Shenzhen Proview, which had just received a huge sum of 60 million U.S. dollars and got out of the lawsuit, was involved in a lawsuit again this time because of arrears of lawyer fees. In the IPAD trademark case, Shenzhen Proview The agent, Shenzhen Guoco Law Firm, sued Proview in Yantian District Court for defaulting on legal fees of US$2 million. The Yantian District Court officially accepted the case.

Lawyer: Proview owes US$2 million in agency fees

Guoco Law Firm lawyer Xie Xianghui has been one of the lawyers representing Shenzhen Proview in the iPad trademark case. . Because Proview failed to pay legal fees as stipulated in the contract after receiving the settlement money, Guoco Law Firm took Shenzhen Proview to court.

Xie Xianghui said, "I did not expect such a result." When becoming Shenzhen Proview's agent, Guoco Law Firm and Shenzhen Proview signed an agency contract in the form of a risk agency. According to the contract, after the lawsuit is completed and the proceeds are obtained, the lawyer's agency fee will be charged in proportion to the proceeds. Xie Xianghui revealed that according to the agreement, Guoco has the right to receive 2 million US dollars (equivalent to more than 10 million yuan) from Proview.

“Our agreement at the time was that as soon as we received the compensation or settlement money, we would pay the lawyer’s fees immediately. Unexpectedly, from the end of June to now, the settlement money has been received for so long, and Proview has also We think it’s really bad that the lawyer’s fees were not paid.” Xie Xianghui said that legally, cases with relatively small amounts will go through the lawyer’s hands first and the lawyer’s fees will be deducted directly. But because the settlement was larger and regulated by the court, there was no direct deduction. But the money was already in Proview's account, and according to the contract, Proview should pay the lawyer's fees immediately. In addition, Guoco also advanced customs filing fees and purchase evidence fees for Proview, but Proview has not repaid these fees.

Proview: Priority payment creditors may have objections

According to Sina Technology reports, Shenzhen Proview founder Yang Rongshan explained that if Shenzhen Proview operates normally, legal fees may be given priority Payment, but Proview is not operating normally, priority is given to payment of expenses, and creditors may have objections. He emphasized that the court would handle the matter in accordance with legal provisions and Proview would not "wander the waters."

Xie Xianghui disagreed with this statement. He said that 60 million U.S. dollars had already arrived in Proview's account, but Proview's assets had been frozen, and the court had imposed asset supervision on it, so Proview was unable to dispose of its property. However, Proview can apply to the court and pay the lawyer's fees first before making other distributions of assets. As for the so-called "statement that other creditors disagree with", Xie Xianghui believes that the creditors knew and agreed when they signed the contract with Proview. The Economic Voice "Tianxia Company" interviewed Guoco lawyer Xie Xianghui, who has participated in the iPad trademark case, and he confirmed the authenticity of the news to us. He also stated that Guoco Law Firm and Shenzhen Proview signed a risk agency contract, and Proview should give them priority in paying their legal fees as soon as possible:

Xie Xianghui: When accepting Shenzhen Proview’s agency in 2010 , all the assets of Shenzhen Proview have actually been seized by the eight major banks, so Shenzhen Proview has no money. In this case, after analyzing the case, we believe that Shenzhen Proview is justified and we expressed our willingness to represent him for free. Free representation is a legally risky representation, which means that we help him defend his rights at our own expense. If he is beaten If we win, we will get a commission. If we lose, we are a risk agent and will not receive a penny. As the creditor at the time, Bank of China also agreed. This contract was approved by them and reported to them for filing, so we agreed on this ratio at that time. After winning the case, he immediately gave us priority to pay the legal fees.

Not long ago, the iPad trademark case in China, which had been turbulent for two years, was finally settled. Apple paid US$60 million and formally reached a settlement with Shenzhen Proview. It is understood that the entrustment contract signed between Guoco Law Firm and Shenzhen Proview stipulated that Guoco has the right to receive 4% of the total settlement amount.

Based on the settlement amount of US$60 million, Shenzhen Proview needs to pay approximately US$2.4 million, or about 15 million yuan in legal fees, to Guoco.

