Lawyer Luo Xianghu was invited to participate in the enterprise environmental protection legal service day activities

In order to better carry out practical activities of the rule of law for the people, help enterprises solve the ecological and environmental legal problems encountered in production and operation, and better serve the high-quality development of enterprises, on February 23, 2022, lawyer Luo Xianghu, as the legal adviser of Jinan Ecological Environment Bureau, was invited to participate in the "Enterprise Environmental Protection legal Service Day" jointly organized by Jinan Intermediate people's Court and Jinan Ecological Environment Bureau. During the event, dozens of department heads, including Xu Xiande, the Ministry of Environmental Protection, the Ministry of Legal Affairs, etc., and middle-level cadres and employees of Jiuyang Group Company raised environmental protection-related legal issues on the spot, mainly involving: how to store, transport, dispose, and utilize solid waste in accordance with the law? In order to transform and construct dust removal equipment and facilities, the company needs to stop all relevant pollution prevention and control facilities. What procedures should it go through? How to understand and apply the "Shandong Province Ecological Environment Administrative Penalty Discretion Benchmark Application Regulations" and the "Jinan City Ecological Environment Bureau's Implementation Opinions on Lighter Mitigation and Exemption of Administrative Penalties? In the course of the trial, if there are inconsistent legal bases such as laws, regulations, government rules and judicial interpretations, how to apply the law? Zheng Zhiyong, leader of Jinan Intermediate People's Court and second-level investigator, Liu Jiying, President of Environmental Resources Tribunal, Xu Guangliang, Director of Regulations Division of Jinan Ecological Environment Bureau, People's Court of Laiwu District of Jinan City, relevant leaders of Laiwu Branch of Jinan Ecological Environment Bureau and Lawyer Luo Xianghu respectively answered the above questions on the spot and achieved the expected good results, and won warm applause from the cadres and employees of Jiuyang Group Co., Ltd. Shandong Jiuyang Group Co., Ltd. is a large-scale whole industry chain iron and steel joint enterprise integrating coking, metallurgy, cultural tourism and intelligent manufacturing. It is one of the enterprises listed in the high-quality development plan of Shandong Province. it is also the construction base of new materials industry for tool and die steel in the high-quality development plan of Shandong Province. Jiuyang Group Co., Ltd. is the largest medium and wide strip steel production base in Shandong Province, the largest standard parts material production base in Shandong Province, and the largest steel material production base for prestressed pipe piles in Shandong Province. It was rated as "high-quality brand of Chinese strip steel plant" and "high-quality steel plant brand of Chinese industrial wire industry". Won the title of excellent (B) enterprise in the development quality and comprehensive competitiveness of China's iron and steel enterprises, China's excellent iron and steel enterprise brand, China's excellent iron and steel enterprise, national key high-tech enterprise, Shandong provincial technology center enterprise, provincial advanced production safety unit, Shandong excellent enterprise and Shandong intelligent manufacturing pilot demonstration enterprise, Shandong manufacturing high-end brand cultivation enterprise, Jinan real economy leading enterprise and other honorary titles. In 2021, it ranked 400 among the top 500 Chinese enterprises; 201 among the top 500 private enterprises in China; 192 among the top 500 manufacturing enterprises in China; 110 among the top 500 private manufacturing enterprises in China; 37 among the top 100 enterprises in Shandong; 19 among the top 100 private enterprises in Shandong; and 31 among the top 100 industrial enterprises in Shandong.

2022-02-24

Point of View... The (V) of the rules of the mortgage period.

