Event background

Zhang Ruoyun formally sued his father Zhang Jian# According to “Corporate” magazine, Zhang Ruoyun recently filed a formal lawsuit against his father Zhang Jian and Zhejiang Nanbei Lake Mengdu Film Co., Ltd. in the Haiyan County Court of Zhejiang Province on the grounds of a contract dispute. The case was opened on April 21. In June last year, after the incident of “Zhang Ruoyun involved in 140 million financial disputes” was exposed, Zhang Ruoyun responded, “I have not signed an agreement and never received any money.”

In 2019, Huace Films filed an arbitration application to the Hangzhou Arbitration Commission, requesting the cancellation of the “cooperation agreement” signed with Mengdu Films and others, requiring Mengdu Films and others to return 144 million yuan in remuneration and liquidated damages, and requiring relevant responsible personnel Take joint and several liability for the above-mentioned debts. Zhang Ruoyun once filed a jurisdictional objection to the Hangzhou Arbitration Commission, but it was rejected in September 2019. After that, Zhang Ruoyun applied to the court twice to confirm that the Hangzhou Arbitration Commission had no jurisdiction over him because his signature in the Cooperation Agreement was forged, but both applications were rejected by the court. The most recent dismissal was the ruling made by Zhejiang Higher People’s Court in January 2021. After the two applications were rejected by the court, Zhang Ruoyun recently filed a lawsuit on the grounds of disputes over the entrustment contract. Zhang Ruoyun’s father, Zhang Jian, stated that Zhang Ruoyun’s performance fees and other matters in the “Cooperation Agreement” were authorized by Zhang Ruoyun and Mengdu Company to negotiate, confirm and sign through WeChat; Zhang Ruoyun did not autograph the cooperation agreement involved, but rather Stamped with Zhang Ruoyun’s signature and seal, the agreement is flawed.

This is a litigation method, a case within a case. Xiao Zhang wants to use this victory verdict as a “must kill” evidence for another case. Huace Pictures requested the cancellation of the “cooperation agreement signed with Mengdu Films, etc. and required Mengdu Films to return 144 million yuan in remuneration and liquidated damages, and at the same time require the relevant responsible personnel to bear joint and several liabilities-this type of case is based on the rules of evidence and probability In the above, the defendant (respondent) is not easy to fight. Because of this, Xiao Zhang sued Lao Zhang to invalidate the so-called entrustment between the two fathers and sons-if Xiao Zhang wins the case, then Xiao Zhang will use this winning judgment as evidence and get it from Huace Pictures and In the arbitration case of Mengdu Pictures, the arbitrator told the arbitrator: “Here is a court effective judgment, ruling that the entrustment between me and Lao Zhang is invalid, so I am not liable in your case!”-If Xiao Zhang has this winning judgment, then the arbitrators who tried Huace Films and Mengdu Films must recognize the fact that the commission is invalid, because the facts determined by the court’s effective judgment must be recognized in principle, and the arbitrators cannot make the opposite. Confirmation and opinion. Therefore, this lawsuit is not really Xiao Zhang suing Lao Zhang, this is Xiao Zhang’s method of obtaining evidence-if Xiao Zhang wins the case, Lao Zhang will not appeal, and the judgment will take effect 15 days after the judgment is made-Xiao Zhang wants Let the winning judgment take effect as soon as possible, before the arbitration tribunal makes a ruling. Therefore, Huace Pictures will definitely obstruct this case in every possible way, or strongly urge to participate in this case, so as not to let Xiao Zhang win the case. If the news has more information, we will talk again. Interested friends are welcome to discuss.