However, after Shenzhen Proview received a settlement of US$60 million at the end of last month, it has not paid its legal fees. Xie Xianghui revealed that in addition to legal fees, Guoco Law Firm also helped Proview advance some legal fees during the lawsuit. These fees should also be returned by Proview:

Xie Xianghui: According to the lawyer According to industry practice, our legal fees should be deducted from the US$60 million first, and the rest should be Shenzhen Proview’s income. However, all this money was later transferred to Shenzhen Proview’s account. Shenzhen Proview After entering the account, we asked him to pay the risk attorney fees according to the regulations, including the expenses advanced on our behalf. In fact, his litigation fees, trademark renewal fees, and customs filing fees were all advanced by us, but he did not pay them. If we He should return the advance to us, and our attorney's fees are paid according to a certain proportion. According to the contingency agency, our country's laws and regulations of the Ministry of Justice are agreed within the range of 30, and he has to give our agency The fee is about 4, which is a relatively low standard, not a high one.

In order to understand the situation more comprehensively, we also called Yang Rongshan, the founder of Shenzhen Proview, to learn from him what the dispute between Proview and Guoco Law Firm was about. Yang Rongshan said that the settlement money received by Proview has been handed over to the court, and Guoco Law Firm should go to the court to ask for the money:

Yang Rongshan: We allocate the money to the court, Proview does not We will not hesitate to raise any objections to this allocation. If it should be given priority, it should be given priority. If it should not be given priority, it should not be given priority. Everything should be respected by the court. I think as lawyers, they are very clear about the ins and outs of the whole matter. I personally cannot understand what they did today because their communication channels with the court are also very smooth. I feel that they are using the media to hype this matter. .

Lawyer Xie Xianghui said that they have been trying to communicate with Shenzhen Proview Company and Yang Rongshan himself, but have received no response. He said that when Guoco Law Firm helped Proview with the lawsuit, it was because they believed in this honest company, but he began to doubt whether Proview still had integrity.

Xie Xianghui: When we elected him, we already received the money. We asked him to give it and sent him a letter, but he refused to reply. We also refused to meet with Yang Rongshan, and he also refused to meet with Yang Rongshan. . Of course, he has many reasons, and I believe he will tell the media, but we think this is a sign of lack of sincerity. In the past, we firmly believed that Shenzhen Proview was an honest company, but I doubted whether it had integrity. If you don't want to deal with it even if you have a lawyer's contract or an entrustment agreement, the company should have very low integrity standards, or it may simply be unqualified on the issue of integrity.

Yang Rongshan said that communication between him and Guoco Law Firm was smooth. The other party has been using the media to hype it up to increase its popularity. Guoco turned to the media again, just to put pressure on the court through hype:

Yang Rongshan: There was no problem signing the agency agreement at the beginning. We never denied it, and we never said we wouldn’t pay him. Also there, you should approach the courts, why resort to the media? Is this an incorrect approach? Their rights protection team has been forcing the media to hype and increase their own popularity. You have seen what they have done in the past, just to hype. We have smooth communication. This is very funny. He is putting pressure on the court.

According to reports, Yang Rongshan has another explanation for Proview’s delay in paying legal fees. If Shenzhen Proview was a normally operating company, legal fees might be paid first. However, Proview is not operating normally. If legal fees are paid first, Proview's creditors may have objections.

In this regard, Xie Xianghui said that this statement lacks legal common sense. Whether in accordance with the practice of the legal profession or in accordance with national laws, their legal fees should be paid first:

Xie Xianghui: First, he has not gone through bankruptcy Procedure, in fact, his company is still independent according to law, and it does not need the consent of its creditors. The second entrustment contract we signed at that time, as its largest creditor bank at the time, Bank of China, as the chairman unit of bank creditors, they also agreed. The bank would not disagree with his payment, because everyone signed the contract. It's written in black and white that money should be given. Third, in fact, this profit was jointly created by the lawyer's rights protection team. At that time, Apple only compensated 1 million yuan in the first trial. After two years of litigation, Apple finally paid 380 million yuan through our efforts. It is obtained by the human, material and financial resources invested by the rights protection team. To us, it is a labor remuneration, which is different from his so-called ordinary creditor's rights. The company should pay us this fee according to the contract and in accordance with customary and The law should do this.

According to lawyer Xie Xianghui, Guoco Law Firm’s case against Proview has been accepted by the Shenzhen Court, but the case has not yet been filed.