Zhou Xingchis 70 million case to be pursued

 Zhou Xingchis 70 million case to be pursued

Prior to this, star master Chow Xingchi was the old love of Wenfeng recovered about HK $70 million (about 59 million yuan) of luxury housing and fund investment share. In response, Zhou Xingchi said that the oral agreement belongs to love words and has no legal effect.

On the same day, Yu Wenfeng also exposed the details of their breakup in court. She said the two often quarreled in 2009 and also mentioned breaking up, and finally broke up in March 2010. Zhou Xingchi Fang pointed out that the reason for the breakup was that Zhou had seen Yu Wenfeng go shopping with a Mr. Liao before ending their relationship. Yu Wenfeng disagrees.

Zhou Xingchis lawyer also pointed out that when the decoration of the mansion under Zhou Xingchis name was completed in April 2010, Yu Wenfengs mansion was still under renovation. He arranged for Yu Wenfeng and Yus mother to stay in the residence for two months. However, in June or July of the same year, Zhou Xingchi went to the mansion and found the lock was replaced, so he asked the police to come to the scene to deal with it. Yu Wenfeng responded that he was not present on that day, and also pointed out that Zhou Xingchis mother had broken into the house to destroy Yu Wenfengs things, so he needed the security guard to look at the house and change the lock.

Previously reported

Zhou Xingchis old love affair in court: speaking English for dinner and appointment

Wei endText.video -infoa{text-d ecoration:none;color :#000;}# endText.video - infoa:hover {color:#d34747;}# endText.video -listli{ overflow:hidden;float :left;list- style:none;width :132px; height:118px;position :relative; margin:8px3px0px0px; I am sorry. entText.video -lista,# endText.video - lista:visited {text-d ecoration:none;color :#fff; I am sorry. endText.video - list.overlay {text- align:left;padding :0px6px;background-color:#313131;font- size:12px;width :120px; position:absolute;bottom :0px; left:0px;height :26px;line- height:26px;overflow :hidden;color:#fff;}# endText.video - list.on {border- bottom:8pxsolid#c4282b ; endText.video - list.play { width:20px;height :20px; B ackground:url ( http://static.ws.126.net/video/img14/zhuzhan/play.png ); position:absolute;right :12px; top:62px;opacity :0.7;color:#fff; filter:alpha (opacity=70);_ B ackground:none;_ filter:progid : DXImageTransform.Microsoft.AlphaImageLoader (src= http://static.ws.126.net/video/img14/zhuzhan/play.png );}# endText.video - lista:hover.play { opacity:1;filter :alpha(opacity=100);_ filter:progid : DXImageTransform.Microsoft.AlphaImageLoader (src= http://static.ws.126.net/video/img14/zhuzhan/play.png ; }if(1/*/(iPhone|iPad|iPod|Android|NETEASEBOBO|blackberry|bbd+)/ ig.test ( navigator.userAgent )||/safari|chrome|firefox/i.test( navigator.userAgent )*/){varstr1=; varstr2= your browser is temporarily unable to play this video Frequency. < / video > ; document.getElementById (FPlayer1404863609673). parentNode.innerHTML=str1 +The classic work of Zhou Xingchi can not be surpassed. Is there a foul in Xingyes action? (source: ~) window.NTES&&function (d){varf=function(c){varb=c.getAttribute(flashvars),a=c.getAttribute(repovideourl).replace(.flv,- mobile.mp4 );h=d(c. parentNode.parentNode.parentNode ) g=; if(1/*(iPhone|iPad|iPod|Android|NETEASEBOBO|blackberry|bbd+)/ ig.test ( navigator.userAgent uff09*/) {g = < videocontrols = controls preload = auto width = 100% height = 100% > < sourcetype = video / MP4 SRC + A + > your browser is temporarily unable to play this video. < / video >; ntES (. Video > )- inner.video ).attr(style,background:#000;);}h.$(.video)[0].innerHTML=g;}, e=function(b){vara=d(b. parentNode.parentNode.parentNode );a.$(li).removeCss(on),b.addCss(on),a.$(.video-title)[0].innerHTML=string== typeofb.textContent?b .te xtContent:b.innerText , A. $(. Video title) [0]. SetAttribute (URL), A. $(. Video from) [0]. InnerHTML = (source: + b.getattribute (source) ), f (b);}; window.continuePlay=function (){vara,b=d(d(.video- list.on )[0].nextSibling);3==b.nodeType&&(b=d(b.nextSibling));if(b&&d(.video-innerinput)[0].checked){e(b);}},function(){vara={ init:function (){if(d(.video-listli)[0]){d(d(.video-listli)[0]).addCss(on), this.eventBind ();}}, eventBind:function (){d(.video-listli).addEvent(click, function(b){e(d(this)),b.preventDefault();});}};a.init();}();}(NTES);

Zhou Xingchis classic work, up to now, cant surpass it. Does Xingye have a foul in the end? (source: ~)

Netease Entertainment reported on November 20 that on November 19, the case of star master Zhou Xingchi was recovered by his old love yu Wenfeng for a luxury house and fund investment of about HK $70 million (about 59 million RMB). Zhou Xingchi was represented by senior lawyer and Yu Wenfeng was represented by former attorney yuan Guoqiang. The plaintiff of the case is Yu Wenfeng, and Zhou Xingchi is the defendant. When the trial was resumed on the 19th, Yu Wenfeng appeared in court in person.

