Guiyang police said Tencent was cheated and the second civil court of Nanshan court in Shenzhen said the case was still under trial

0
136

Original title: Guiyang police said Tencent was cheated and the second civil court of Nanshan court in Shenzhen said the case was still under trial
Beijing News (reporter Liu Huan) Tencent sued Laoganma and asked to freeze Laoganma’s assets for several times, and it is still fermenting. On the afternoon of July 1, relevant personnel of the second civil trial court of Shenzhen Nanshan court, which accepted the case of Tencent and Laoganma contract service dispute, told the Beijing news that “this case is still under further trial.”. The reporter inquired that according to the previous arrangement, if the lawsuit is not withdrawn, the case will normally open on July 17.
On June 30, China judicial documents website released a civil ruling of Nanshan District People’s Court of Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province. Tencent requested to seal up and freeze the property worth 16.2406 million yuan under the name of Guizhou Laoganma company, and the court ruled and agreed. According to Tencent’s previous response, Lao Ganma put in tens of millions of yuan of advertising in Tencent, but she has been in arrears for a long time and failed to make repeated reminders. She has to sue in accordance with the law, apply for asset preservation and freeze the other party’s enterprise account.
At noon on July 1, Shuanglong branch of Guiyang Public Security Bureau reported that the case involved three people forging the seal of Laoganma company, posing as the manager of marketing department of the company, and signing a cooperation agreement with Tencent. Its purpose is to obtain Tencent company in the promotion activities of supporting the network game gift code, and then through the Internet reselling illegal economic benefits.
According to the judgment of Nanshan District People’s Court of Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, the Beijing News reporter inquired that the trial personnel of the case of Tencent and Laoganma contract service dispute were chief judge Hu Xunzi, judges Liang Yi and Wang gahuan, all belonging to the second civil trial court of Shenzhen Nanshan court, and the clerk was Lin Ruimiao.
In response to the dispute between Tencent and Lao Ganma and a notice from Guiyang police, on the afternoon of July 1, a reporter from Beijing News called the second civil trial court of Nanshan court in Shenzhen. A staff member said that he was not a judge in charge, and the case was still under trial, so it was not convenient to disclose more information.
Sorting out the whole incident, we can roughly form such a timetable: on April 24 this year, the case document was formed by Nanshan court in Shenzhen. Lao Ganma received the legal document on June 10 and reported the case to the public security organ. On June 20, Guiyang public security organ decided to put the case on file for investigation. The incident was disclosed by the media on June 30 before it was known to the outside world. According to the latest news from qixinbao, under normal circumstances, the lawsuit between Tencent and Laoganma will be held in Shenzhen Nanshan District People’s Court on July 17 this year.
Chen ruojian, the managing partner of Duanhe Duan law firm, explained to the Beijing News reporter that the civil trial is based on the evidence provided by both parties. If one party brings a lawsuit, it can apply for property preservation. Tencent should have applied for property preservation. Moreover, in general, when applying for freezing assets, the court will also require the applicant to make a guarantee, so as to avoid freezing errors and compensate the other party for losses. So if there is an error in freezing property, Tencent will be liable for compensation. He analyzed that the court may not have entered the trial of the entity, but only made property preservation before litigation.