4. interpretation of "no (to) support" and "no protection" Sort out the existing laws and regulations, from "support" as stated in the Interpretation of the Guarantee Law to "no protection" as stated in the Property Law to "support" as stated in the Minutes of the Meeting to "no protection" as stated in the Civil Code to "no support" as stated in the Interpretation of the Guarantee Law System ". In the author's opinion, the meaning of "not (to) support" and "not to protect" are not exactly the same, the former refers to the conclusion of not (to) support the mortgagee's claim; the latter, in addition to the meaning of "not (to) support", may also include the annihilation of the mortgage (the annihilation of the mortgage), the annihilation of the right of victory (the annihilation of the right of victory), the occurrence of the right of defense (the occurrence of the right of defense) and so on. In this regard, it is necessary to clarify the similarities and differences between the existing main doctrines arising from "non-protection. 1. The mortgage is extinguished. Scholars who agree with this theory believe that, unlike the Schrodinger's cat principle, the fact of high probability can be assumed by absolute assumption that the inevitable event is the expiration of the mortgage period, the mortgagee must invoke the statute of limitations defense to claim the elimination of the mortgage and then request the cancellation of the mortgage registration. For this reason, it is beneficial to make the best use of things, to play the value purpose of circulation efficiency and balance of interests, and to reduce the negative effects of norms. The summary of the judgment of "Wang Jun v. Li Rui Mortgage Contract Dispute" published in the 7th issue of the Bulletin of the Supreme People's Court in 2017 (No. 249 in total) clearly states that the consequence of the statute of limitations is the elimination of the mortgage right rather than the loss of the right to win. The author thinks that, combined with the principle of "from the main" image, the theory does not reasonably explain why the real creditor's rights of the time limit have not been eliminated but the mortgage right has been eliminated, and the defects are more obvious. 2. The elimination of the right to win a lawsuit (also known as the loss of execution). The elimination of the right of victory originated from the Soviet Union is a reflection of the old general theory on the issue during the exercise of the mortgage right. The essence of its emergence lies in allowing and requiring judges to invoke and review the expiration, suspension and interruption of the statute of limitations ex officio. Since its quotation, it has been criticized by most scholars as "contradiction between self-concept and logic" and "victory" falling into the "straw man fallacy" in logic on the "objective effect. With the introduction of the concept of private autonomy into the statute of limitations system in Article 3 of the statute of limitations, the doctrine has lost its own basis of existence and has been gradually dispelled and replaced by the doctrine of "the occurrence of the right of defense. 3 the right of defense occurs. Influenced by German legislation and the writings of Taiwan, the existing scholars and practitioners in the domain agree with the view that the right of defense occurs. As far as the author can see, Articles 1 to 3, 5, 18 to 19 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Limitation of Action System in Hearing Civil Cases promulgated by the Supreme People's Court in 2020 use the word "defense" in 12 places. Articles 20 and 419 of the Civil Code also indirectly reflect the right of the mortgagor to invoke the defense of the principal debt limitation according to the interpretation of the text; the introduction of the Interpretation of the Guarantee System also adopts the view of "the occurrence of the right of defense. In summary, the author believes that the existing legislation and judicial interpretation of the doctrine may be based on the following reasons: First, in the context of the current law, the law does not completely stifle the possibility of the mortgagor to realize his rights, and "non-protection" should not be equated with the "elimination" of the mortgage as mentioned in Article 393 of the Civil Code, that is, "non-protection" should not be interpreted as the natural result of the statute of limitations, but rather the effect of the mortgagor invoking the right of defense of limitation. Second, the doctrine simply and clearly explains the situation of rights and obligations between the right holder and the obligor after the statute of limitations by means of the antagonism between the right of claim and the right of defense. Unlike other doctrines, this theory does not go to extremes and does not re-create new legal concepts outside the existing legal framework system, ensuring conceptual homogeneity while reflecting the integrity of the legal system. Moreover, the "occurrence of the right of defense", which specifically refers to the "substantive right of defense", can effectively link up the relevant provisions of the procedural law (such as Article 371 of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law), that is, the court shall not take the initiative to invoke and review the statute of limitations on the premise that the parties do not claim the right of defense of the statute of limitations. Third, the obvious flaws in the theory of annihilation of mortgage, the loss of the basis of its own existence, the understanding of the effect of rights as "incomplete defense" and the natural "private autonomy" publicity effect of the theory of defense, lead to the theory being able to cater to the general environment on the basis of criticism and elimination of other theories, and eventually become a "popular" theory in academic circles and even in judicial practice. The extended interpretation of the period during which the 5. mortgage is exercised. (I) Extension Interpretation I-Article 390 of the Civil Code During the life of the mortgage, on the premise that the secured property is not bound by the parties' intention, the existing rights in rem naturally extend to the "security substitute", which includes the application of the rules during the exercise of the mortgage. What is a "guaranteed substitute"? The author believes that it mainly contains two meanings. The first meaning is the "three gold" stipulated in the law, namely compensation, insurance and compensation. The second meaning is the "etc" mentioned after the "three gold" in the law. As for "etc", the academic circles are divided into two camps. The first camp believes that "guarantee substitute" not only includes the relative elimination of "collateral transfer price", that is, the guarantee is sold, it also includes "all proceeds derived from the mortgaged property", I .e. absolute extinction, including but not limited to fruits, additions, important ingredients, etc. The second camp believes that "security substitutes" only include substitutes formed under the condition of absolute elimination. It believes that the retroactive effect of mortgage right under the condition of "relative elimination" can not only claim to return the mortgaged property to the transferee and realize the mortgage right, but also require to recover the proceeds from the transfer of mortgage property, which has the disadvantages of overlapping beds and overprotecting the mortgagee's suspicion. The author believes that the existing mainstream theory that "etc." is limited to absolute elimination mainly lies in the fact that the physical form of real estate has changed less. At the beginning of the establishment of the security right system, "real estate (value is far greater than movable property)" is at the core, and the wanton expansion of the scope of application of the rule of substitution on the security substitute will ignore the existing legal norms and systems. In addition, based on the principle of "from the master" image, the mortgaged real estate (or movable property) is destroyed, lost or expropriated during the life of the mortgage, and the period rule should automatically apply to the "three gold" until the secured claim is extinguished. However, two major problems arise from this: first, how to deal with the mixing of money after the "three gold" is deposited into the special account designated by the mortgagee? In my opinion, although the mixing of the "three gold" and the money already in the account loses its specificity, the creditor obtains the deposit claim on the bank that opened the account. Since the original security interest cannot be extended to currency, but can be extended to deposit claims, as long as the account balance exceeds the "three gold" and the resulting interest, it can be assumed that the "security substitute" always exists in the mixed account for the withdrawal of the claim "? Even if the" mortgaged property "is transformed into" three gold "due to damage, loss, etc., it is still the same as the" limitation period for execution of the main claim "as described in section III of Part