A lawyer s interpretation of Zhang Ruoyun s 140 million yuan dispute with his father

category:Ent
 A lawyer s interpretation of Zhang Ruoyun s 140 million yuan dispute with his father


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.

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.

Red Star News reporter checked tianyancha and found that the dream capital involved in the dispute was formerly Haiyan Nanbei Lake film and television base Co., Ltd., later renamed Haiyan Nanbei Lake film and television base Co., Ltd., which was operated by Zhang Ruoyuns father, Zhang Jian, who also served as the legal representative and chairman of the company. On December 7, 2015, the legal representative and chairman of Mengdu changed from Zhang Jian to Zhang Ruoyun, but two years later, on January 18, 2017, less than a month after the signing of the cooperation agreement with Huace, Zhang Ruoyun quit and was replaced by Wang Hua.

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.

Zhang Ruoyuns response conflicts with Huaces announcement. It is not clear which side is true. Some legal people believe that the reply of the listed company to the inquiry letter of Shenzhen stock exchange must be reviewed by lawyers and the board of directors, and there are also contracts and seals of both parties, which is unlikely to be forged.

Deng Qing, a lawyer from taihetai 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.