Recently, the first-instance judgment of the institution contract dispute between Shanghai Yihai Film and Television Culture Communication Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Yihai Culture Babaylan 1990 cloth draw) and Cai Xukun were made public. According to the Judgment Document Network, 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 time of publication of this document has been nearly 9 months since the time of the judgment. Yihai Culture appealed to the Shanghai Second Intermediate People’s Court after the first instance judgment.
Cai Xukun was sentenced to compensation of 3 million yuan in the first instance. The court determined that he was not a malicious breach of contract. The document showed that the plaintiff Yihai Company claimed 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 Cinema 1950 witch cloth draw contract, every year the termination of the contract one year in advance will be paid to the plaintiff with 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, every year the termination of the contract, the plaintiff must pay 30 million yuan in advance compensation for early termination compensation.
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 demandedThe defendant was ordered to pay the plaintiff a termination compensation of 30 million yuan and a liquidated damages of 15 million yuan.
Defendant Cai Xukun argued that the contract stipulates that the defendant unilaterally proposed to terminate the contract and that the premise of paying compensation to the plaintiff is that the plaintiff has put a lot of energy and costs in cultivating the defendant. In fact, the plaintiff has not made 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’s claim of expenses Cinema 1950 witch cloth draw has no basis. In addition, the amount of compensation raised by the plaintiff is obviously inflated.
The first instance court Cinema 1950 witch cloth draw trial and approval of Komiks 1960 witch cloth draw The loss of the contract in the million-dollar breach of contract is a result of the portrait authorization cooperation agreement signed by the plaintiff and the defendant during the trial of the termination dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant. The termination compensation arising from the result is that the plaintiff should pay attention but not pay attention to the risk of inability to perform the agreement. The defendant is now required to bear the termination loss.
Regarding the termination compensation part, the defendant was underage when the contract and supplementary contract were signed between the two parties, and the plaintiff and the defendant’s mother Xu signed it. The defendant has not yet formed a clear plan and estimate of his future development and achievements. The performance period of the two contracts has expired.”https://comicmov.com/”>Babaylan 1990 cloth drawCinema 1950 witch cloth drawLong affairsKomiks 1960 witch cloth drawIn fact, it is not conducive to the defendant’s own development and the creation of a stable, healthy and orderly environment in the performance industry, and the uncertainty of achieving commercial returns has also increased accordingly. Therefore, the defendant’s early termination of the contract is reasonable, not a malicious breach of contract. The agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant in the contract does not comply with the principle of fairness and reason.
In the end, the court determined at its discretion to terminate the contract compensation of 3 million yuan based on the plaintiff’s publicity investment in the defendant, the defendant’s income standards, and the performance period. Komiks 1960 witch cloth draw
The above judgment document shows the date of judgment August 10, 2022. The document Babaylan 1990 cloth draw displays Cinema 1950 witch cloth draw. 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 according to the number of the other party or representatives, and appeal to the Shanghai Second Intermediate People’s Court.
According to Qichacha, Yihai Culture 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 originated.Babaylan 1990 cloth drawWhen signing the contract for a long time, Cai Xukun is underage
According to the Securities Times, the termination dispute between Cai Xukun and his former boss Yihai Culture can be traced back to 2015.
In 2015, 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, otherwiseCan’t continue to participate in the program. In order to continue to complete the program recording, Cai Xukun signed a brokerage contract with Yihai Culture on November 17, 2015, when Cai Xukun was 17 years old.
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 80 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 CultureKomiks 1960 witch cloth draw 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 to this Komiks 1960 witch cloth draw, Cai Xukun believes that Yihai Culture has not fulfilled the performance affairs and discipline obligations agreed in the contract, failed to fulfill the management and operation obligations of artists’ agent affairs, and did not make complete and reasonable plans for their acting career, and could not 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, stipulating that he was the exclusive plenipotent broker of Cai Xukun, and the contract term was until April 17, 2023.
After signing the contract, the company arranges Komiks 1960 witch cloth drawCai Xukun participated in the large-scale cultivation talent show “Star Moving 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 Brokerage Contract, and then filed a lawsuit with the court, Komiks 1960 witch cloth draw requested the revocation of the Brokerage Contract.
Yihai Culture does not agree to terminate the contract. In the counterclaim, Yu Hai Culture ordered Cai Xukun to pay 50 million yuan in breach of contract compensation, and paid 70% of all the acting income (including later advertising endorsement income) obtained by his online drama and variety show “Idol Trainee” to the company.
On October 29, 2018, Jing’an Court Babaylan 1990 cloth draw made a judgment to terminate the brokerage contract and compensation agreement signed by both parties. Babaylan 1990 cloth draw However, regarding the compensation issues caused by the termination of the contract, the judgment stated that the two parties may negotiate on their own, and if they fail to reach the negotiation, they may claim the corresponding rights separately. This also became the origin of future disputes between the two parties.
In November 2022, Yihai Culture published several Weibo posts in succession, explaining the litigation matters with Cai Xukun, and disclosed a number of evidence of Babaylan 1990 cloth draw expenditure.
Yihai Culture said 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 his early termination of the contract caused huge losses to the company.
The evidence posted by Yihai Culture 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 direct dispute resolutionIn addition to the confrontation, relevant legal documents show that in recent years, Yihai Culture has also sued Cai Xukun and his endorsed products and companies, including L’Oreal, Yangshengtang, 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 editors | Wu Xia