II of this article. (II) Extension Interpretation II-Article 1998 of the Civil Code In order to prevent the mortgagee's mortgage from causing the value of the mortgage to be impaired, the clause gives the mortgagee two remedies: first, to request the mortgagee to cease the act that caused the mortgage to be impaired and to restore the value of the mortgaged property; and second, to require the mortgagee to provide security corresponding to the reduced value. Of course, in judicial practice, the mortgagor may refuse to restore the value of the mortgaged property or provide security, at which point the creditor may request the debtor to pay off the debt in advance. Through this clause, it will also be found that "requiring the mortgagor to provide a guarantee corresponding to the reduced value" includes four situations: the first and (II) situation is that the original mortgage is real estate (movable property), and the rear mortgage is also real estate (movable property); The third situation is that the original mortgage is real estate and the rear mortgage is movable property; the fourth situation is that the original mortgage is movable property and the rear mortgage is real estate. Whether the original mortgage is real estate (or movable property) or the post-mortgage is movable property (or immovable property), the principle of "following the master" image shall be followed (with exceptions, see below). The period of exercise of the mortgage right is applicable to the suspension, interruption and extension of the limitation of action and execution of the limitation of the main creditor's right, but corresponding problems will also arise. For the convenience of understanding, the following is illustrated by way of examples. Example: A borrowed 1 million yuan from B on October 1, 2021 for a period of one year. Both parties agreed to repay the principal on October 2, 2022. A mortgaged the real estate A (or movable property A, which is not repeated below) under his name to B. Situation 1 is that when the debt performance period expires, A fails to repay the debt and damages the real estate A on December 2, 2022, resulting in the value of the real estate falling from the original 1 million to 800000 yuan. B discovers on December 12 of the same year and requires A to provide a guarantee corresponding to the reduced value. A mortgages the real estate B under his name to B the next day; case 2 (ibid.) B did not claim its own creditor's rights to the court before October 2, 2025 but found that the original real estate A was damaged, and immediately requested A to provide a guarantee corresponding to the reduced value. A mortgaged the real estate B with a value of 200000 yuan under its name to B on October 3, 2025. In summary, in case one, when B claims the right to provide a mortgage again to A within the statute of limitations (the same applies to the execution of the statute of limitations), the statute of limitations is interrupted and re-calculated, at this time, the claim of 800000 yuan secured by the original mortgage and the claim of 200000 yuan secured by the post-mortgage (the front and back claims should be regarded as a whole) are calculated again for three years from the time of registration of the real estate mortgage (or when the movable property mortgage contract comes into effect), and there is no objection to this. If the creditor does not claim to exercise the claim or mortgage during the limitation period of the claim, but A sets up a "secondary" mortgage for B during the "natural" period of the mortgage, is it necessary to clarify the period during which the mortgage is exercised? In case 2, the creditor's right of 800000 yuan was reduced to "natural debt" due to exceeding the limitation period of action, thus the exercise of the original mortgage lost the legal compulsory protection. As for the 200000 yuan creditor's right becoming a "natural debt", it is indisputable that Party A provides the corresponding guarantee again, which means that Party A voluntarily performs the 200000 yuan's debt, thus giving rise to a question, is there still a problem during the exercise of mortgage? For the above two cases, the existing law does not give clear provisions. In my opinion, in order to strike a balance of interests between the utility of collateral circulation and judicial efficiency, as well as between creditors and mortgagors, legislation should clarify the period of exercise of the mortgage corresponding to the "secondary" mortgage, rather than being confined to the principle of "following the master" across the board, but breaking through the existing legal framework to make special provisions, that is, to clarify the period of exercise of the mortgage of the "secondary" mortgage. 6. epilogue The "point-to-point" period expression draws a clearer line between the mortgage period and the legal terms related to it, so that the exclusion period, statute of limitations, etc. cannot be treated "equally" with the mortgage period. Combing the legislative history of the mortgage period will still find that the legislative guidelines of different countries in different periods affect the meaning, characteristics and even the definition of the nature of the mortgage in China, and to this day, the rules of the period of the exercise of the mortgage are still looking for a position in line with China's national conditions in the judgment and theoretical disputes. The unique "dual model" makes the application of the period more complicated, and the differences in legislative terms also make the theory of the period of exclusion, from the attribute, the elimination of the right to win the case and so on. The application of the period rule shall extend to the "security substitute" obtained after the loss, destruction (or expropriation, etc.) of the mortgaged real estate (or movable property) ". Of course, the legislation should also clarify the rules for the exercise of the "secondary" mortgage period based on the impairment of the value of the collateral, rather than calculating the "mortgage exercise period" within the existing legal framework system based on existing laws and regulations ". 7. reference works [1] Wang Liming, Civil Law, Renmin University of China Press, 2020; [2] Wei Zhenying: "Civil Law", Peking University Press, 2017; [3] Wang Liming, Research on Property Law (Volume II), Renmin University of China Press, 2013; [4] Zipelius: Methodology of Law, translated by Jin Zhenbao, Beijing Law Press, 2009; [5] Wang Shengming, Editor-in-Chief: "Interpretation of the People's Republic of China Property Law", Law Press, 2007, pp. 436-437; [6] Huang Pine has: 《<中华人民共和国物权法>Interpretation and Application of Provisions, People's Court Press, 2002, p. 603. 8. References [1] Zhuang Jiayuan, "Implied Extension of Security Rights in Movable Property", Legal Studies, No. 2, 2021, p. 39; [2] Yang Wei, "The Connection between the Exercise of Mortgage and the Limitation of Action for Principal Claims-From the Perspective of Article 419 of the Civil Code and the New Provisions of Judicial Interpretation", Northern Law, No. 6, 2021; [3] Lin Wenxue, Yang Yongqing, Ma Jinliang, Wu Guangrong: 《<关于适用民法典有关担保制度的解释>Understanding and Application of the People's Justice, No. 4, 2021, p. 40; [4] Luo Shuai, "Interpretation of the Rules of Mortgage Period under Skopos Theory-Centered on Article 419 of the Civil Code", Journal of Shandong University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), No. 6, 2020, p. 85; [5] The Second Civil Trial Division of the Supreme People's Court, ed: 《<全国法院民商事审判工作会议纪要>Understanding and Application, People's Court Press, 2019, p. 361; [6] Huo Haihong: "Name" and "Reality" of the Elimination of the Right to Win a Case, Chinese and Foreign Law, No. 2, 2012, p. 351; [7] Gao Shengping, "Study on the Period of Exercise of Security Rights", Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law, No. 1, 2009; [8] Xu Mingyue: "Legislative deficiencies in the collateral transfer system and its judicial interpretation remedies-Review<中华人民共和国物权法>Article 191, Law and Business Research, No. 2, 2008, p. 146; [9] Sun Peng, "On the Period of Implementation of Security Interests", in Modern Law, No. 6, 2007, pp. 85-87; [10] Wen Shiyang and Liao Huanguo: "On the co-accommodation of the superior subrogation of the mortgage right and the power of the object", Law, No. 6, 2001, p. 51; [11] Zhao Jia, "An Analysis of the Duration of Mortgage Rights and Related Issues-A Commentary on Article 59 of the Ninth Minute", in the 30th Series of the Judicial Reform Review. 9. reference case [1] Han Xiaolan and Tang Zuoyin's Civil Ruling Letter on Retrial Review and Trial Supervision of the Application for Execution of Objection by Executors [(2021) Supreme Law Minshen No. 1134]; [2] Liu Wei and Zhongjing Xin Investment Co., Ltd. and other mortgage contract disputes second-instance civil judgment [(2016) Jing 03 Min Zhong No. 9567]; [3] Sales Contract between Dongguan Cihua Stationery Products Co., Ltd. and China Minmetals Shenzhen Import and Export Co., Ltd. and Longyan Hongyu Trading Co., Ltd.</中华人民共和国物权法></全国法院民商事审判工作会议纪要></关于适用民法典有关担保制度的解释></中华人民共和国物权法>

