![[Search time] May 29, 2022 (system generation) [Search platform] Peking University magic weapon case search platform [Search method] (Keyword search, legal related case search, case related search or other methods, filled in by users) [Search results] (system generation) Through - DayDayNews](https://cdn-dd.lujuba.top/img/loading.gif)
[Search time] 2022 years 5 April 29 days (system generation)
[ search platform ] Peking University magic weapon case search platform
[Search method] (Keyword search, legal-related case search, case-related search or other methods, filled in by user)
[Search results] (system generation)
Through the above methods, a total of 18, including 4 guiding cases published by the Supreme People's Court 0, typical cases published by the Supreme People's Court 0html, and typical cases published by the Supreme People's Court 0html ml8 cases, 0 cases where the Supreme People's Court is in effect, 0 reference cases released by the Higher People's Court, 0 cases where the Higher People's Court is in effect, 0 cases where the Intermediate People's Court is in effect, 6 cases where the grassroots people's court is in effect. Among them, the four types of cases of 18html have been effective in the past three years.
[Search conclusion] (relatively objective conclusions drawn based on the retrieved cases, user fill in)
[Comparative analysis] (Basic information of a class case and a comparison and analysis with pending cases, the details of a class case are generated by the system, and the analysis part is filled in by the user)
1. First instance civil judgment of the first instance of the capital reduction dispute between Shanghai Lingshang Machinery Co., Ltd. and Pan Li and Zhang Xiaomei Company
Cases: Company capital reduction dispute
Case number: (2020) Shanghai 0114 Civil primaries No. 11536
Case Source: China Judgment Documents Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Jiading District People's Court
Trial Procedure: First Instance
Review Time: 2020.11.30
Legal Base: Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendment in 2014) Article 14, Paragraph 2, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 144, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 253, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2018) Article 177, paragraph 2 (currently valid)
judgment result: 1. The defendant Pan Li shall bear the supplementary compensation liability to the plaintiff Shanghai Lingshang Machinery Co., Ltd. within ten days from the date of the effective date of this judgment within the scope of capital reduction of 67.221 million yuan for the unexecuted claims in the civil mediation No. 13450 of Shanghai 0114 Minchu 13450 (the defendant Pan Li has actually fulfilled the compensation liability in other cases will no longer bear);
2. Civil Judgment of First Instance of Suzhou Anwen Precision Mechanical and Electrical Co., Ltd. and Pan Li and Zhang Xiaomei Company's Capital Reduction Dispute
Cases: Company Capital Reduction Dispute
Case No.: (2020) Shanghai 0114 Civil First Instance No. 8490
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Jiading District People's Court
Trial Procedure: First Instance
Trial Time: 2020.11.27
Legal basis: Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendated in 2014) Article 142, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendated in 2017) Article 144, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendated in 2017) Article 253, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendated in 2018) Article 177 Article 2 (currently valid)
Judgment results: 1. The defendant Pan Li shall bear supplementary compensation liability to the plaintiff Suzhou Anwen Precision Mechanical and Electrical Co., Ltd. for the unexecuted claims in the civil mediation document of Civil Mediation No. 7383 within ten days from the date of the effective date of this judgment;
3. First-instance Civil Judgment of Shanghai Yuanchao Printing Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Changhua Baorui Investment Co., Ltd., Ji Hesheng and other shareholders' capital contribution dispute
Cases: Company capital reduction dispute
Case No.: (2019) Shanghai 0113 Minchu No. 6184
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Baoshan District People's Court
Trial Procedure: First Instance
Review Time: 2020.04.21
Dispute Focus:
Legal Base: Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendment 2014) Article 142, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2017) Article 144, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2017) Article 253, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2018) Article 177 (currently valid)
Judgment Results: Judgment Results 1. The defendant Gong Xu bears supplementary compensation liability to the plaintiff Shanghai Yuanchao Printing Co., Ltd. for the unpaid part of the debts determined by the Civil Mediation No. 53.28 million yuan in the range of capital reduction of RMB 53.28 million, and shall be fulfilled within ten days from the date of effectiveness of this judgment.
