Recently, King&Capital represented a well-known medical device company in shenzhen equity dispute case won the case, the case is the client in the first trial, second trial, retrial of the first instance were found to bear the responsibility of payment of more than 50 million yuan, commissioned by King&Capital team of lawyers to intervene. Team lawyers after in-depth study of the case, invited Beijing university, tsinghua university, the Chinese academy of social sciences institute of law and other institutions of jurisprudence, and joint ZhaoQiLong lawyers, wangXinTong lawyers, wangXiaoguang lawyers, zhuKun lawyers, chengYan lawyers and so on to set up a professional team, on behalf of the client to shenzhen intermediate court of law to appeal. By the shenzhen intermediate court hearing, and finally adopted our agency opinion, revoke the original judgment and change the judgment of the client in this case is not responsible. The other party (the plaintiff of the first trial and the appellee of the second trial) applied for retrial to the Guangdong Provincial Higher People's Court, and then the Guangdong Higher People's Court retrial review procedures, and upheld the Shenzhen Intermediate Court retrial judgment of the second trial. The client highly recognized the dedication of our lawyers and their professional performance in turning the situation around.
The road is long and difficult, the previous procedure has made unfavorable determinations
This case is the company for equity incentives to executives to grant equity disputes, the company introduced executives to promote shareholding reform, and then due to the failure of the share reform to complete the dispute between the parties. Before the intervention of our lawyers, the client in the previous case of the litigation for the gratuitous grant can be exercised before the delivery of the right to revoke the right to revoke the grant of equity to the executives, but through the first trial, the second trial, the retrial of the first instance of a number of proceedings, the point of view has never been supported by the court.
In the face of danger, decisively change the idea of litigation to meet the turning point.
Our lawyers intervened in the second trial stage, carefully analyzed and studied the case materials and expert evidence, and changed the previous litigation idea of gratuitous gift, and believed that the case should start from the basic facts, for the interpretation of the contract terms involved, gratuitous gift and conditional gift of the dialectical relationship, the identification of the nature of equity incentives, the protection of shareholders' pre-emptive rights, the equity value of the base date of evaluation, the preparatory litigation claims, and other substantive and procedural issues. The court conducted in-depth excavation on substantive and procedural issues, and submitted nearly 40 pieces of new evidence to support the evidence at the second trial stage of the retrial. The court of the second trial finally adopted the agent's viewpoints by synthesizing the evidence of the whole case, and reversed the original judgment and rejected all the litigation claims of the opposing party.
Improvement of litigation strategy through moot court and expert argumentation
In order to test and improve the litigation strategy, the team organized a mock court for the core disputes involved in the case, in which a number of lawyers debated the substantive and procedural issues involved in the case by participating in the mock court. At the same time, the team invited famous scholars in the academic field to conduct expert argumentation on the difficult focus, and asked for advice from experts many times during the litigation process, and finally formed a practicable representation strategy.
Justice will eventually come, since the dispute between the parties in 2015, the case lasted nearly 8 years, faced with a number of prior trial results are unfavorable to the client, the firm's lawyers to live up to their responsibilities, in the retrial of the second trial stage of a comprehensive victory. The other party did not accept the judgment of the second trial, and applied for retrial within the statutory time limit. During the retrial, the judge organized a hearing for both parties, and the team carefully prepared, closely cooperated, and made every effort to excel in the review stage of the retrial, and the Higher People's Court of Guangdong Province ultimately rejected the applicant's application for retrial. The judgment not only safeguarded the company's personhood from being destroyed, but also saved the company and its major shareholders from suffering a huge loss of more than 50 million RMB for no reason. This case involves a complex background of equity transaction, the rights and obligations of the parties are nested in layers, touching on a number of difficult and complex issues in the fields of corporate law, contract law, labor law, investment and mergers and acquisitions, etc., which reflects King&Capital attorneys' high level of theoretical foundations and practical experience in the practice.
