On December 3rd, the Ho Chi Minh City High Court announced its verdict against defendant Truong My Lan (Chairwoman of the Board of Directors of Van Thinh Phat Group) and 47 other defendants who appealed in the case involving Van Thinh Phat Group, Saigon Commercial Bank (SCB), and related entities and organizations.
Regarding the civil aspect, to ensure the defendant's fulfillment of the judgment, the panel of judges decided to continue seizing and freezing assets related to Ms. Truong My Lan, including her shares in SCB. In the event of a dispute regarding the handling of these shares, the matter will be resolved in a separate case.
Regarding the 1,120 asset codes used as collateral for 1,243 loans of Ms. Lan at SCB, the lower court had previously assigned SCB to manage them for debt resolution. However, the appellate court disagreed with this decision.
The 700 billion VND antique villa that Truong My Lan requested not be seized.
The Court of Appeal requested SCB to coordinate with competent authorities to manage the aforementioned assets. The handling of these assets must be carried out under the supervision of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Economic Police Department (C03, Ministry of Public Security ), and the enforcement agency to ensure optimal debt recovery efficiency.
If SCB processes the assets and recovers the remaining amount, the bank must coordinate with C03 to determine which assets belong to Ms. Lan. These assets will be used to fulfill the defendant's other compensation obligations in the case.
The court also rejected Ms. Lan's appeal to have the seizure of assets such as the old villa on Vo Van Tan Street (District 1), the building at 19-25 Nguyen Hue Street, the house and land at 21-21A Tran Cao Van Street (District 3), and several other properties lifted.
Ms. Lan claimed that these assets did not belong to her and were unrelated to the case. However, the court determined that these assets did indeed belong to Ms. Lan, and therefore continued to seize them to ensure the fulfillment of compensation obligations in the case.
The seizure of assets belonging to Quoc Cuong Gia Lai continues.
The case file shows that Ms. Lan used Sunny Island Investment Joint Stock Company to sign a promise-to-buy, promise-to-sell contract for the Bac Phuoc Kien residential project with Quoc Cuong Gia Lai Company for 14,800 billion VND. Subsequently, Sunny Island paid more than 2,882 billion VND to Quoc Cuong Gia Lai.
The first-instance court annulled the transaction, ordering Quoc Cuong Gia Lai to return 2,882 billion VND to Ms. Lan. The company appealed but later withdrew its appeal, so the appellate court suspended the hearing on this matter.
However, Quoc Cuong Gia Lai still has to fulfill its obligation to repay the aforementioned amount. To ensure this, the court ruled to continue seizing some of the company's assets. After fulfilling its payment obligation to Ms. Lan, the seized assets will be released.
Defendant Truong My Lan at the trial.
There is no basis to determine the 6,000 billion VND from SCB's loans.
In considering the appeals of those with related rights and obligations, the panel of judges stated that Ms. Truong My Lan and the Tuan Chau Group, chaired by Mr. Dao Hong Tuyen (commonly known as the "Tuan Chau Island Lord"), had collaborated through share transfer and project contracts.
Specifically, Mr. Dao Anh Tuan (son of Mr. Tuyen) and two companies belonging to the Tuan Chau Group, namely Au Lac Company and T&H Ha Long Company, received a total of 6.095 billion VND from Ms. Truong My Lan through two main installments. These included:
T&H Ha Long Company received over 1.411 billion VND from the agreement to transfer 70.59% of its shares to Ms. Truong My Lan. In addition, 1.768 billion VND is currently being discussed by the parties to offset other payment obligations under the framework agreement.
Au Lac Quang Ninh Company received VND 4.684 billion from framework cooperation agreements and asset transfers, including 243 townhouses in the Morning Star and Hoang Long villa projects. These assets correspond to 9 land use right certificates that were mortgaged to secure loans at SCB.
In total, Au Lac Company and T&H Ha Long Company used 32 land use right certificates to secure outstanding loans at SCB.
Regarding the request from T&H Ha Long Company and Au Lac Company to separate the repayment obligations of each company, the Court found that the two companies had received a total of 6.095 billion VND from the defendant Truong My Lan according to the framework agreements. To ensure the full recovery of this amount to mitigate the consequences of the case, the Court decided not to accept the appeal and ordered the two companies to jointly fulfill their repayment obligations.
Regarding the request from the two companies that after fulfilling their payment obligations, 8 out of 23 asset codes in the list of 1,120 asset codes handed over to SCB should be released from seizure, the Court ruled that the seizure of assets by the two companies was in accordance with the law, aiming to ensure the recovery of funds for repayment.
However, the request to lift the seizure after the fulfillment of financial obligations falls within the scope of resolution during the enforcement phase. The appellate court did not address this issue in the appeal hearing and recommended that the competent authorities consider and resolve it during the enforcement process.
Regarding the request to annul the cooperation agreement between the two parties, the appellate court affirmed that, according to the first-instance judgment, Au Lac Company and T&H Ha Long Company were required to return over 6.095 billion VND to ensure the compensation obligation of Ms. Truong My Lan. After this amount is paid, the framework agreement between the parties will be annulled. The appellate court affirmed that these cooperation agreements will be automatically annulled along with the obligation to return the aforementioned amount.
Regarding Project 6A (Trung Son area, Binh Chanh), Ms. Truong My Lan stated that she had lent this project to SCB for restructuring and requested the court to compel the bank to return it. She also voluntarily offered to use this asset to mitigate the consequences of the case.
However, the appellate court ruled that this issue had not been considered by the first-instance court, therefore the appellate court had no basis to resolve it. Because Ms. Lan's obligations in this case are substantial, the handling of Project 6A will be carried out according to the legal provisions on enforcement of judgments.
Project 6A is not within the scope of the appellate court's jurisdiction.
The case file shows that Project 6A was one of five restructuring plans at SCB, including Windsor, 6A, Times Square, Mui Den Do, and Cho Vai. Currently, borrowers whose loans were secured by Project 6A have repaid all principal and interest to SCB, so this project no longer has any collateral obligations to the bank.
However, SCB still holds the legal documents for the project, which is valued at over 16,000 billion VND on the system. The bank argues that the money recovered from customers who borrowed funds secured by Project 6A originated from SCB's disbursements, and therefore requests to manage and dispose of this asset.
Project Zone 6A is located adjacent to the Him Lam residential area.
The panel of judges determined that, since the content related to Project 6A had not been considered by the first-instance court, the appellate court did not have the authority to resolve it.
Similarly, at the appeal hearing, Ms. Lan requested that SCB return the 5,000 billion VND used to increase its charter capital. However, SCB stated that this amount had been "integrated into the bank's general cash flow" since July 2021 and is currently completing the legal procedures to issue certificates to shareholders.
The appellate court determined that this issue had not been investigated and clarified by the first-instance court, therefore the appellate court has no basis to consider it. In the event of a dispute, the parties may file a separate civil lawsuit.
Source: https://vtcnews.vn/toa-phuc-tham-yeu-cau-scb-phoi-hop-khong-tu-y-xu-ly-tai-san-cua-truong-my-lan-ar911208.html
![[Photo] Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh holds a phone call with the CEO of Russia's Rosatom Corporation.](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fvphoto.vietnam.vn%2Fthumb%2F1200x675%2Fvietnam%2Fresource%2FIMAGE%2F2025%2F12%2F11%2F1765464552365_dsc-5295-jpg.webp&w=3840&q=75)
Comment (0)