CNY 35224 Owed for Sunglasses Parts – Court Orders Payment
The Eastern China City People’s Court issued a judgment in a dispute between a local businessman and a sunglasses manufacturing company over unpaid goods. The plaintiff, Mr. Li, claimed that the defendant company had failed to pay the balance of a series of purchases for eyewear components. The court ruled in favor of Mr. Li, ordering the company to pay the outstanding sum of CNY 35,224 plus legal costs. The case highlights the legal obligations of buyers under Chinese contract law when goods are delivered and accepted.
Mr. Li, an individual supplier of eyewear parts, conducted business with the defendant company from July 2010 to August 2011. According to the plaintiff, the company purchased components totaling CNY 70,054 over this period. The defendant made partial payments amounting to CNY 34,830, leaving a shortfall of CNY 35,224. Despite repeated requests for payment, the company offered only excuses and showed no intention to settle the debt. Mr. Li then filed a lawsuit on October 27, 2011, seeking the full outstanding amount plus interest and costs. The defendant did not submit a written defense or appear in court.
The court held a public hearing on January 31, 2012. Mr. Li attended, while the defendant, having been properly served with notice, did not appear without giving a valid reason. Mr. Li submitted two sets of evidence: his own identification and the company’s business registration records to establish the parties’ legal status, and 49 delivery notes to prove the business transactions and the amount still owed. Since the defendant failed to appear, the court considered that it had waived its rights to challenge or cross-examine the evidence. The court reviewed the documents and found them to be authentic, relevant, and mutually corroborative.
The court found the facts as presented by Mr. Li to be accurate and credible. The evidence showed that the defendant had ordered and received eyewear parts worth CNY 70,054, paid only CNY 34,830, and therefore owed the remaining CNY 35,224. The court determined that a valid and enforceable sales contract existed between the parties. Under Chinese law, a buyer must pay for goods within a reasonable time when no specific payment date is agreed. The court held that the defendant was in breach of contract by failing to pay the balance.
Under Article 161 of the Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China, when the time for payment is not fixed, the buyer shall pay at the same time as taking delivery of the goods. Here, the delivery notes confirmed receipt of the components, yet payment was not completed. The court also applied Article 130 of the Civil Procedure Law, allowing judgment by default when a defendant fails to appear without justification. The court concluded that Mr. Li’s claim was lawful and reasonable. It ordered the defendant to pay the full amount within 15 days of the judgment’s effective date. If payment is delayed, the defendant must pay double interest for the period of delay under Article 229 of the Civil Procedure Law.
This case serves as a reminder that written delivery records are critical evidence in commercial disputes for proving both the existence of a contract and the amount due. The court relied on the 49 delivery notes to establish the unpaid balance. Businesses involved in the supply of goods should ensure they maintain clear, signed delivery documents and pursue payment promptly. The judgment also demonstrates that courts in China will proceed with default judgments when defendants ignore legal proceedings, and will enforce payment orders with additional penalties for delay.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.