In the latest development, Mr. Gerard Richard Williams - singer Bich Tuyen's husband added more than 300 pages of documents to sue singer Dam Vinh Hung, demanding compensation of 1 USD and an apology.
As for Dam Vinh Hung, according to the website of the California Supreme Court in Orange County, he decided to change his lawyer and withdraw his request to dismiss the lawsuit.
Controversy over "repaying kindness with hatred"
Over the past month, the case of Dam Vinh Hung and Mr. Gerard Richard Williams simultaneously suing each other has attracted the attention of public opinion at home and abroad.
Although both lawsuits are still in their early stages, most public opinion has been inclined to criticize singer Dam Vinh Hung. Opinions say that he does not value friendship and repays kindness with hatred.
Because in addition to their long-standing friendship, Dam Vinh Hung was helped by Mr. Gerard when an accident happened, such as: paying for hospital and ambulance fees (about 753 million VND), and sponsoring the live show Ngay em den sao troi with 300,000 USD (about 7.6 billion VND).
In addition, a controversial detail is said to be that Dam Vinh Hung "asked" Mr. Gerard for 15 million USD, lowered it to 5 million USD and failed, then sued for 50 million USD (about 1,270 billion VND).
However, ethics and law are two different categories. If we look at the case from a legal perspective, anyone can become a plaintiff in a lawsuit if they feel that their legitimate rights and interests have been violated.
Dam Vinh Hung's lawsuit against his close friend may be controversial in terms of ethics, but it does not contradict the philosophy of law and the constitution regarding human beings.
The singer's alleged "extortion" of money is essentially a pre-dispute negotiation activity. In every legal system in the world, negotiation and mediation are always the first steps in civil matters. When no agreement is reached, the two parties will ask the judiciary to adjudicate.
The number 50 million USD could be Dam Vinh Hung's real wish, or it could also be a familiar "trick" of many lawyers in court.
Therefore, putting aside ethical controversies, it is necessary to recognize that Dam Vinh Hung has the right to sue - one of the most basic human rights - if he feels wronged or unjust.
Lots of false and misleading information
In nature, the civil lawsuit between Dam Vinh Hung and Mr. Gerard Richard Williams is quite common, with simple details. However, social networks are increasingly filled with fake news, disrupting the main information flow of the case.
On December 23 (Vietnam time), social networks were abuzz with the news "Dam Vinh Hung withdrew his lawsuit because he was afraid of having his tax records made public".
In fact, on the website of the Orange County Superior Court of California, the court rejected the request to dismiss the lawsuit as requested by Ms. Olivia Maclay (of Wilshire Law Firm) - the lawyer who previously represented Dam Vinh Hung, meaning that his request to sue Mr. Gerard is still in effect.
The tax suspicions, the salary of 30 - 50 thousand USD (763 million - 1.27 billion VND)/show... revolving around Dam Vinh Hung all stem from Mr. Gerard's 338-page lawsuit, which has not been verified.
In principle, Mr. Gerard has the right to present his views in the lawsuit. Moreover, the American businessman hired up to 4 lawyers to participate in the proceedings.
This file was posted on the court's official website, the download cost is about 35 USD (890,000 VND). Thus, anyone can access the document file full of information about Dam Vinh Hung, including extremely private and unnecessary content such as the divorce agreement between him and his ex-wife - Ms. Lien Pham.
Another information being discussed is that "The Court rejected Dam Vinh Hung's application". In fact, the "application" here is a request to change lawyers from Wilshire Law Firm to Mr. Tu Huy Hoang. The court returned this application because Section 5 was not dated, and requested to correct and resubmit.
From a small request to complete the document's format, the information was exaggerated, attracting hundreds of gloating comments like "Dam Vinh Hung lost in court".
Dilemma
On the legal side, an anonymous lawyer said the key point of the lawsuit revolves around the issue of determining whether Dam Vinh Hung is a client (licensee) or an invitee and whether the danger of injury to him was known in advance and warned about.
If Dam Vinh Hung is identified as a customer, the business owner must be responsible for checking the area within the business premises, handling problems and dangers, and warning the customer.
Conversely, if they are guests, the host is not responsible for finding, repairing or warning about dangers in the house that they do not or do not know about.
The host is only accused of negligence and is liable if he knew of the dangers in the house and failed to warn the guests.
Dam Vinh Hung is in a dilemma. Experts say that although suing Mr. Gerard is not hopeless, it is almost impossible to recover 50 million USD.
If you are lucky, you can only claim a reasonable amount of compensation as prescribed by law; if you lose, you have to pay court costs and attorney fees from the defendant.
However, whether he wins or loses the lawsuit, Dam Vinh Hung is still the party that suffers the heaviest loss. He practically becomes disabled, specifically losing 3 toes, suffering financial losses and a tarnished image in the eyes of the public.
Surveying social media platforms, the wave of anger towards Dam Vinh Hung is increasing and negative.
It would be difficult for Dam Vinh Hung to pursue the lawsuit to the end, but to preserve his honor in front of the public, he cannot withdraw the lawsuit again. The male singer showed his confusion when he sued then canceled, posted an apology then deleted it.
As Dam Vinh Hung himself admitted, his decision in anger led to mistakes and serious consequences. In this lawsuit, will he "win all" or "lose all"?
TB (according to Vietnamnet)Source: https://baohaiduong.vn/kien-ty-phu-my-dam-vinh-hung-duoc-an-ca-hay-nga-ve-khong-401327.html
Comment (0)