2022-02-23

The launching ceremony of "Shandong Provincial National Intellectual Property Protection Center Rapid Rights Protection Station" was successfully held in Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Institute

On February 23, 2022, the launching ceremony of the "Shandong Provincial National Intellectual Property Protection Center Rapid Rights Protection Station" was successfully held in Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Institute. Yin Qiangmin, deputy director of Shandong National Intellectual Property Protection Center, Li Huabin, member of the Rapid Rights Protection Department, Mou Renan, member of the Pre-trial Department, and Guo Jing, member of the Rapid Rights Protection Department, attended the ceremony and unveiled the rights protection station. Han Honggang, director of Zhongcheng Qingtai Law Firm, Geng Guoyu, party secretary and director of Jinan Institute, Mou Xun, partner Tian Feng, lawyers Miao Ze Zhuang, Ma Xugan and Mao Xiang attended the ceremony. After the ceremony, the two sides held a discussion on the work content and objectives of the "rapid rights protection station of Shandong national intellectual property protection center. The two sides discussed in depth the innovative ideas and specific measures to carry out the work of the rights protection station, and further exchanged views on the declaration and protection of intellectual property rights. The two parties stated that the next step will be to strengthen close cooperation, advocate resource sharing, strengthen exchanges and training between personnel and business, implement the "strict protection" standard, build a "big protection" pattern, pursue the effect of "fast protection", and adhere to the "same protection" "The principle provides strong intellectual property protection for accelerating the innovation-driven development strategy and optimizing the business environment. Zhongcheng Qingtai Law Firm has a large number of high-level expert teams in the field of intellectual property legal services such as patents, trademarks, copyrights, etc., providing satisfactory protection solutions and performance for the intellectual creativity and technological innovation of a wide range of client groups. Prior to this, many lawyers from Zhongcheng Qingtai have been selected into the talent expert database of the provincial protection center. Taking this first batch of rapid rights protection stations as an opportunity, Zhongcheng Qingtai lawyers will continue to use their own professional and dedicated services to help relevant filing entities achieve all-round protection of technical barriers and brand advantages, and help achieve a new level of rapid rights protection of intellectual property rights.

