, covering 1,086 square meters. Ms. Ngoc stated that the couple contributed money to purchase the property in 10/2010 for over 21 billion VND, with her contributing 6,53 billion VND. She provisionally estimates its current value at about 150 billion VND.
Other assets include: two apartments in the Ngoc Phuong Nam project, each valued at about 2,5 billion VND; two apartments in the Quoc Cuong Gia Lai project, each about 1,8 billion VND; two apartments in the Belleza project, each about 3,8 billion VND; land use rights for over 138 square meters in the Huy Hoang project, valued at about 50 billion VND; a villa at Vinhomes Central Park, about 120 billion VND, along with many other assets.
Ms. Ngoc claimed that Mr. Thai transferred some assets to relatives or other individuals without her consent.
Regarding the proposed division, Ms. Ngoc requested one-half of the value of Viet My Aesthetic Hospital Co., Ltd., one-fourth of the value of the Vinhomes Central Park villa, and one-half of the value of the remaining disputed assets.
 |
Mr. Chiem Quoc Thai and Ms. Ngoc in court in 2020. Photo: Huu Khoa |
Mr. Chiem Quoc Thai and Ms. Ngoc in court in 2020. Photo: Huu Khoa
Mr. Chiem Quoc Thai claims no marital relationship exists
In court, Mr. Chiem Quoc Thai disagreed with Ms. Ngoc's claims. He asserted that no legal marital relationship existed between him and Ms. Ngoc. This was ruled by a US court, and he had also cancelled their marriage registration in Vietnam.
He argued that no legal or de facto marital relationship ever existed between them. Without a marital relationship, there is no joint property ownership during marriage.
According to him, if the dispute were merely a civil one over joint assets, Ms. Ngoc would need to prove her financial contribution or joint investment. In reality, he purchased, invested in, and received transfers of all acquired assets. State agencies issued legal certificates for these assets.
Additionally, Mr. Thai demanded Ms. Ngoc compensate him for over 51 billion VND. This includes money he asked Ms. Ngoc to withdraw, interest, and compensation for damages caused by the improper application of interim urgent measures to his bank accounts.
Ms. Ngoc withdraws part of her request to divide hospital and three oto
After Mr. Thai's presentation, Ms. Ngoc's authorized representative withdrew part of her claim regarding the division of three oto, including a Maybach. Concurrently, the plaintiff withdrew the request to divide assets related to the value of the company owning Viet My Aesthetic Hospital.
Regarding Mr. Thai's counterclaim for compensation for money withdrawn from bank accounts and interest, Ms. Ngoc's representative requested the trial panel to halt the session to gather more evidence, specifically concerning the existence of a power of attorney.
Ms. Ngoc's side also requested verification of some assets Mr. Thai allegedly transferred to multiple individuals using five certificates of single status.
Regarding Ms. Ngoc's proposal, Mr. Thai argued that since no marital relationship existed between them, his request for single status confirmation and asset transfers were irrelevant to Ms. Ngoc.
The trial continued with presentations from several involved parties.
Hai Duyen
