14
2024-11
On November 13, the "Famous Places Navigation" research activity of the Foshan lawyer industry visited the Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan office. The delegation included Yi Xinhua, a member of the Party Leadership Group and Deputy Director of the Foshan Justice Bureau, Zhang Xiaofeng, President of the Foshan Lawyers Association and Deputy Secretary of the Party Committee of the lawyer industry, and Lin Cunbao, Supervisor of the Foshan Lawyers Association and member of the Party Committee of the lawyer industry. They were warmly received by Li Ruzhi and Meng Fanhua, Deputy Secretary of the Party Committee of Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan office, as well as Du Wentang, Director of the Management Committee of the Jinan office, and Shi Guangbo, Deputy Director of the Management Committee.
2024-11-14
14
2024-11
The independent bank guarantee system is an important legal tool in the fields of international trade and finance, and its credibility and security are directly related to the stability of cross-border transactions. This article conducts an in-depth analysis of the identification standards and judicial adjudication rules for bank independent guarantee fraud. By examining the subjective and objective elements, the standards for obvious fraud, and exceptional circumstances, it systematically elaborates on the principles and specific rules for the trial of independent guarantee fraud cases, providing a reference for improving the judicial practice of independent guarantees in China.
2024-11-14
14
2024-11
Perspective | Obtaining Evidence in the U.S. through 28 U.S.C. 1782 Procedure
When it comes to obtaining evidence in the United States, many people often feel daunted. This is primarily because there is currently no bilateral judicial assistance treaty between China and the United States. Furthermore, although both the U.S. and China are signatories to the "Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters," the procedures outlined in the Convention are cumbersome and there is a significant chance that U.S. courts may refuse to apply it. However, U.S. law actually provides a procedure for assisting those engaged in litigation outside the U.S. to obtain evidence from within the U.S. This is outlined in 28 U.S.C. Section 1782(a). Once a federal court decides to initiate the Section 1782 evidence-gathering process, the applicant can utilize all the tools available under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to gather evidence. Below, this article will briefly introduce readers to this powerful tool for obtaining evidence in the United States.
2024-11-14
14
2024-11
Pre-foreclosure refers to a type of preliminary restrictive registration by the people's court on real estate that has not yet undergone ownership registration by the person being executed, but may be registered in the future.
2024-11-14
14
2024-11
Perspective | Determination of Developers' Phase-specific Guarantee Responsibilities
The developer's phased guarantee responsibility refers to a type of guarantee provided by the developer to assist the buyer in applying for a loan from the bank during the process of buying a house. The developer assumes a phased joint guarantee responsibility through a resolution of the shareholders' meeting, until the property ownership certificate for each homeowner is completed and mortgaged to the financial institution or the mortgagee designated by the financial institution. If the borrower defaults, the financial institution has the right to require the developer to assume the guarantee responsibility. In judicial practice, it is common for homeowners to default on repayments, leading to the developer assuming joint guarantee responsibility. Therefore, whether the developer enjoys an exemption from phased guarantee responsibility under specific circumstances is worth contemplating.
2024-11-14
11
2024-11
In response to the new challenges faced by the legal validity of electronic contracts in the digital economy era, this article systematically analyzes the components of the legal validity of electronic contracts from three dimensions: expression of intent, signature authentication, and evidence protection. It delves into new legal issues such as the determination of cross-border jurisdiction, risks in the execution of smart contracts, and data security protection. The article proposes optimization measures such as establishing a cross-domain collaborative regulatory mechanism, improving the risk prevention and control system for smart contracts, and creating a graded data security protection system. The aim is to strengthen the standards for recognizing the legal validity of electronic contracts, enhance the safety and reliability of contract performance, and promote the standardized application of electronic contracts in cross-border commercial transactions.
2024-11-11
11
2024-11
Perspective | Controversial Focus and Case Analysis on Employers Distributing Bonuses
In our country, the Labor Law and the Labor Contract Law do not provide detailed regulations regarding bonuses. The definition of bonuses is mainly reflected in the "Regulations on the Composition of Total Wages" issued by the National Bureau of Statistics, which states that bonuses refer to the excess labor remuneration and the labor remuneration for increased income and cost savings paid to employees, and are part of the total wages. In the absence of legal regulations specifying the conditions for issuing bonuses, in practice, employers mainly issue bonuses based on their own business conditions and the performance of employees. Typically, employers establish relevant systems or stipulate the issuance of bonuses in labor contracts. Some employers, although lacking institutional and contractual basis, have formed a practice of issuing bonuses, leading employees to have certain expectations regarding the issuance of bonuses. Consequently, disputes regarding the issuance of bonuses have been increasing. This article will analyze the focal points of disputes over bonus issuance based on relevant legal provisions and related cases, and provide suggestions for risk prevention in bonus issuance.