2022-02-23

(IV) on the rules of mortgage period.

The basic relationship between the period of exercise of the mortgage right of the 3. and the limitation of action and the limitation of execution of the main claim. The determination of the nature of the period during which the (I) mortgage is exercised. Combined with the adjudication approach and the theoretical controversy, the nature of the period during which the mortgage is exercised is divided into three main points of view: first, the statute of limitations. The doctrine holds that the mortgage and the main claim "co-existence and co-extinction", applicable to the provisions of the statute of limitations on suspension, interruption and extension, should not be eliminated by the statute of limitations of the main claim, but into a "naked right" to apply the "loss of the right to win the case" view. The second is said during the exclusion period. The study considers that the mortgage as a limited property right is different from the claim that mainly applies to the statute of limitations. The linkage does not mean that it is equally applicable and that the right should be extinguished at the end of the period. The doctrine holds that the mechanical attribution of the mortgage exercise period to the statute of limitations or the exclusion period is a logical error, and it can be regarded as a special period in combination with the existing civil law of our country (such as the "guarantee period" stipulated in Article 692 of the Civil Code). Whether this "special period" is an independent period (also called the judicial protection period) mainly includes two viewpoints, the first view is that the mortgage exercise period belongs to the independent period based on the limitation period of the main creditor's right, but it is calculated in parallel with the limitation period of the main creditor's right, that is, the two periods are calculated separately, and whether the periods affect each other is divided into two views, one view is that they do not affect each other, the other view is that they affect each other, and the latter is mostly recognized in judicial practice. The second view is that the period during which the mortgage is exercised does not belong to the period of independence, and that everything is the application of the image of "following the master" in judicial practice, and the author agrees with the second view. In addition, in conjunction with the above, the duration includes the period of exercise of the mortgage and the period of exclusion, and the two periods are side by side rather than inclusive, I .e., the period of exercise of the mortgage is not a period of exclusion, but another period classification that is side by side with the statute of limitations and the period of exclusion. The Effect of (II) "Dual Model" on the Period of Mortgage Exercise Combined with the "limitation of action" mentioned in Chapter 1, Part 9 of the Civil Code of China and the many amendments to the Civil Procedure Law and related judicial interpretations until now the "limitation of execution" mentioned in Article 246 of Chapter 20 (known as the dual model or dual pattern in academic circles), the limitation of execution has gradually changed from the period of procedural law to the period of protection of substantive rights, such as the suspension of limitation of execution and the interruption rules applicable to the suspension of limitation of limitation of litigation; in the enforcement procedure, the court may not, on its own initiative, invoke the provisions on the expiration of the limitation of execution. On this basis, we interpret the provisions of Article 44 of the Interpretation of the Guarantee System: 1. After the expiration of the statute of limitations for the principal claim, the people's court shall not support the mortgagee's claim to exercise the mortgage. The interpretation of this article is that the mortgagee shall exercise the mortgage within the limitation period of the main claim, and upon the expiration of the exercise, the main claim will lose the protection of the court's enforcement power. According to the principle of "following the master" image, the mortgage is also reduced to a "naked right" or a "natural right" and thus cannot be supported by the court. Of course, the rights enjoyed by the mortgagee died during the "first heavy" protection period, and did not transition to the "second heavy" protection period, which does not involve the application of the statute of limitations. 2. If the mortgagor claims not to be liable for security on the grounds that the statute of limitations for the principal claim has expired, the people's court shall support it. The interpretation of this article is to give the mortgagor the legal right to claim the "limitation defense" under the premise that the court may not invoke the expiration of the statute of limitations on its own initiative, but the question arises as to whether the mortgagor can claim the mortgage registration together or after the fact after claiming no liability for security. It is believed that although the expiration of the statute of limitations for the principal claim does not belong to one of the circumstances in which the security right is extinguished under Article 393 of the Civil Code, the Minutes of the Meeting clearly stipulates that the mortgagor may request the court to cancel the registration after the expiration of the statute of limitations for the principal claim, and the Interpretation of the Guarantee System does not provide for it again in order to prevent confusion in the application of legislation. In my opinion, the right of claim based on the "annihilation of mortgage" does not affect the application of the right of claim based on the "right of defense. 3. Before the expiration of the limitation period for the main claim, the creditor shall only bring an action against the debtor, after the judgment or mediation of the people's court. This article is interpreted to mean that even if the mortgagor is not listed as a defendant during the "first heavy" protection period, as long as the payment and confirmation claims are confirmed by the effective legal instrument and constitute the basis for execution, the transition to the "second heavy" protection period can be made. In short, if the payment content determined by the enforcement basis (payment order, fair creditor's rights instrument, judgment, mediation statement, decision confirming the mediation agreement, arbitral award, etc.) is clear and meets other conditions for the people's court to accept the enforcement case, the relevant provisions of the statute of limitations shall apply to the enforcement procedure. It should be noted that the report or complaint of the mortgagee requesting the protection of civil rights may not only cause the interruption of the statute of limitations, but the resulting fine or confiscation of property may also make the civil payment the subject of enforcement, but such payment may not become the mortgaged property in advance; or the administrative action initiated by the mortgagee on the basis of civil legal relationship constitutes the cause of the interruption of the statute of limitations, however, the administrative judgment does not take civil payment as the subject matter of enforcement and does not give rise to the issue of the time limit for transitional enforcement. 4. If the debtor fails to apply for enforcement within the period of application for enforcement, the people's court shall not support its claim to the mortgagor to exercise the mortgage right. The interpretation of this article is based on the general cause of the extinction of the debt and the principle of the "subordinate" image of the mortgage, which is extinguished by the extinction of the first paragraph of Article 557 of the Civil Code during the period of limitation of execution of the principal creditor's debt relationship. If the mortgagee fails to take any measures to be paid during the "second" protection period to extinguish the claim in whole or in part, the right will be reduced to a "naked right" because it has exceeded the time limit for enforcement ". In addition, the "application for enforcement" described in the provisions is not the only means for the right holder to claim rights, and should be understood in a broad sense, with the same effect also including the obligor's agreement to perform the obligation, the two parties to reach a settlement agreement and so on. Of course, the above-mentioned means are also the cause of the interruption of the execution of the statute of limitations, pending the elimination of the interruption of the resumption of the execution of the statute of limitations and the execution of the statute of limitations has not expired, the mortgage is still in the "second" period of protection. Applicable circumstances during the exercise of (III) mortgage Judicial practice cases and theoretical disputes are like "a treasure house of knowledge for discovering, analyzing and solving problems", and this section hopes to list the applicable circumstances during the exercise of existing mortgages in conjunction with the provisions of relevant laws and regulations. 1. The "first heavy" protection period Scenario 1: During the limitation period of the main claim, the claim is claimed but the mortgage is not claimed, and the lack of confirmation of the mortgage in the effective judgment or mediation does not cause the mortgagee to lose the mortgage. According to Article 140 of the Civil Code, the meaning of silence has legal effect only if it is statutory, agreed and in accordance with the customs of the transaction. Subject to the principle of "non-disregard", the conciliation statement (or judgment) shall not contain matters other than the main claim claim, nor shall it be stated that the mortgagee shall waive the mortgage on the mortgaged property, provided that the parties have not had a dispute over the mortgage. If the mortgagee does not give up the mortgage in an express manner, nor does he apply with the debtor to the real estate registration authority to cancel the mortgage registration, it is not appropriate to directly presume that the mortgagee has waived the right to exercise the mortgage, so the mortgagee still enjoys the mortgage right to the mortgaged property. Case 2 (Understanding Case 4): The original purpose of the statute of limitations and the statute of limitations for enforcement is to urge the right holder to claim his or her legal rights by initiating judicial proceedings within the statutory period. If no effective measures are taken to claim claims and exercise mortgages, such rights sleeping on the "hotbed" of limited time will not be necessary for legal protection. Case 3 (understand the following "second heavy" protection period case 8): the main claim within the statute of limitations period did not claim the main claim and apply for the realization of the mortgage, at this time should be applied to the civil procedure law chapter 15, section 7 of the non-contentious procedure, that is, the relevant rules of the case of the realization of the security right. It should be noted that: first, the applicant applying for the realization of the real right of security should not only be understood as the owner of the real right of security, but also include the mortgagor or owner other than the mortgagee; second, the situation of "applying for the realization of the mortgage right" and "filing a lawsuit" and "applying for arbitration" have the same effect, which constitute the cause of interruption of limitation; third, if the parties have no (part of) substantial dispute over the realization of the mortgage right and the (undisputed part) conditions have been achieved, the mortgagee can enforce it according to the court's ruling. If the mortgage right paid in full for the main creditor's right is eliminated, there is no limitation of application. If the mortgage right paid for the main creditor's right is eliminated, the remaining creditor's right is changed from "guaranteed (or priority) creditor's right" to "to", and the ordinary creditor's right ", and the right, the court rejected the creditor's application and caused the creditor to bring a lawsuit to the court because of the dispute between the parties on the validity of the main contract or the mortgage contract, whether the mortgage is effectively established, whether the secured claim is the liquidation period, and so on, which involves" two interruption of limitation ". The "second" protection period The premise of the application of the "second heavy" protection period is that the creditor has filed a lawsuit with the people and obtained a successful judgment (or the parties have reached a mediation) during the "first heavy" protection period, and this stage is transformed into a discussion of how to deal with the relationship between the statute of limitations and the mortgage, which mainly includes the following four situations in judicial practice: Scenario 5: No application for the exercise of the mortgage right during the "first heavy" protection period, after the judgment comes into effect (or the parties reach a mediation), apply for enforcement but do not claim the exercise of the mortgage right during the period of limitation of execution. Based on the principle of the property of the security right, the mortgage right is eliminated with the full payment of the main claim, and the main claim is not paid in full, the mortgage right is still in the remaining outstanding claim. At the same time, "application for enforcement" as a legal interruption, the time limit for the execution of the remaining claims will be affected by this, before the expiration of the mortgage and the remaining claims are protected by law. Extended Interpretation 1: After reaching an enforcement settlement agreement with the executed person under court mediation, the court ruled to terminate the enforcement procedure. According to the sixth paragraph of Article 16 of the notice on filing and closing opinions, if the person applying for execution (or the court) finds that the person subject to execution has property after the ruling of "ending the execution procedure" is made, the execution may be resumed on application (or ex officio). The application executor shall not be limited by the time limit for the execution of the application. The reason for this is that since the judgment of the principal claim has entered into force and the mortgagee has applied for enforcement within the statutory time limit, there is no question of interruption, suspension or extension of the statute of limitations for the principal claim. As a subordinate right, there is no question of interruption, suspension or extension during the exercise of the mortgage. The mortgagee may, when applying for the resumption of enforcement proceedings, claim the exercise of the mortgage together with the enforcement court. Extended interpretation 2: After reaching an execution settlement agreement with the person subject to execution under court mediation, and the person applying for execution requests the court to suspend or withdraw the execution application, the court may consider whether to make a decision to suspend or terminate the execution based on the execution of the case. It should be noted here that the termination of this execution procedure (see extended interpretation 1) is different from the termination of execution and suspension of execution. Suspension of execution, as the cause of suspension of execution limitation, can resume the calculation of execution limitation after the cause of suspension is eliminated. However, withdrawal of the execution application leads to the termination of the execution of the case. In principle, the execution procedure cannot be started again. Of course, in some cases, an application can be made to the execution court. In the author's opinion, such a situation of submitting an application and withdrawing the application constitutes an interruption of the execution statute of limitations, which should be recalculated. Extended Interpretation III: After the court mediation to reach a settlement with the debtor, the court ruled to terminate the execution proceedings, and then the debtor filed for bankruptcy liquidation, the mortgagee within the statutory period to declare claims to the administrator. Although the debtor filed an application with the people's court to initiate bankruptcy liquidation procedures during the execution of the case, the mortgagee has already declared its own property-guaranteed creditor's rights to the bankruptcy administrator with an effective judgment within the period of declaration of creditor's rights (legal protection period) stipulated by law, so the main creditor's rights are still within the period of legal protection, and accordingly, its mortgage right should also be protected by law. Scenario 6 (including scenario 9): "The first heavy" protection period does not apply for confirmation of the exercise of the mortgage, after the judgment has entered into force (or the parties have reached a mediation), apply for enforcement and claim the exercise of the mortgage during the period of limitation of execution, or neither apply for enforcement nor claim the exercise of the mortgage during the period of limitation of execution. The legal consequences arising from the former are referred to in case I and will not be repeated here. The legal consequences arising from the latter invoke the above-mentioned "first heavy" protection period situation II, that is, there is no need for legal protection.

2022-02-22

Mr. Li Heng was appointed as an arbitrator of Shenzhen International Arbitration Court.