Yu Wenfeng testified in court. She recalled that in 2002, Zhou Xingchi said that she would give her a bicycle as a Christmas gift, but she said that she would not want a bicycle. She also proposed to implement the 10% split. At that time, Zhou Xingchi also agreed. Yu Wenfeng chose to make a confession in English. She said that she was not a fan of Stephen Chow, but she saw his works after falling in love with him. At this point, the judge cut in and joked, it sounds painful when you say that? In response: I never hinted that, those are comedies..

Yu Wenfeng went on to say that when she and Zhou Xingchi were ordinary friends, she had helped him solve the problem of American visa. Before signing the agreement in 2002, she had made suggestions on Zhous investment from time to time, and even set foot in his film business to help him solve copyright disputes with his partners. Yu Wenfeng said that apart from her ability to invest, their close relationship is also one of the reasons why she can gain Zhous trust. At that time, she signed a contract with Zhou Xingchi in the name of her company. It was also because their relationship was not public at that time, so she did not want her name to be related to Zhou Xingchis company.

Yu Wenfeng stressed that Zhou Xingchi had an oral agreement with her. She provided investment advice, and her profit could be divided into 10%. Because of her trust, she did not write these conditions in a written agreement. She said that she and Zhou Xingchi had reached a consensus on the sharing in early 2002. Around Christmas, she proposed to implement the previous sharing agreement, and proposed to ask for 10%, which was more agreed by Zhou Xingchi.

At that time, Yu Wenfeng decided to leave his brothers company to help Zhou Xingchi full-time. Her elder brother paid attention to whether she paid Zhou Xingchi in vain. She explained that she would get a profit share and pointed out that Zhou Xingchi did not trust marriage. She did not do this to force Zhou Xingchi to marry him or to force him to pay remuneration. Zhou Xingchis counsel questioned Yu Wenfeng during cross examination, pointing out that Zhou has rich experience in investing in top property. Yu Wenfeng should learn from Zhou Xingchi rather than rely on Yu Wenfeng to assist Zhou Xingchi. Yu Wenfeng disagrees. She points out that she learned a lot about property construction and investment from her father and brother although she did not own property when she met Zhou Xingchi.

In the agreement signed by both sides, Yu Wenfeng explained that she was not the financial adviser with a monthly salary of only HK $20000. Now, it seems that she did not write the agreement. It seems that her remuneration is not correct and her description of her duties is not true. She pointed out that the company had mentioned at that time that the written agreement had its tax purpose, and she signed it without much attention based on her trust in Zhou Xingchi. Today, Chows barrister and Yu Wenfeng spend a lot of time to consider whether there are any differences in the wording used in the discussion of the split agreement with Stephen Chow. Yu Wenfeng insisted on mentioning some English words and revealed that she and Zhou Xingchi were talking in English. I know it sounds ridiculous, but I speak English when I eat with him, she said.

It is reported that Yu Wenfengs appeal involves the profits of Zhou Xingchis investment in three units and five parking spaces in the peak luxury house Tianbi Gao and bihuali mountain in Tai Po from 2002 to 2010, as well as the profits of the investment fund. Yu Wenfeng said that although there was no contract signed at that time, there was an oral agreement between the two sides, allowing her to take 10% of Zhou Xingchis investment profits. But Zhou Xingchi pointed out that although they had been in contact for 13 years, they said they would share the investment profits with her, but that was just a love talk in love, not a commitment to establish a legal relationship.

Yu Wenfeng, on the other hand, believed that Yu Wenfeng signed a contract with Stephen Chows Xinghui overseas for the first time in April 2002, and became the financial consultant of Xinghui overseas with a monthly salary of HK $20000. At that time, both parties had reached a consensus that Yu Wenfeng could share the profits of Zhou Xingchi. Finally, the two sides reached an agreement on a 10% share after the Christmas Day negotiations of the same year. As for the sky high project, the lawyer said that at the beginning, Stephen Chow was going to reserve one of the independent houses for self occupancy, so it should not be regarded as an investment.

Yu Wenfeng denies Zhou Xingchis love gift: it may be another woman, Zhou Xingchi, who was once in love with Wenfeng to collect 70 million yuan of debt. The next day, the women showed up and held their own opinions! Zhou Xingchis share of investment of 70 million yuan recovered by his predecessor_ NBJS12251