2024-11-11
11
2024-11
Perspective | Discussion on the Nature of Buyback Rights and Exercise Period in Betting Agreements
On November 14, 2019, the Supreme People's Court (hereinafter referred to as "the Supreme Court") issued the "Work Summary of National Courts on Civil and Commercial Trial Meetings" (hereinafter referred to as "the Nine Civil Summaries"). Article 2 of the Nine Civil Summaries confirmed the validity of the "betting agreements" made between investors and the shareholders or actual controllers of the target company, stating that "the 'betting agreements' made between investors and the shareholders or actual controllers of the target company shall be deemed valid and supported for actual performance, unless there are other invalid reasons, and there is no dispute in practice." The Nine Civil Summaries affirmed the validity of the betting agreements made between investors and the shareholders or actual controllers of the target company. However, there is still no consensus on the issues related to the performance of these agreements in the later stages, especially regarding the nature of the repurchase rights in the betting agreements, the performance period of the repurchase rights, and the determination of the starting point for the period, and disputes in practical handling continue.
2024-11-11
05
2024-11
In the execution of cases within a company, the company as the party being executed often faces situations where it cannot repay its due debts. During the execution process, if the debtor company is unable to fulfill its debt obligations, the creditor can file an application with the court to add shareholders who have defects in their capital contributions or those who have not fully paid their contributions as parties to the execution. The creditor can request these shareholders to bear the responsibility for the defects in their contributions or for the accelerated maturity of their contributions. In judicial practice, the court agrees to the addition mainly for the reasons that the company has no assets available for execution and there is evidence proving that the shareholders have not fully paid their contributions or there are other statutory circumstances. The court rejects the application mainly when the applicant fails to provide the aforementioned evidence or when the evidence submitted by the shareholders is sufficient to prove that they have fully paid their contributions or that there are no statutory responsibilities to bear. Combining the provisions of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the "Company Law"), the Minutes of the National Court's Civil and Commercial Trial Work Conference (hereinafter referred to as the "Nine Civil Minutes"), and the Supreme People's Court's "Regulations on Changing and Adding Parties in Civil Execution" (hereinafter referred to as the "Change and Addition Regulations"), this article analyzes the specific circumstances under which shareholders can be added as parties to the execution by distinguishing between types of companies, and elaborates on how to add shareholders as parties to the execution in judicial practice.
2024-11-05
05
2024-11
In early 2007, Mr. Li established X Tian Company with an initial registered capital of 500,000 yuan, in which Mr. Li held 80% of the shares and contributed 400,000 yuan. In September 2008, Mr. Li married Ms. Zhang, and they had a son and a daughter after marriage. During their marriage, X Tian Company underwent four rounds of capital increase, with Mr. Li's contribution rising to 18 million yuan, holding 90% of the shares, and his actual contribution reaching 14 million yuan, while Ms. Zhang was not registered as a shareholder of the company. X Tian Company served as the main business for both spouses, and they subsequently established more than ten other enterprises. Additionally, during the marriage, Mr. Li purchased 18 properties (including one overseas property) in his personal name, while Ms. Zhang's income mainly came from her monthly salary of 15,000 yuan from working at X Tian Company, and she had no knowledge of the scale and situation of Mr. Li's assets. In October 2023, due to a breakdown in their relationship, Ms. Zhang decided to entrust the lawyers of this team to file for divorce in court. After accepting the commission, the team lawyers completed the online filing on October 16, 2023, but during the pre-litigation protection process, it was discovered that on October 19, 2023, Mr. Li transferred all the shares of X Tian Company to Y Hai Company, which he controlled. In December 2023, the court ruled against the divorce between Mr. Li and Ms. Zhang.
2024-11-05
Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Region
Address: Floor 55-57, Jinan China Resources Center, 11111 Jingshi Road, Lixia District, Jinan City, Shandong Province