According to the "the People's Republic of China Arbitration Law" and the "Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration Regulations", the Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration (also known as "South China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission", "Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area International Arbitration Center", "Shenzhen Arbitration Commission", English abbreviation SCIA) Deliberated at the 18th meeting of the second council, the new "Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration List of Arbitrators" will be opened on February 21, 2022. The new arbitrator of Shenzhen International Arbitration Court has 1549 arbitrators from 114 countries and regions around the world. Li Heng, deputy director and senior partner of Zhongcheng Qingtai (Jinan) law firm and President of Zhongcheng Qingtai Law Research Institute, has been employed as the new arbitrator of Shenzhen International Arbitration Court. Founded in 1983, Shenzhen International Arbitration Court is the first arbitration institution in Guangdong and Hong Kong, and the first arbitration institution in China to implement a legal and international corporate governance mechanism. The Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration adheres to the principle of "independence, impartiality and innovation", is based on the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, faces the "Belt and Road", and enjoys extensive credibility in the national and international arbitration circles. As the first arbitration institution in China to hire overseas arbitrators, SZC continues to increase the internationalization of its arbitrator structure. The roster of arbitrators covers 77 countries and regions, basically achieving full coverage of countries along the "Belt and Road". There are 385 overseas arbitrators, accounting for more than 41%, and the proportion of internationalization is leading the country. The appointment of lawyer Li Heng as an arbitrator of Shenzhen International Arbitration Court fully reflects Shen Guozhong's high recognition of lawyer Li Heng's professional quality, ability, professional ethics, moral quality and work attitude, and fully demonstrates the professional level, professional ethics and industry influence of lawyer Li Heng in the fields of construction, infrastructure construction, project financing, bidding law, PPP and other dispute resolution.

2022-02-22

Viewpoints | New changes in the Civil Code on external guarantees for corporate branches

1. Foreword Article 74 of the Civil Code provides that legal persons may establish branches in accordance with the law. If a branch engages in civil activities in its own name, the civil liability arising therefrom shall be borne by the legal person. As an enterprise legal person, the effectiveness of the guarantee provided by its branches to the outside world, the Civil Code does not follow the relevant provisions of the original Guarantee Law, and is briefly analyzed below in conjunction with the Civil Code and related provisions. Legal status of branches of 2. companies As an independent enterprise legal person, its branches are not independent civil subjects, and it shall obtain written authorization from the company to engage in civil activities on behalf of the company. The form of written authorization can be either a general authorization reflected in the business license of a branch of the company or an individual written authorization. The validity of the original guarantee law of the 3. on the external guarantee of the branch of the enterprise legal person shall be judged by the written authorization of the legal person. If a branch of an enterprise legal person concludes a guarantee contract with a creditor without the written authorization of the legal person or beyond the scope of the authorization, the contract is invalid or the part beyond the scope of the authorization is invalid, and if the creditor and the enterprise legal person are at fault, they shall bear the corresponding civil liability according to their fault; if the creditor is not at fault, the enterprise legal person shall bear the civil liability. Therefore, if the debtor, guarantor and creditor are at fault, they shall bear the corresponding civil liability according to their fault. If a branch of an enterprise legal person provides a guarantee with the written authorization of the legal person, if the scope of the written authorization of the legal person is unclear, the branch of the legal person shall bear the guarantee responsibility for all the debts stipulated in the guarantee contract. New Changes in the 4. Civil Code on the External Guarantees of Corporate Branches Comparing Article 11 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Guarantee System under the the People's Republic of China Civil Code, which came into effect on January 1, 2021, it can be found that there have been significant changes in the determination of the validity of the external guarantee of the company's branches: The (I) shall perform the procedures for the resolution of the shareholders' (general) meeting or the board of directors. Since the branch of the company is not an independent civil subject, its representation comes from the company. In order to prevent the legal representative from providing guarantees for others on behalf of the company at will, causing losses to the company and harming the interests of small and medium shareholders, Article 16 of the Company Law restricts the representation of the legal representative and stipulates that the resolutions of the company's shareholders (general) meeting, board of directors and other company organs must be used as the basis and source of authorization. The company's resolution is the direct evidence to prove the true meaning of the company's external guarantee. The relative can only claim liability from the company or branch in good faith. Branches of (II) financial institutions are not required to perform the company's authorization to issue a letter of guarantee. In view of the principle of separate supervision of the financial industry in China, the Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission supervises banks, insurance and other non-bank financial institutions, and the Securities and Futures Commission supervises financial institutions in the securities industry, whether financial institutions that can operate letter of guarantee business need to be determined in accordance with the regulatory regulations of various financial institutions. A financial institution does not need to obtain a corporate resolution to issue a letter of guarantee, and may use whether the business license of the financial institution records the letter of guarantee or guarantee business as the basis for determining whether the company authorizes the branch in general. For guarantees other than guarantees, authorization should still be obtained in accordance with the appropriate resolution procedures. The branch of the (III) guarantee company must obtain the authorization of the company. A guarantee company is a company established in accordance with the Regulations on the Supervision and Administration of Financial Guarantee Companies and is not subject to the adjustment of Article 16 of the Company Law. Due to the special nature of the business of the guarantee company, its business license of course records the guarantee business, can not be simply understood as the guarantee company's general authorization of the branch. According to Article 8 of the Judicial Interpretation of the Guarantee System of the Civil Code, a guarantee company does not need to make a resolution by the company to provide a guarantee. Considering the particularity of the guarantee, there is of course guarantee business in the business license of its branch, but it cannot be understood as the general authorization of the company. Therefore, although the external guarantee of the branch of the guarantee company does not need a resolution by the company, it should still obtain the authorization of the company. 5. Reference Law Article 11 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Guarantee System in the Civil Code of the People's the People's Republic of China of China (Fa Shi [2020] No. 28) If a branch of a company provides a guarantee in its own name without a resolution of the shareholders' (general) meeting or the board of directors of the company, and the relative requests the company or its branch to bear the guarantee liability, the people's court shall not support it, but the relative does not know and should not know that the branch provides external guarantee without the company's resolution procedure. If a branch of a financial institution issues a letter of guarantee within the scope of business recorded in its business license, or is authorized to issue a letter of guarantee by a superior institution with the right to engage in guarantee business, and the financial institution or its branch claims not to bear the guarantee liability on the grounds of violating the provisions of the Company Law on the resolution procedure of the company's external guarantee, the people's court shall not support it. If a branch of a financial institution provides a guarantee other than a letter of guarantee without the authorization of the financial institution, and the financial institution or its branch claims not to be liable for the guarantee, the people's court shall support it, except where the counterpart does not know and should not know that the branch provides a guarantee without the authorization of the financial institution. If a branch of a guarantee company provides a guarantee without the authorization of the guarantee company, and the guarantee company or its branch claims not to bear the guarantee liability, the people's court shall support it, except where the counterpart does not know and should not know that the branch provides a guarantee without the authorization of the guarantee company. If a branch of the company provides a guarantee to the outside world, and the relative is not in good faith and requests the company to bear the liability for compensation, it shall be handled with reference to the relevant provisions of Article 17 of this interpretation. 2. Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of the the People's Republic of China Guarantee Law (Fa Shi [2000] No. 44) Article 17 If a branch of an enterprise legal person provides a guarantee without the written authorization of the legal person, the guarantee contract shall be null and void. Therefore, if a loss is caused to the creditor, it shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Article 5, paragraph 2, of the Security Law. If a branch of an enterprise legal person provides a guarantee with the written authorization of the legal person, if the scope of the written authorization of the legal person is unclear, the branch of the legal person shall bear the guarantee responsibility for all the debts stipulated in the guarantee contract. If the property operated and managed by a branch of an enterprise legal person is not sufficient to bear the guarantee liability, the enterprise legal person shall bear civil liability. If a branch of an enterprise legal person shall bear the liability for compensation after the guarantee provided by the branch is invalid, it shall be borne by the property managed by the branch. If an enterprise legal person is at fault, it shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Article 29 of the Guarantee Law. 3. Article 16 of the the People's Republic of China Company Law (as amended in 2018) The company's investment in other enterprises or the provision of guarantees for others shall, in accordance with the provisions of the company's articles of association, be resolved by the board of directors or the shareholders' meeting or the general meeting of shareholders; if the company's articles of association stipulate a limit on the total amount of investment or guarantee and the amount of a single investment or guarantee, it shall not exceed the prescribed limit. Where a company provides a guarantee for the shareholders or actual controllers of the company, it must be resolved by the shareholders' meeting or the general meeting of shareholders. The shareholders specified in the preceding paragraph or the shareholders controlled by the actual controller specified in the preceding paragraph shall not participate in the voting on the matters specified in the preceding paragraph. The vote shall be passed by a majority of the voting rights held by other shareholders present at the meeting. 4. Minutes of the National Court Conference on Civil and Commercial Trials (Law [2019] No. 254) 17. [Violation of Article 16 of the Company Law constitutes ultra vires representative] In order to prevent the legal representative from providing guarantees for others on behalf of the company at will, causing losses to the company and harming the interests of small and medium shareholders, Article 16 of the Company Law restricts the representation of the legal representative. According to this article, the act of guarantee is not a matter that can be decided by the legal representative alone, but must be based on the resolution of the company's shareholders (general) meeting, board of directors and other corporate organs as the basis and source of authorization. If the legal representative provides security for others without authorization, it constitutes an ultra vires representative, and the people's court shall, in accordance with the provisions of Article 50 of the Contract Law on the ultra vires representative of the legal representative, distinguish whether the creditor is in good faith at the time of the conclusion of the contract to determine the validity of the contract: if the creditor is in good faith, the contract is valid; otherwise, the contract is invalid.

