Interpretation of Zhang Ruoyuns 140 million dispute by lawyer

category:Ent
 Interpretation of Zhang Ruoyuns 140 million dispute by lawyer


Is Zhang Ruoyun trapped by his father, or is there another reason? In response, red star journalists launched an investigation and asked lawyers to answer.

Huace film and television said in the announcement that in December 2016, its subsidiary Huace film (Tianjin) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Huace film) signed a cooperation agreement with Mengdu and its core artists. It was agreed that within a certain period of time, the core artists of Mengdu would play in the four film and television projects invested and shot by Huace film (including related companies), and the remuneration for each project was RMB 50 million, The total amount is 200 million yuan. In the same month, Huace film industry paid 150 million yuan to Mengdu and provided multiple film and TV programs to Mengdu and its core artists, but they all refused.

However, it is worth noting that Zhang Ruoyun is not stated in the announcement as the core artist of Mengdu.

Red Star News reporters found on the Chinese judicial documents website that a civil ruling issued on August 6, 2018 by Zhejiang Nanbei Lake Mengdu Film Industry Co., Ltd. and Huace film industry (Tianjin) Co., Ltd. to confirm the validity of the arbitration agreement shows that Mengdu had applied for arbitration on the cooperation agreement signed with Huace film industry.

According to the ruling, Mengdu signed a cooperation agreement with Huace and Zhang Jian (Zhang Ruoyuns father), stipulating that the actor Zhang Ruoyun would participate in four Huace TV dramas. Due to disputes during the performance period, Huace submitted to Hangzhou Arbitration Commission for arbitration. After the trial, it was found that in 2016 (the specific date is unknown), Huace as Party A, Mengdu as Party B, Zhang Ruoyun as Party Bs artist, and Zhang Jian as Party C, all parties signed the cooperation agreement.

The result of the ruling shows that the reason why the applicant Mengdu requests to confirm the invalidity of the arbitration agreement cannot be established and the court does not support it. In accordance with the provisions of Article 16 and Article 20 of the Arbitration Law of the peoples Republic of China, the application of Zhejiang Nanbei Lake Mengdu Film Co., Ltd. for confirming the invalidity of the arbitration agreement was rejected.

It is worth noting that in 2016 when Mengdu and Huace signed the agreement, Zhang Ruoyun happened to be the legal representative and chairman of Mengdu.

When it comes to Zhang Jians name, many people may be a little strange. In fact, Zhang Jian is a famous director in the industry, who has successively participated in the operation of Xian dreamboat film and television, Mengdu film and other companies. He was the director and producer of snow leopard and black fox. Before that, there was a media report that Zhang Ruoyuns brokerage contract had been firmly grasped by his father. Behind his debut, Zhang Ruoyun could not do without his fathers support. In 2011, Beijing dreamboat produced a sister piece of snow leopard, black fox, directed and written by Zhang Jian, starring Zhang Ruoyun. In 2013, Beijing dreamboat produced the TV play sword, directed by Zhang Jian and starred by Zhang Ruoyun. In the same year, Zhang Ruoyun also starred in three other TV series wind shadow, Snow Leopard strong years and love song; in 2014, he participated in the TV series light shadow produced by dreamboat and written by Zhang Jian. In 2016, Zhang Ruoyun once again starred in the TV series Huo Qubing produced by Mengzhou film and television, which was also directed by Zhang Jian. However, due to various reasons, the play has not yet been broadcast. It is said that there seems to be a gap between father and son in recent years. On the day of Zhang Ruoyuns wedding, Zhang Jian did not even attend.

Deng Qing, a lawyer from Taihe Thai law firm, believes that from the information released to the public at present, it is not certain whether Zhang Jian signed the cooperation agreement without Zhang Ruoyuns knowledge; on the other hand, although Zhang Ruoyun was the legal representative and chairman of the company at the time of signing the agreement, it cannot be proved that he knew about it. Because different companies have different management, the only evidence is whether there is Zhang Ruoyuns signature on the cooperation agreement.

Some lawyers said that Zhang Jian, as Zhang Ruoyuns interested party, generally would not support his claim that he did not know anything about it. If he wanted to overturn the agreement, the evidence was not sufficient.

Source: Red Star News Editor: Liu Dan_ NBJS10788