Lin Jiarong's team of lawyers was commissioned by Fujian Wuping State-owned Investment Group Co., Ltd. to issue legal opinions based on the materials provided by the client and the necessary verification investigations by the trustee to provide decision-making reference for the client. Inductive analysis establishes basic information of the fund, legal compliance evaluation; conducts legal analysis and evaluation on the core team of major investors, fund managers and fund managers; analyzes and judges the principal qualification of the principal as a fund investor; The agreed partnership scope and partnership period, partner funding method and payment period, partnership fees and management fees, the principle of income distribution and loss sharing, partnership affairs management organization, withdrawal mechanism and other key provisions for legal analysis, suggesting investment risk.
Case: Labor dispute
Article 4 of the Payment Regulations stipulates that the employer shall pay the wages of the workers in a timely and full amount, and the act of arrears of wages by the respondent has violated the aforementioned legal provisions and seriously damaged the legitimate rights and interests of each applicant.
1. Confirm that both parties terminate the labor relationship.
2. The respondent paid the applicant's salary of 165,600 yuan in a lump sum on the limited date.
3. The respondent paid one-off financial compensation of 450,000 yuan to 15 applicants.
Case: Contract dispute
1. Xu and Chen agreed that Xu would replace Chen’s bank loan for a real estate property, and Chen would use the property as a mortgage to sign the “maximum mortgage contract” with the bank. The loan was for Xu’s A. The company is operating on a revolving basis, and the parties agree that the mortgage is valid for three years from 2013 to 2016. After the maximum mortgage contract expires, Chen should immediately return the money that Xu has made for him.
2. Xu instructed Chen to find Company B and borrow money from Company B. Company B transferred more than 4.8 million yuan to Hong’s account through Hong’s account.
3. After obtaining the bank loan, Xu will promptly transfer 4.8 million yuan and interest into Hong's account and repay it to Company B. Company B issued the “Repayment Confirmation” to confirm the facts of borrowing between Chen and Company B.
4. In 2014, Chen broke the contract and sent a letter to the bank to cancel the mortgage registration of the property. Xu asked Chen, B, and Hong to return the 4.8 million yuan of the money.
5, Xu will Chen, B company, Hongmou to the court and apply for litigation preservation, requesting the order of Chen to return the advance payment of 4.8 million yuan and interest of 680,000 yuan and assume the security, litigation costs, B company and Hongmou Bear the responsibility for co-payment. The defendant Chen believed that the factual legal relationship advocated by Xu was unclear and the evidence was insufficient to prove the legal relationship between the parties.
6. The court held that the evidence of “repayment confirmation”, bank flow, “maximum mortgage contract” and the facts mentioned by Xu were highly probative, and Chen could not prove that his money with Hong was based on other laws. Relationship, it is believed that there is a fact that Xu Mou has repaid 4.8 million yuan in debt; and Company B and Hong Mou have no factual and legal basis for the responsibility for repayment of the debt, and will not support it. The judgment is as follows: Chen pays Xu’s advance payment of 4.8 million yuan and the interest rate of the bank’s loan interest rate at the same time, and pays the litigation preservation fee of 5,000 yuan, rejecting other claims.
7. Chen refused to accept the appeal and appealed to the Intermediate People's Court: dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment.
Brief description of the case: In 2000, the Chen family gave their house a friend Mr. Lin. After six years, the Chen couple suddenly repented and brought Mr. Lin to the court to make the gift contract invalid. Mr. Lin entrusted the lawyer of the firm as an agent. In fact, behind the gift contract in this case, what is hidden is a dispute over a contract for the transfer of a house. The Jimei court made a first-instance judgment on this contract dispute, and the Chen couple were convicted.
Details of the case can be found in the 8th edition of Xiamen Daily on April 18, 2007, the 6th edition of Xiamen Evening News and the 13th edition of Straits Herald.
Fujian Province's 2008 Excellent Legal Aid Case: Yuan Yi sued Xiamen Yinghua Transportation Co., Ltd. to confirm the labor relationship case
Case: Confirmation of labor relations dispute
Organizers and personnel: Fujian Fazheng Union Law Firm, Jiang Renfu Lawyer
Submitted by: Xiamen Legal Aid Center
Thailand Fengtai Group participated in the restructuring of state-owned enterprises and acquired the property rights of chemical raw material factory in Nanchang City, Jiangxi Province. After the completion of the restructuring, it strives to develop into a leading enterprise in the same industry in the country and strives to list it at home and abroad. Our lawyers provide full legal services for the project and have completed it. Project feasibility study, clearing accounting, asset valuation and transaction negotiation.
Our lawyers successfully provided full legal services for Sanda Group to invest in Northern Jiangsu.
The legal advisor unit Xiamen Jiufa Real Estate Development's “White Collar Mansion” opened for sale. Our lawyers Lin Jiarong and Li Chunyu provided full legal services for the project's real estate sales.