2022-02-21

Point of View... The (III) of the rules of the mortgage period.

(Continuously) 2. From the General Principles of Civil Law to the Interpretation of the Guarantee System: the legislative evolution during the exercise of mortgage in China. (I) initial stage The General Principles of Civil Law, promulgated in 1986, do not provide for the period during which the mortgage is exercised, but only three provisions describe the types of prohibited collateral and the manner in which the secured obligation is performed-the mortgage. In 2005, the "Guarantee Law" was promulgated, which changed the position of the "General Principles of Civil Law" on mortgage, redefined the meaning of mortgage from the perspective of the civil law system, and proposed for the first time in Article 52 of this law that the mortgage and its secured creditor's rights "co-exist and co-exist". It is precisely because of the emergence of this clause that it leaves room for discussion on the definition of the nature of the mortgage during the exercise period. In addition, the General Principles of Civil Law does not set up a chapter on the General Principles of the Law of Debt, and in practice, the "general provisions" on the termination of rights and obligations under the Contract Law are often regarded as the general cause of the extinction of the debt, but the "general provisions" do not include "the loss of the right to prevail on the principal claim due to the expiration of the statute of limitations" as one of the circumstances in which the extinction of the claims. According to the provisions of "co-existence and co-extinction", the mortgage is still in existence at this time, and the general principles of civil law do not give a clear answer on how to deal with it after the mortgagor invokes the creditor's limitation defense. In 2000, the "Interpretation of Guarantee Law" was issued. Article 12 for the first time specifies the period of mortgage exercise, that is, "within two years of limitation of main creditor's rights". The author thinks that the above period should be divided into two periods for calculation. The first period is the limitation of action for main creditor's rights. Although the legislation does not clearly stipulate that the mortgage in this period is subject to the suspension, interruption and extension of the limitation period of main creditor's rights, however, some scholars, taking into account the basic principles of civil law, define this period as the period of exclusion, during which the mortgage is extinguished upon the expiration of four years (including the second period); others believe that it is a statute of limitations and should be understood as the "period of exclusion of the statute of limitations (the second period)", but agree that the second period is the "period of exclusion". What is to be explained here is that the second period does not belong to the limitation of execution. Before the Interpretation of Guarantee Law was promulgated, a review of the legislative evolution of China's Civil Procedure Law found that Article 169 of the 1982 Civil Procedure Law (Trial) and Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Law promulgated in 1991 are "six months" and "one year", which have nothing to do with the two-year exclusion period. Some scholars believe that this article draws on the provisions of civil law in Taiwan. In addition, the article only provides for "support", and no explanation is given as to whether "non-support" should be understood as "not protected by law" or "the mortgage is extinguished. (II) development stage Before the promulgation of the Property Law in 2007, there were four versions of disputes regulating the duration of mortgage. The legislation finally chose to delete the two-year exclusion period mentioned above, shortening the period of mortgage exercise from "within two years of limitation of the main creditor's right" to "within the limitation of action of the main creditor's right", so that the nature of the dispute was retained in the first period of discussion. At the same time, "support" is expressed as "not protected", this change in legislative language does not really solve the question of whether the mortgage is extinguished, but leaves the difficult question of whether the mortgagor can apply for the mortgagee's assistance in canceling the mortgage registration. Based on this, the following three kinds of judgment results are mainly obtained through the investigation of practical cases: first, the limitation of action of the mortgage right due to the main creditor's right has not been eliminated, and the mortgagee has no obligation to assist the mortgagee to cancel the mortgage registration; Second, the limitation of the mortgage right due to the main creditor's right has not been eliminated. In order to maintain the normal use and circulation of the mortgage and create greater social value, the mortgagee, the mortgagor shall have the right to apply for the cancellation of the registration of the mortgaged property. In addition, in 2014, the Jilin Provincial Higher People's Court issued the "(I) on Answers to Some Difficult Questions in Commercial Trials". The reply to question 28 clearly stated that the mortgage right due to the limitation of action of the main creditor's rights had not been eliminated. At the same time, it cleverly avoided the existing legislative gaps and proposed another way to cancel the mortgage registration. The mortgagor could sue for the termination of the mortgage contract as stipulated in Item 1 of Article 110 of the Contract Law. After the court decides to terminate the mortgage contract, the mortgagor may apply for cancellation of the mortgage registration with the judgment. Through the above combing, it is known that in this period of judicial practice, different levels of courts "different judgments in the same case" phenomenon, the purpose of mortgage setting is difficult to achieve at the same time so that both parties trapped in the mortgage relationship can not get rid of, and finally a "lose-lose" situation. (III) perfection stage In view of the difficult disputes at the forefront of civil and commercial trials, in order to unify the thinking of adjudication, standardize the discretion of judges, and enhance the openness, transparency and predictability of civil and commercial trials. The Supreme People's Court promulgated the "Minutes of the National Court Civil and Commercial Trial Work Conference" (hereinafter referred to as the "Minutes of the Meeting") in 2019, in which Article 59 clearly stipulates "the legal consequences of the mortgage right after the statute of limitations of the main creditor's rights", That is, the right to cancel the registration request is based on the premise of "the elimination of the mortgage right. However, we need to note that the Minutes of the Meeting do not belong to judicial interpretation and cannot be invoked as a basis for adjudication, but can only be invoked in the specific analysis of the reasons for the application of the law in the "opinion of this Court" part of the adjudication document. The Supreme Court, on the premise that it is unable to interpret the law in accordance with the existing context, amended the provisions of Article 202 of the Property Law by way of judicial guidance, which is undoubtedly a regulation of the phenomenon of "different judgments in the same case", with a view to the correct understanding and application of the minutes of the meeting by courts at all levels in the trial of the case. When the Civil Code was promulgated in May 2020, and the academic and practical circles criticized that it was still following the legislative model of Article 202 of the Property Law, the promulgation of Article 44 of the Interpretation of the Guarantee System made a new interpretation of Article 119 of the Civil Code, resulting in a new meaning of the period of exercise of the mortgage, the scope of application and the effect. However, there are also differences brought about by the differences in the legislative terms of "no protection" and "no support", and how to connect the "elimination of mortgage" adopted in the Minutes of the Conference and the "occurrence of defense" adopted in the Civil Code. Basic relationship between the period during which the 3. mortgage is exercised and the statute of limitations and enforcement of the principal claim (see next issue)