4. Second-instance Civil Judgment of Second-instance Cases between Shanghai Wensheng Asset Management Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Jinshan Weizhen Industrial Corporation and other companies in Capital Reduction Dispute
Cases: Company Capital Reduction Dispute
Case No.: (2019) Shanghai 01 Civil Final No. 4267
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Cases
Trial Court: Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court
Trial Procedure: Second-instance
Trial Time: 2020.03.11
Focus of dispute: This court believes that the focus of dispute in this case is: 1. Whether the capital reduction of Sanlun Factory has damaged the legitimate rights and interests of Wensheng Company as a creditor; 2. In this case, Wensheng Company claims that the Industrial Corporation, as a shareholder, bears supplementary compensation liability for the defective capital reduction of Sanlun Factory, and whether the statute of limitations has been lost.
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 1999), Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2018) Article 3, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2018) Article 14, Chinese Certified Public Accountant Audit Standard No. 1111-Acceptance Agreement (Amendment 2006) [Void], General Provisions of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China Article 76, General Provisions of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China Article 188 Paragraph 1, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2018) Article 177, Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Litigation Status of Litigation System in the Trial of Civil Cases Article 1 (already modified) , Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2017) Article 142, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 169, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 170, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 175,
Judgment result: The appeal is rejected and the original judgment is upheld.
5. First-instance Civil Judgment of the First Instance of the Shareholder of Liu Baofeng and Shanghai Dacheng Electric Technology Co., Ltd.
Cases: Company Capital Reduction Dispute
Case No.: (2019) Shanghai 0110 Civil Century No. 1149
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Yangpu District People's Court
Trial Procedure: Simple Procedure
Trial Time: 2019.03.18
Legal basis: Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 253 (has been modified)
Judgment result: 1. The defendant Shanghai Dacheng Electric Technology Co., Ltd. shall pay the plaintiff Liu Baofeng's refund of 1,816,740 yuan within ten days from the date of the effective date of this judgment;
6. The second instance civil judgment of the first instance case of Jiande HSBC Materials Co., Ltd. v. Shen Yuxing Company's capital reduction dispute
Cases: Company capital reduction dispute
Case number: (2018) Shanghai 01 Civil Final No. 10054
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court
Trial Procedure: Second Instance
Trial Time: 2018.12.25
Dispute Focus: Regarding the focus of the third dispute, Shen Yuxing and Lou Qiming believe that when Bank X sued Company Z and Company C on January 17, 2000, he knew that Company Z's registered capital had decreased to US$300,000, so HSBC filed this case in 2017, which exceeded the statute of limitations. In this regard, the first instance court held that if Company Z did not notify the known creditors during the capital reduction process, then this situation is essentially no different from the essence of the shareholder's illegal withdrawal of capital contribution and the impact on the damage to the interests of the creditors. Therefore, the legal provisions of the company's failure to comply with the legal procedures for reducing funds that lead to damage to the interests of creditors can be determined in accordance with the relevant principles and provisions of the Company Law on shareholders' withdrawal of funds. According to relevant laws, if the creditor's claim has not passed the statute of limitations, the People's Court will not support the statute of limitations. Therefore, the first instance court will find it difficult to accept the statute of limitations in this case.
Legal basis: Law on the Application of Laws for Foreign-related Civil Relations of the People's Republic of China Article 13 (currently valid) . Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2018) Article 186. Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China Article 90. Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 1691, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 170. Paragraph 11. Paragraph 11. Paragraph 11. Result of the Judgment of Article 170. Paragraph 11. Paragraph 11. Paragraph 11. Paragraph 11. Paragraph 12
Judgment: The appeal is rejected and the original judgment is upheld.
7. The second instance civil judgment of the second instance of the capital reduction dispute between Liu Haining and Shanghai Jingcheng Electrical Appliance Complete Set Co., Ltd., Shanghai Kanglin Investment Co., Ltd. and other companies
Cases: Company capital reduction dispute
Case number: (2018) Shanghai 02 Civil Final No. 7484
Case source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court
Trial Procedure: Second instance
Trial Time: 2018.09.17
Focus of dispute: The first instance court held that the focus of dispute in this case was: 1. Whether Jingcheng Company is a known creditor at the time of Tieyuan Company's capital reduction; 2. Whether Tieyuan Company's capital reduction behavior on September 10, 2012 has flaws, and whether Liu Haining and Kanglin Company should bear the responsibility for improper capital reduction; 3. Whether Tieyuan Company's capital reduction behavior after subscribing to increase capital after subsidizing capital, can shareholders be exempted from improper capital reduction responsibility?
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 177 (already modified) , Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 253, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 170, paragraph 1, item 1,
Judgment result: The appeal is rejected and the original judgment is upheld.
