Recently, the first-instance judgment of the entrustment contract dispute between Shanghai Yihai Film and Television Culture Communication Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Yihai Culture) and Cai Xukun was made public. According to the Judgment Documents Network, Komiks 1960 witch cloth draw, the court found that Cai Xukun did not breach the contract by maliciously, and Cai Xukun was sentenced to pay the former boss 3 million liquidated damages.
It is worth noting that the publication time of this Cinema 1950 witch cloth draw has been nearly 9 months since the judgment time. Yihai Culture appealed to the Shanghai Second Intermediate People’s Court after the first instance judgment.
Cai Xukun was sentenced to 3 million yuan in compensation in the first instance. The court determined that he did not breach of contract by maliciously. The document shows that the original Komiks 1960 witch cloth draw sue Yihai Company that in November 2015, he signed a contract with the defendant Cai Xukun, stipulating that the plaintiff was the defendant’s exclusive plenipotent broker, and the contract term was until April 2023. The contract stipulates that if the defendant proposes to terminate the contract, every year the plaintiff will have to pay the plaintiff an early termination compensation of 3 million yuan per year.
In June 2016, the plaintiff and the defendant signed a supplementary contract. If the defendant unilaterally proposes to terminate the contract, the plaintiff will have to pay the early termination compensation to the plaintiff every year. Cinema 1950 witch cloth draw30 million yuan per year.
In February 2017, the defendant sent a notice of termination of the contract to the plaintiff and filed a lawsuit with the court, demanding the termination of the contract and supplementary agreement signed by the two parties. Therefore, the plaintiff sued the court and demanded that the defendant be ordered to pay the plaintiff a settlement. Drawapproximate compensation of RMB 30 million and liquidated damages of RMB 15 million.
Defendant Cai Xukun argued that the contract stipulates that the defendant unilaterally proposed that the defendant needs to pay compensation to the plaintiff if he unilaterally proposed to terminate the contract. The plaintiff paid a lot of energy and costs to cultivate the defendant. In fact, the plaintiff did not make effective investment in the training and promotion of the defendant. During the contract period, the defendant did not obtain any remuneration paid by the plaintiff, and the plaintiff claimed no basis. In addition, the amount of compensation proposed by the plaintiff was obviously inflated.
The first instance court held that regarding the 15 million breach of contract loss, Babaylan 1990 clothes draw is a portrait authorization cooperation agreement signed between the plaintiff and the defendant during the trial of the termination dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant. The resulting termination compensation is arising from the plaintiff who should pay attention but fail to pay attention to the risk that the cooperation agreement may face inability to perform. The defendant is now required to bear the termination loss.
Regarding the termination compensation part, the contract and supplementary between the two parties are contracted and supplemented by the two parties. drawThe defendant is underage and signed by the plaintiff and the defendant’s mother Xu. The defendant has not yet formed a clear plan and estimate of his future development and achievements. The long performance period of the two contracts is actually not conducive to the defendant’s own development and businessCinema 1950 witch cloth draw creates a stable, healthy and orderly environment in the performance industry, and realizes the uncertainty reported by Babaylan 1990 cloth draw. The uncertainty reported by Babaylan 1990 cloth draw has also increased accordingly. Therefore, the defendant terminated the contract early, which is reasonable and not a malicious breach of contract. The plaintiff and the defendant have been in the process of Cinema 1950 witch cloth draw. href=”https://comicmov.com/”>Komiks 1960 witch cloth drawThe contract stipulates high termination compensation, which does not comply with the principle of fairness and reason.
Finally, the Court determined that the termination compensation was RMB 3 million based on the plaintiff’s publicity investment made by the defendant, the defendant’s income standards, and the performance period.
The judgment date shown in the above judgment document is August 10, 2022. The document shows that if you are dissatisfied with this judgment, you may submit an appeal to this court within fifteen days from the date of delivery of the judgment, and submit a copy based on the number of persons involved in the other party or the person on behalf of the Komiks 1960 witch cloth draw, and appeal to the Shanghai Second Intermediate People’s Court. Cinema 1950 witch cloth draw
and Babaylan 1990 cloth draw According to Qichacha, Komiks 1960witch cloth draw Hua appealed to the Shanghai Second Intermediate People’s Court after the first instance, and the court issued several trial announcements.
The dispute between the two parties has been around for a long time. Cai Xukun is still underage. According to the Securities Times, the termination dispute between Cai Xukun and the former boss Yihai Culture can be traced back to 2015.