2022-02-21

Tianqiao District People's Procuratorate Launching Party Building Exchange Activities at Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Institute

On February 18, 2022, Li Changkui, deputy chief procurator of Jinan tianqiao district People's Procuratorate, and his party went to Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Institute to carry out party building exchange activities. Han Honggang, director of Zhongcheng Qingtai Institute, Wu Xuhui, Shi Guangbo and Tian Wenhua, deputy directors of Jinan Institute, and Liu Xiuqin, party building commissioner, warmly received them. Director Shi Guangbo accompanied the Tianqiao District People's Procuratorate and his party to visit the office environment of Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Institute and introduced the law firm's functional areas, performance honors, business scope, etc. At the symposium, Director Shi Guangbo gave a detailed introduction to Zhongcheng Qingtai's party organization structure, organizational construction mechanism, rules and regulations mechanism, work integration mechanism, learning and education mechanism, etc., focusing on Zhongcheng Qingtai's innovative ideas in party building work And innovative practices, the two sides conducted in-depth discussions on the party building business integration mechanism and talent training issues, which were unanimously recognized by the leaders of the Tianqiao District Procuratorate. The two sides said that the next step is to strengthen business exchanges, learn from excellent experience, strengthen team building, enhance the professional ability of the legal professional community, and better serve the overall situation of economic and social development.

2022-02-18

Lawyer Luo Xianghu was invited to carry out legal training for Shandong Academy of Environmental Sciences Environmental Testing Co., Ltd.

On the morning of February 18, 2022, lawyer Luo Xianghu of Zhongcheng Qingtai (Jinan) Law Firm was invited to provide legal training for Shandong Academy of Environmental Sciences Environmental Testing Co., Ltd. General Manager Cao Dayong and cadres and employees participated in the training. First of all, lawyer Luo Xianghu introduced the relevant provisions and practical experience of the contract code of the Civil Code. In view of the characteristics of the testing company of the Academy of Environmental Sciences, which is mainly engaged in environmental professional services, the main body of the contract, the scope of the contract service agreement, the payment of service fees, the liability for breach of contract, the jurisdiction of disputes and other aspects were combed, and the relevant issues were discussed interactively with the participants. Subsequently, lawyer Luo Xianghu systematically introduced the newly revised "Solid Waste Law" in 2020 from four aspects: the revision background, main revision contents, new requirements for enterprises put forward by the revision of the "Solid Waste Law" and key points of solid waste and hazardous waste management, and discussed and exchanged relevant legal issues and analyzed possible enterprise risks, in view of the potential risks, the countermeasures and professional suggestions were put forward, which were highly affirmed by the participants. Shandong Academy of Environmental Sciences Environmental Testing Co., Ltd. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Shandong Environmental Protection Science Research and Design Institute Co., Ltd., and is a state-owned enterprise with 13 qualifications in the whole field of ecological environment testing. Mainly engaged in environmental testing services; Identification of solid waste and hazardous waste; Inspection of environmental protection products and performance testing of environmental protection equipment and facilities; Environmental damage identification and assessment; Site investigation and risk assessment, restoration effect assessment, identification of responsible persons for soil pollution; Radiation environmental assessment, testing and acceptance; Radiological health technical services; Testing technology training; Environmental testing big data platform construction and comprehensive analysis services. The company is established by Shandong Environmental Protection Science Research and Design Institute Co., Ltd. Testing Center, Judicial Appraisal Center, and Shandong Boer Radiation Environmental Technology Co., Ltd., with 3 management departments and 7 business departments. The company has a high-quality talent team, with more than 120 employees, including 55 graduate students and above, 23 senior engineers and above titles, 1 special consultant of the Standing Committee of Shandong people's Congress, 3 national environmental damage identification experts, 1 expert from the national Torch Program expert database, 2 national inspection and testing institutions qualification accreditation assessors, and more than 10 people holding various professional qualification certificates, there are more than 30 national, provincial, and municipal industry experts. It is a technical team with professional skills, strong business capabilities and high service efficiency.

2022-02-18

December 2021

Jinan 12348 Public Legal Service Hotline Excellent Law Firm

2022-02-17