zhiwo

By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
helpmekim
7 months ago

I took a look at the Judgment Documents website, and the brief case is as follows: Zhang Ruoyun’s father signed a “cooperation agreement” with Huace Film and Television Company in the name of Zhang Ruoyun, agreeing that Zhang Ruoyun will star in four TV dramas produced by Huace Company, and pay Dad Zhang in advance. 140 million in remuneration. After Huace’s TV drama project came out, he contacted Zhang Ruoyun, the script came out, let’s start filming as soon as possible. Zhang Ruoyun and Huace said that my dad is my dad, and I am me, whoever signs the contract and who receives the money will act. Hua Ce was a bit stunned. What’s the matter with you father and son, so you sued the brokerage companies of Zhang Ruoyun, Zhang Dad, and Zhang Dad to the Hangzhou Arbitration Commission. Here is a point of knowledge of legal practice: In recent years, all issues involving artist contracts have generally agreed to be under the jurisdiction of the XX Arbitration Commission. Do you know why this is? Answer: Because arbitration cases are not heard in public, the documents do not need to go online, which can avoid unnecessary public opinion. But my son entrusted me to sign this contract through WeChat. It used my son’s personal name stamp, and my son should bear the responsibility. Here is another knowledge point of the entertainment industry. The entertainment industry is now unfathomable. In order to avoid being recorded by phone calls or screenshots of text chats, many artists talk about important things, they are WeChat voice calls, because WeChat voice calls cannot record screens and cannot record. . For example, Shuangma and Zhang Heng, who are relatively hot recently. Zhang Ruoyun saw this situation in a hurry. Everyone was cheating. You are a cheating son. When did I entrust you to sign a contract with Huace? So he quickly sued his father and asked the court to confirm the validity of the entrustment contract with his father. In summary, I personally think that Xiao Zhang was indeed cheated by his father. Because Xiao Zhang has been in a rising career in 17 years, but he withdrew from his father’s film and television company during the 17 years of rising, combined with his father’s continuous investment in the past few years, marrying a new wife, there may be conflicts between father and son. A lot. So, in my opinion, all this is not like a father and son colluding to engage in a conspiracy. If it is collusion, it is entirely possible for his father to carry the pot down, unless his father is a pig teammate.

heloword
7 months ago

Let the bullet fly for a while. Zhang Jian mentioned in the High Court’s defense that matters such as Zhang Ruoyun’s performance fees in the “Cooperation Agreement” were communicated and authorized through WeChat. In the cooperation agreement, Zhang did not sign but only affixed the signature seal, so ignorance and handwriting fraud and whether the entrustment contract is established, this still depends on the evidence submitted by both parties and the proof strength and relevant basis. Sometimes the parent-child relationship between celebrities is very delicate. But I remember that Zhang Ruoyun said in previous interviews that the relationship with his father was not very good. In this case, how could such a large amount of cooperation agreement not be known or assured to be handled by his father. Whether this lawsuit is a bit overwhelming, or is it really pursuing the responsibility of the father, or is it an act that must be carried out in order to show the results to someone, this is still to be seen slowly. In addition, I thought about it. Since Zhang believes that this commission contract is false and does not exist and is not known to him, and the signature is not his own, why not start suing his father very early? Why not litigate separately during the arbitration. What kind of jurisdictional objection should I engage in? Now that the arbitration case is over and the application for enforcement has been applied, the litigation begins. I have to think more about this. If I am a party and this case determines that I was wronged, then I litigate immediately, the purpose of which is to use the court to confirm the power to prove the arbitration with favorable evidence, but it seems that this process is now reversed. There is still another way, which is to take effect as soon as possible, and try to cancel the arbitration case like a court within six months of its effective date. But will he win?

helpyme
7 months ago

Some netizens say it is called “the righteousness to destroy the relatives”, but I think it might be more appropriate to use “the father and the son to settle accounts. From a legal point of view, the entrustment contract dispute between Zhang and his father is directly related to whether he needs to repay his debts. In terms of entrustment, it should be based on mutual trust. If Zhang’s father does not receive instructions and requests to sign a contract for entrusted activities, it should be determined that there is no entrustment contract between the two parties. From the lawyer’s point of view, the establishment of its own commission contract should be determined from two aspects: the offer and the promise. Of course, because the determination of whether there is an entrusted relationship between the two parties should be a matter of fact finding, the author predicts the subsequent trial, and the determination of this fact should also be based on evidence—the key to whether Zhang Ruoyun’s case succeeds or not depends on the proof.