201Babaylan 1990 clothes draw5 years, Cai Xukun signed a contract with Haoshang Media (Hunan) Co., Ltd. for participating in the “Star Moving Asia”. During the recording of the program, due to the transfer of the program producer, Cai Xukun was told to transfer the contract, otherwise he would not be able to continue participating in the program. In order to continue to complete the program recording, on November 17, 2015, Cai Xukun signed a brokerage contract with Yihai Culture. Komiks 1960 witch cloth drawCai Xukun was 17 years old at this time.
After the contract was signed, the two parties signed a supplementary contract in June 2016, and modified Cai Xukun’s termination compensation. For example, Cai Xukun’s unilateral termination compensation was changed from 8 million yuan to 8,000 yuanCinema 1950 witch cloth draw million yuan, and the early termination compensation was changed from 3 million yuan per year to 30 million yuan per year.
In 2017, Cai Xukun filed a termination of the contract with Yihai Culture and filed a lawsuit. The main reason is that Yihai Culture unilaterally increased the contract liquidated damages and compensation at the same time, and also required Cai Xukun to bear the cost investment in his acting career activities and withdraw a high share of his acting activities income.
In addition, Cai Xukun believes that Yihai Culture has not fulfilled the performance agency agreed in the contract.m/”>Babaylan 1990 cloth draw‘s business has not fulfilled its obligation to manage and operate the agency affairs of artists, and has not made complete and reasonable plans for their acting career, so it cannot improve professional and stable support for the better development of their acting career.
However, Yihai Culture tells another story. It stated that on November 12, 2015, he signed a brokerage contract and supplementary agreement with Cai Xukun, agreeing that he is Cai Xukun’s exclusive and pleadministered agent, and the contract term is until April 17, 2023.
After signing the contract, the company’s security Komiks 1960 witch clothes DrawCai Xukun participated in the large-scale cultivation talent show “Star Asia”, and arranged to go to South Korea to receive artist training, release albums, etc., to help Cai Xukun develop from a middle school student to a formal debut artist.
In January 2017, the company notified Cai Xukun to participate in the performance, but was rejected. Since then, Cai Xukun refused to participate in any activities arranged by the company. On February 10 of that year, Cai Xukun proposed to terminate the “Brandministrative Contract”, and then filed a lawsuit with the court, demanding the revocation of the broker contract. /p>
Yihai Culture did not agree to terminate the contract. In the counterclaim, Yihai Culture ordered Cai Xukun to pay 50 million yuan in compensation for breach of contract, and paid 70% of all the performance income (including later advertising endorsement income) obtained by starring in the online drama and variety show “Idol Trainee” to the company.
On October 29, 2018, Jing’an Court made a judgment to terminate the brokerage contract and compensation agreement signed by both parties. However, regarding the compensation issues caused by the termination of the contract, the judgment stated that The two parties can negotiate on their own, and if they fail to reach the negotiation, they can claim corresponding rights separately. This has also become the origin of the future dispute between the two parties.
In November 2022, Yihai Culture published several Weibo posts in succession, explaining the litigation matters with Cai Xukun and revealing a number of expenditure evidence.
Yihai Culture stated that after signing the contract with Cai Xukun in November 2015, the company invested a lot of money and resources to cultivate his acting career, shape his image and promote it, and its early termination of the contract caused the company to suffer huge amounts. Loss.
Yihai Culture’s evidence shows that includes training contracts signed for trainees such as Cai Xukun and some training and even plastic surgery fees, as well as photos of the company’s promotional activities for Cai Xukun’s group, and other information. The relevant materials have attracted great attention on Weibo.
In addition to going to court directly due to termination disputes, relevant legal documents show that in recent years, Yihai Culture has also sued Cai Xukun and his endorsement of products and companies, including L’Oreal and YangshengtangBabaylan 1990 cloth draw, VIVO, etc.
If he sued Cai Xukun, Cai Xukun Studio and VIVO Company, he believed that Cai Xukun and Cai Xukun Studio had cooperated with VIVO without the company’s consent, agreed that Cai Xukun was the spokesperson for the vivox23 series mobile phones, and shot a large number of advertisements and posters and other promotional materials.
Yihai Culture believes that its behavior infringes on its exclusive brokerage rights, constitutes unfair competition, seriously damages the legitimate rights and interests of Yihai Company, and causes significant economic losses to Yihai Company. However, most of these lawsuits ended with Yihai Culture’s withdrawal of the lawsuit.
For the first-instance judgment, many netizens congratulated Cai Xukun on winning the case and successfully terminated the contract↓
As well as netizens used this to warn young people who hoped to enter performing arts companies and MCN institutions↓
Source | Yangcheng Evening News·Yangcheng School Comprehensive Judgment Document Network, Upstream News, Securities Times, @Cai Xukun, Netizen Comments and other responsibilitiesCinema 1950 witch cloth drawEditor | Wu Xia