8. First-instance Civil Judgment of the Capital Reduction Dispute between Kangli and Shanghai Zhongkhan Investment Management Center, Zhao Shaodong and other companies
Cases: Company Capital Reduction Dispute
Case No.: (2018) Shanghai 0115 Civil Century No. 38045
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Pudong New District People's Court
Trial Procedure: Simple Procedure
Trial Time: 2018.08.21
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2013) Article 2011, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2013) Article 203, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2013) Article 35, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2013) Article 177, Sole Proprietorship Law of the People's Republic of China Article 2 (currently valid) , Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendment 2014) Article 142, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2017) Article 253
Judgment results: 1. The defendant Zhao Shaodong shall bear the supplementary compensation liability to the plaintiff Kang Li for all payment obligations to Shanghai Yancheng Asset Management Co., Ltd. under the Civil Judgment No. 22891 of Shanghai Pudong New District People's Court (2017) Shanghai 0115 Minchu 22891;
9. First-instance Civil Judgment of Shen Yuxing and Lou Qiming Company's Capital Reduction Dispute
Cases: Company Capital Reduction Dispute
Case No. : (2017) Shanghai 0115 Minchu 53389
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Case Level: Ordinary case
trial court: Shanghai Pudong New District People's Court
trial procedure: First instance
trial time: 2018.06.25
Dispute focus: Regarding the third dispute focus, the two defendants believed that when the Hangzhou Branch of Bank of Communications sued Jinchong Company and Xinye Company on January 17, 2000, he knew that the registered capital of Jinchong Company had decreased to US$300,000, so the plaintiff filed this case in 2017, which exceeded the statute of limitations. In this regard, this court believes that if Jinchong Company does not notify known creditors during the capital reduction process, then this situation is essentially no different from the essence of the shareholder's illegal withdrawal of capital contribution and the impact on the damage to the interests of creditors.Therefore, the legal provisions of the company's failure to comply with the legal procedures for reducing funds that lead to damage to the interests of creditors can be determined in accordance with the relevant principles and provisions of the Company Law on shareholders' withdrawal of funds. According to relevant laws, if the creditor's claim has not passed the statute of limitations, the People's Court will not support the statute of limitations. Therefore, the defense of the two defendants on the statute of limitations in this case is also difficult for this court to accept.
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 186, Article 2, (already modified) , Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (I) (Amendment in 2014) Article 14, Article 2, Law on the Application of Law of Foreign-related Civil Relations of the People's Republic of China Article 13, Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (I) (Amendment in 2014) Article 1, Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (I) (Amendment in 2014) Article 2, Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (I) (Amendment in 2014) Article 20, Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China Article 90
Judgment Results: The plaintiff Jiande HSBC Materials Co., Ltd.'s lawsuit request was rejected.
10. First-instance Civil Judgment of Capital Reduction Disputes between Shanghai Qingkai International Trade Co., Ltd. and Lin Jun, Jin Wei and other companies
Cases: Company Capital Reduction Disputes
Case No.: (2017) Shanghai 0115 Civil First Century No. 77948
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Pudong New District People's Court
Trial Procedure: Simple Procedure
Trial Time: 2018.03.29
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 177 (already modified) . Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendment in 2014) Article 14, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 144, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 253
Judgment results: 1. The defendant Huang Youhong shall bear supplementary compensation liability to the plaintiff Shanghai Qingkai International Trade Co., Ltd. for the debt claims that have not been executed in the civil judgment No. 8164 of Pudong New District People's Court (2015) Pumin Liu (Shang) Chu Zi No. 8164;
11. Tang Xu and others sued Shanghai Aijia Investment Holding Co., Ltd. for company capital reduction disputes
Cases: Company capital reduction disputes
Case No.: (2017) Shanghai 0115 Minchu No. 26021
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Case Level: Ordinary case
trial court: Shanghai Pudong New District People's Court
trial procedure: Simple procedure
review time: 2017.10.12
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment 2013) Article 177 Article 2 (has been revised) . Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendment 2014) Article 13. Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendment 2014) Article 14. Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendment 2017) Article 144, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 253, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 148, Article 1,
Judgment Results: The defendant Shanghai Aijia Investment Holdings Co., Ltd. shall bear supplementary compensation liability for the unpaid claims of the plaintiffs Tang Xu, Huang Fang and Tang in the civil judgment No. 7496 of Pu Min Yi (Min) Chu Zi within ten days from the date of effectiveness of this judgment.