sina156
7 months ago

If Zheng Shuang’s income of 208w a day is taxed, then we can’t say anything. This is that although the capital market does not match the income of the hard-working scientists and heroes who are in danger of life at any time! But if you evade tax, you must check it, and this should be the tip of the iceberg in the entertainment industry! Look again, I usually see all kinds of cheating fathers, and now I have seen some cheating sons. Zhang Ruoyun, a Chinese citizen. Zhang Jian, a Chinese citizen. What is strange about the legal dispute between two citizens. Is it just because one is the other father? Father, what’s so great? You contributed a sperm many years ago, and it is not possible that you will hurt me for the rest of your life. ​

yahoo898
7 months ago

Needless to say, Zhang Ruoyun is like a little white flower, how many dramas his dad has played since his debut, why didn’t he say that his father and son were not in harmony at that time. Moreover, after Hua Ce’s incident, his father directed the “Huo Qu Bing” which he starred in and invested more than 200 million yuan. That was the “Huo Qu Bing” that said Huo Qu Bing is like a perverted murderer and cannot be convinced by him. Of course, we are not saying that there is a causal relationship between the two, right? The bullet should be allowed to fly for a while.

leexin
7 months ago

1. Zhang Ruoyun and his father’s company “Mengdu Pictures” signed a contract with Huace for a total of 200 million yuan in four TV series (50 million for one drama. Not as good as Zheng Shuang’s fraction), and received an advance payment from Huace 1.5 billion. Huace said, either to fulfill the contract obligations (make four TV series), or to pay me back (140 million). 2. Zhang Ruoyun said: “The signature is forged. I didn’t know about it. It was my dad who lied to Huace by pretending to be my signature. You ask Zhang Jian for the 140 million yuan.” 3. Zhang Jian said: “My son knows. In this matter, Huace, you ask my son for 140 million.” The court handwriting expert appraisal result: The signature on the contract is forged, but the signature stamp is real. As long as one of the signature and the signature seal is false, it is a fraud, which is a contract fraud and forgery of personal information. However, the point that the court needs to find out is whether Zhang Ruoyun knew about it? How did Zhang Jian get his signature stamp? If Zhang Ruoyun didn’t know that the signature was forged, the signature seal was stolen by Zhang Jian or other illegal means, then the whole thing was Zhang Jian’s work alone. Hua Ce could only admit that he was unlucky, and asked Zhang Jian for the 140 million, with Zhang Ruoyun. Irrelevant. If Zhang Ruoyun knew about it, or rather, he stumbled and gave the signature seal to Zhang Jian. Whose official seal will be given to outsiders casually? Why did Li Guoqing grab the official seal of Dangdang? These official seals are kept by a dedicated person and have legal effect. Whoever signs a contract needs to appraise the handwriting, and everyone recognizes the official seal. Even if the signature is false, Zhang Ruoyun has to bear the responsibility (140 million).

greatword
7 months ago

Others are cheating fathers, this is a cheating son… In the court’s ruling, it can be known that Zhang Ruoyun has submitted relevant evidence to prove that the signature on the “cooperation agreement” has been forged, while his father is impersonating Negotiating affairs by himself, and also used Zhang Ruoyun’s signature stamp, which caused his son to pay huge sums of money. Probably it was the “cooperation agreement” signed by the father in the name of his son to get the investment money of Huace Film and Television, and then because the son did not know at first and later did not agree, Huace Film and Television failed to perform the contract, so Huace Film and Television filed an arbitration with the Hangzhou Arbitration Commission. . After all, when Zhang got married in 2019, his father was not present, which shows that the relationship is tense. And at the time of the “Celebrating More Than Years” fire, Zhang Ruoyun posted a meaningful text on social media, in which he wrote: “I used to have a fantasy. When did I grow up and have my own home? My own world, I invite you to come… and then you sipped a glass of wine, what happened back then… What is your character… It’s a pity that you don’t deserve it.” Suspected alluding to his father. Zhang Ruoyun’s father, Zhang Jian, stated that Zhang Ruoyun’s performance fees and other matters in the “Cooperation Agreement” were authorized by Zhang Ruoyun through WeChat to negotiate, confirm and sign with Mengdu Company; Zhang Ruoyun did not autograph the cooperation agreement involved, It was stamped with Zhang Ruoyun’s signature and the agreement was flawed. What Zhang said on Weibo: No contract, no money, and conflicts. If the previous tension is true, someone must be telling lies, which can rule out the possibility of litigation strategies. However, in the arbitration filed by Huace Film and Television, regardless of whether Zhang knew or authorized him, Huace Film and Television was in good faith. The specific case cannot be seen, but regardless of whether it is stereotyped or not, it is a well-intentioned counterpart. All of his claims can be supported by the court, and the final ruling also returned 129 million yuan and liquidated damages of 68.13 million yuan, and the relevant personnel shall bear joint and several liabilities. After the above-mentioned case, Zhang sued his father Zhang Jian for the losses caused to Zhang in the previous case for the “entrusted relationship” formed by his father Zhang Jian’s impersonation and seal.

