论文部分内容阅读
不久前,律师佘某乘车前往长沙,按新规定株洲到长沙的票价应为5.5元,但还是被按照旧规定收费。他将该次列车所属的广铁客运公司诉至长铁运输法院,要求赔礼道歉,退还多收的票款0.5元,赔偿其精神损失费2万元。长铁运输法院立案庭在收到起诉书后了解到,事后广铁集团客运公司多次派员专程到株洲和佘某联系,对其监督行为表示感谢,并且进行了整顿,将多收的票款退还,还聘请余某担任客运公司的“路风监督员”。对于佘某仍执意将客运公司诉至法院,长铁运输法院立案庭认为余某的行为系滥用诉讼权利,不符合诉讼经济原则和立法精神,不予立案。
Not long ago, lawyer She rushed to Changsha by car, according to the new provisions of Zhuzhou to Changsha fare should be 5.5 yuan, but still in accordance with the provisions of the old charges. He sued the Guangzhou-Guangzhou passenger transport company belonging to the train to the Long Railway Transportation Court for apology, refund of overcharged fare of 0.5 yuan and compensation for mental damages of 20,000 yuan. After receiving the indictment, the Longtian Transportation Court case court learned that after the fact, the Guangzhou Railway Group Passenger Transport Company dispatched a number of special trips to Zhuzhou and Shemou to express gratitude for its supervision and conduct rectification. The overcharged fare Refund, but also hire Yu as a passenger company’s “road supervisor.” For She still insist on suing the passenger company to the court, the long-distance transport court case that Yu’s behavior abuse of legal rights, does not comply with the litigation economic principles and the spirit of legislation, not to file a case.