12. Zhu Guoqing and others sued Shanghai Congming Trading Co., Ltd. for company capital reduction dispute
Cause: Company capital reduction dispute
Case number: (2017) Shanghai 02 Minzhong No. 7061
Case source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court
Trial Procedure: Second Instance
Trial Time: 2017.08.16
Legal basis: Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 253, Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 177 (already modified) , Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 170, paragraph 1 item 1
Judgment result: The appeal is rejected and the original judgment is upheld.
13. Zhang Xianglong v. Shanghai Dianbin Brewing Co., Ltd. Company Capital Reduction Dispute
Cause: Company Capital Reduction Dispute
Case No.: (2017) Shanghai 0118 Minchu No. 1283
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Qingpu District (County) People's Court
Trial Procedure: Simple Procedure
Trial Time: 2017.07.28
Focus of dispute: According to the facts found in the court and the parties' lawsuits and arguments, the main focus of dispute in this case is whether the defendant concealed aged rice wine worth RMB 2 million when reducing capital. This court's specific analysis is as follows:
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 178 (has been modified)
Judgment result: All litigation requests of the plaintiff Zhang Xianglong were rejected.
14. Changxing Greentown Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. v. Zhu Jingqing and other companies’ capital reduction dispute
Cases: Company capital reduction dispute
Case number: (2017) Shanghai 0115 Minchu No. 43528
Case source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Pudong New District People’s Court
Trial Procedure: Simple Procedure
Trial Time: 2017.07.28
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 3 (already modified) , Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 177, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 144, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2017) Article 253
Judgment result: The defendant Zhu Jingqing and the defendant Hu Gaoming bear additional compensation liability to the plaintiff Changxing Greentown Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. for the part that the 839,742.94 yuan debt of Shanghai Greenrui Asset Management Co., Ltd. cannot be paid off for the part that the debt cannot be repaid by Shanghai Greenrui Asset Management Co., Ltd.'s debt cannot be repaid.
15. First-instance Civil Judgment of Shanghai Congming Trading Co., Ltd. and Zhu Guoqing and Zhu Guofang Company Capital Reduction Dispute
Cases: Company Capital Reduction Dispute
Case No.: (2016) Shanghai 0114 Civil First Century No. 12272
Case Source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Jiading District People's Court
Trial Procedure: Simple Procedure
Trial Time: 2017.06.16
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendated 2013) Article 177 (already modified) , Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendated 2012) Article 64 Paragraph 1, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendated 2012) Article 253
judgment result: 1. The defendant Zhu Guoqing shall bear the supplementary compensation liability for the plaintiff Shanghai Congming Trading Co., Ltd.'s civil judgment No. 692 (Shang) Civil Judgment No. 692;
16. Cao Jun and the Hongkou Branch of Shanghai Banking Co., Ltd., Ltd., appeal case
case cause: Company capital reduction dispute
case number: (2017) Shanghai 02 Minzhong No. 521
case source: China Judgment Document Network (Union)
Case level: Ordinary case
trial court: Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court
trial procedure: Second instance
trial time: 2017.01.25
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 177, paragraph 2 (already modified) . Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendment in 2014) Article 14, Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (III) (Amendment in 2014) Article 19, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2012) Article 170, paragraph 1 1
Judgment Results: The appeal is rejected and the original judgment is upheld.
17. Guo Hongtao sued Pan Deyou and other companies for capital reduction dispute
Cases: Company capital reduction dispute
Case number: (2016) Shanghai 02 Minzhong No. 6253
Case source: China Judgment Document Network
Category Case Level: Ordinary Case
Trial Court: Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court
Trial Procedure: Second Instance
Trial Time: 2016.08.16
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) Article 178 Paragraph 2 (already modified) , Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2012) Article 144, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2012) Article 253, Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2012) Article 170 Paragraph 1 1
Judgment result: The appeal is rejected and the original judgment is upheld. The second-instance case acceptance fee is RMB 11,800, which shall be borne by the appellant Guo Hongtao. This judgment is final judgment.
18. Shanghai Jinchao Enterprise Investment Management Co., Ltd., Pan Deyou and Shanghai Baijinhan Palace Hotel Co., Ltd., Guo Hongtao Company’s capital reduction dispute
Cases: Company capital reduction dispute
Case number: (2015) Pumin Er (Shang) Chu Zi No. 1252
Case source: China Judgment Document Network (Union)
Case level: Ordinary case
Trial court: Shanghai Putuo District People’s Court
Trial procedure: First instance
review time: 2016.05.04
Legal basis: Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2013) (already modified) , Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Amendment in 2012)