loveyou
7 months ago

The cause of this case is a dispute over an entrustment contract, which should be adjusted by the Civil Code Contract Compilation, but because the contract was signed in 2019, the provisions of the Contract Law on entrustment contracts may also apply.
Family relationships such as father-son relationships are regulated by the Marriage and Family Chapter of the Civil Code.
It is not the same civil legal relationship and need not be confused.
Even father and son are equal civil subjects in this case.

strongman
7 months ago

It was originally a scene.
To be precise, this is not a lawsuit, it is a collection of evidence.
What he needs to judge is that Zhang’s commission is invalid. Then in another lawsuit, Xiao Zhang does not have to bear joint and several liability!
However, if it proves that Xiao Zhang’s commission is invalid, is Lao Zhang suspected of forging the commission agreement, fraudulent cooperation, em, is there any professional analysis?

stockin
7 months ago

First paste the factual part of the (2018) Zhejiang 01 Minte No. 88 ruling and the ruling result: After the trial, it was found that: 2016 (the specific date is unknown), Huace Company as Party A, Mengdu Company as Party B, and Zhang Ruoyun as Party B The artist and Zhang Jian are Party C, and the parties sign the “Cooperation Agreement”. Article 10 of the “Applicable Law and Dispute Resolution” Article 2 stipulates: “When disputes arise between parties A and B, they should uphold the spirit of mutual trust and mutual assistance and resolve them through friendly negotiation. If the negotiation fails, either party has the right to settle the matter with the Hangzhou Arbitration Commission, where this contract was signed, in accordance with the arbitration rules of the Association.” Judgment result: The applicant’s application by Zhejiang Nanbei Lake Mengdu Films Co., Ltd. to confirm the invalidity of the arbitration agreement was rejected. It can be seen from the ruling that in 2016, the “cooperation agreement” signed by Huace Company and Mengdu Company, the general film and television companies signed such agreements will be accompanied by gambling clauses, and according to the ruling, the specific date is unknown. It can be seen that the Mengdu company is so confident that it does not even write the date of the contract. From the Tianyan check, we can see that Zhang Ruoyun served as the legal representative from December 7, 2015 to January 18, 2017, and the “Cooperation Agreement” was signed in 2016, that is, Zhang Ruoyun was still the legal representative at the time of signing. The legal representative is the main person in charge of exercising civil rights and fulfilling civil obligations on behalf of the company. To what extent can the legal representative’s signature be overbearing? If the two parties have not clearly agreed that the agreement will take effect after being signed and sealed, or if the agreement is signed or sealed, even if there is no company stamped by the company, the contract will take effect as long as the legal representative signs the contract. Zhang Ruoyun was born in 1988 and was 28 years old in 2016. He is already a person with full capacity for civil conduct, so the external signature is of course valid. However, Zhang Ruoyun’s father said that he had affixed the official seal of the legal representative without signing. It depends on how the “cooperation agreement” is agreed. In the two cases other than the above, the official seal can be affixed. The court will also support the “cooperation agreement” to take effect without the legal representative’s signature. After all, the official seal needs to be filed, while the legal representative seal does not need to be filed. This time Fan Xian sued his father greatly. Some people said it involved apparent agency. Article 172 of the “Civil Code”   The actor has no agency power, beyond agency power, or after agency power is terminated. , The agency is still implemented, and the counterparty has reason to believe that the actor has agency rights, the agency behavior is effective. The premise of apparent agency is that there is no right to agency. Zhang Ruoyun is the legal representative. It is not agency not agency at all, but a legitimate civil act. In summary, Fan Xian’s chances of winning the case are not high. He has seen many cheating fathers, and it is the first time that he cheated his son. If it were not for helplessness, who would be willing to confront his dearest relatives in court?

11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x