Sanlu problem milk powder for children Hong Kong claims rejected

4 family members of the child or appeal to the Supreme Court of Hong Kong every reporter Liu Dan from Beijing recently, the 4 children and their parents in the Hong Kong Small Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the oat) have applied for a claim of more than 80,000 Hong Kong dollars to the second largest shareholder of the original Sanlu Group (China) Limited (hereinafter referred to as Fonterra). Yesterday (May 31), The daily economic news reporter from the case of the acting lawyers learned that May 27 received the tribunal tick back to the trial notice, the claim was dismissed.　　Industry insiders pointed out that sanlu victims of family members of the judicial rights of the road will be difficult and indefinite. Judge: Fonterra non-litigious subject "We have two ways to go now, one is to apply to the Tribunal (Hong Kong) for a review and the other is to appeal to the Supreme Court of Hong Kong." "The children's family lawyer Peng told the Daily Economic news reporter, the Hong Kong lawsuit is helpless, according to Hong Kong's legal appeal period is 7 days."　　In other words, before June 2, children's families and attorneys need to decide whether to continue the appeal.　　Lin Yu, a longtime person familiar with the case, told the daily economic news that there had been a lawsuit against the New Zealand Fonterra group, but was forced to run aground for reasons such as exorbitant costs. Lin Yu introduced, from the current situation to see the two roads are not the odds, because the evidence they obtained is the New Zealand Fonterra Group, and the case defendant-Sanlu's second largest shareholder Fonterra is the former through another wholly-owned subsidiary in Hong Kong registered, it is difficult to recover the legal parent company, in addition to face the risk of excessive costs, at present,　　The expenses of the children's families in Hong Kong are sponsored by the Federation.　　Public data show that Sanlu group registered capital of 300 million yuan, a total of 300 million shares, Fonterra's shareholding ratio of 43%, the Department of Sanlu Group's second largest shareholder, is the only registered outside the mainland of China's shareholders. On April 8 This year, the case was approved for filing in the Hong Kong Small Claims Tribunal, and plaintiffs in Hong Kong filed for Action said: 4 children were less than two years old at the time of the incident.　　It is understood that the combination of Fonterra in the Sanlu group in the composition of the shares, and the degree of responsibility, the 4 cases of children to claim total natural claims of 84600 Hong Kong dollars, of which more than 30,000 Hong Kong dollar, a small number of only 10,000 Hong Kong dollar.　　According to the Daily Economic news reporter, the 10-page verdict contains the reasons given by the plaintiff, the defendant and the Tribunal's views. "The judge mainly considers that Fonterra's lack of evidence in the Sanlu case or the direct liability to be borne is insufficient, and Hong Kong pays attention to the principle of ' respect for jurisprudence ', which has been previously tried in favor of the defendants."　　Peng introduced, the Tribunal rejected the request the main reason is: Fonterra is only the original Sanlu group shareholders, there is no sufficient legal basis can be judged that the company should bear as an independent legal entity of Sanlu Group of losses caused by Fonterra is not suitable for the subject of litigation. Fonterra: Refusing to negotiate and settling is different from other courts, the proceedings of the Hong Kong Small Claims Tribunal are limited to claims not exceeding HK $50,000 and the parties to the proceedings shall not be represented by solicitors; trial modeThe informal listening model was adopted, mainly to assist the two sides to reach a consensual settlement.　　The daily economic news reporter was informed that because Fonterra refused to negotiate, the case was not reconciled at a brief hearing on May 4. Fonterra believes that even if the judiciary in Hong Kong has jurisdiction, it is not liable, on the grounds that it is manufactured and sold by Sanlu Group and its subsidiaries, a shareholder of Sanlu Group (not its subsidiary), each of which is a separate unit, " We are therefore not responsible for the acts or omissions of Sanlu Group or its subsidiaries.　　At the same time, Fonterra also denied the joint liability of the 3 Directors who had been accredited to Sanlu group. Sanlu was a negative asset at the time, it is their shareholders and other parties to the three deer insolvency administrator to pay more than 900 million yuan, but also as shareholders of Fonterra did not assume any responsibility.　　Peng the heart to doubt. Compensation: The judicial way is difficult "The government compensation program can not replace the judicial way, the parents of children if dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, the right to resolve through litigation."　　"Zhang Yansheng, a lawyer at Beijing Dayu law firm, said to the daily economic news." But the path to litigation is unusually difficult. "Daily economic news" reporter learned that in the Melamine Stone Children series of compensation cases, for Sanlu case there are five, in March 2009, there are two in Shijiazhuang city, Hebei province, Xinhua District Court file, and three separate in Beijing Shunyi District, Daxing District and Xicheng District Court.　　So far, other lawsuits have not even been filed, except for the first trial of a claim by the Beijing Shunyi District court in late 2009. "Sanlu's liquidation work, the accounts of the last why not open to the outside world."　　Peng that the first Sanlu bankruptcy process was led by the local government, which made it extremely difficult to safeguard justice. In the period of more than a year, the family of some stone children have been accepted by the government-led, the Chinese Dairy Association specific implementation of a one-time compensation.　　According to the compensation plan, the child's situation is divided into death, severe disease and receive general treatment 3 kinds: death child compensation for 200,000 yuan, severe child compensation for 30,000 yuan, accept general treatment of children compensation 2000 yuan. The family members of many children expressed compensation for the compensation scheme is too general, do not take into account the specific circumstances. In Hong Kong lawsuit, a child mother Ms. Chen accepted a standard of 2000 yuan of uniform compensation, "We in the designated hospital examination, the doctor said the children's stone has been discharged." "Ms. Chen told the Daily Economic news reporter, then took the child in another hospital examination but found that the child stone symptom did not reduce, angry Chen finally chose the lawsuit."