Recently, the TV series "Flowers" "caught fire". In the play, the exquisite lens language, philosophical lines, and unique light and shadow aesthetics...... It shows the ups and downs of the business sea and the treacherous "Shanghai Past", which makes the audience addicted!
In the play, there are also some "famous scenes" that are thought-provoking, let us follow these plots and learn legal knowledge together!
One
Plot recap
The Zhizhenyuan Hotel was newly opened, and Xiao Jiangxi, who had just been expelled, came to take refuge but was refused. In order to vent his anger, Xiao Jiangxi sneaked into the back kitchen of Zhizhen Garden and cut the wires, causing the hotel to lose power and the guests to be injured.
What are the possible legal consequences for Xiaojiangxi, which cuts the wires?
The judge interprets the law
Xiaojiangxi's act of cutting the wires has damaged the production and operation of Zhizhenyuan, and if the property loss caused reaches the amount prescribed by law, it may be found to constitute the crime of sabotaging production and operation. If Xiaojiangxi's act of cutting wires endangers public safety, it may be found to constitute the crime of destroying power equipment. Even if the conditions for criminalization are not met, Xiao Jiangxi also needs to compensate for the property damage of the hotel and the personal injury of the guests caused by the cutting of the wires. At the same time, as a business premises, Zhizhenyuan Hotel shall perform safety guarantee obligations such as warning, rescue, maintenance and safety inspection of facilities and equipment to customers, and shall bear tort liability if it causes injury to customers. If the Zhizhenyuan Hotel fails to fulfill its safety and security obligations, it shall bear the corresponding supplementary liability, and after assuming the supplementary liability, it can recover from Xiaojiangxi.
Legal Links
Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China
Article 276: Whoever destroys machinery and equipment, mutilates farm animals, or destroys production and operation by other means for the purpose of venting anger or retaliation or for other personal purposes shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, short-term detention or controlled release, and if the circumstances are serious, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years.
Article 118:Whoever destroys electricity, gas or other flammable or explosive equipment, endangering public safety, and has not caused serious consequences, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years.
Civil Code of the People's Republic of China
Article 1165:Where the perpetrator infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others and causes harm due to his fault, he shall bear tort liability.
Where it is presumed that the actor is at fault in accordance with the provisions of law, and he cannot prove that he is not at fault, he shall bear tort liability.
Article 1198:Where the operators or managers of hotels, shopping malls, banks, stations, airports, stadiums, entertainment venues, or other business venues or public places, or the organizers of mass events, fail to fulfill their security obligations and cause harm to others, they shall bear tort liability.
Where a third party's conduct causes damage to others, the third party shall bear tort liability, and if the operator, manager or organizer fails to fulfill its security obligations, it shall bear corresponding supplementary liability. After the proprietor, manager or organizer bears supplementary liability, it may recover compensation from a third party.
Two
Plot recap
Facing the scoundrel Du Honggen, Li Li, the owner of Zhizhenyuan, took out an IOU, which stated: Du Honggen had borrowed 300,000 yuan from Mr. Bao. The arrogant Du Honggen was instantly deflated when he saw it.
Can holding an IOU prove the existence of a private lending relationship between the two parties?
The judge interprets the law
Whether the existence of a private lending relationship between the parties can be determined on the basis of IOUs, receipts, IOUs and other creditor's rights vouchers requires comprehensive consideration of the type and nature of the creditor's rights vouchers, as well as whether the creditor's rights vouchers are sufficient to determine the existence of a loan agreement between the parties and whether the loan has been actually delivered. If one party denies the existence of a loan agreement and provides relevant evidence to prove that the money exchange between the two parties is based on other legal relationships, the court should further examine whether there is a loan agreement between the two parties.
Legal Links
Civil Code of the People's Republic of China
Article 667: A loan contract is a contract in which the borrower borrows money from the lender and returns the loan at maturity and pays interest.
Article 679: A loan contract between natural persons shall be formed when the lender provides the loan.
Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Private Lending Cases
Article 14: Where a plaintiff initiates a private lending lawsuit on the basis of an IOU, receipt, IOU, or other proof of creditor's rights, and the defendant raises a defense or counterclaim based on the underlying legal relationship, and provides evidence to prove that the creditor's rights dispute is not caused by private lending, the people's court shall try the case in accordance with the basic legal relationship on the basis of the ascertained facts of the case.
The provisions of the preceding paragraph do not apply to creditor's rights and debts agreements reached by the parties through mediation, conciliation or liquidation.
Three
Plot recap
Mr. Fan registered the trademark of "Sanyang" and produced a kind of burnt mercerized cotton T-shirt, which became a hot-selling brand under the marketing and operation of Mr. Bao. Since then, Ma Boss's factory has also produced a batch of high-imitation T-shirts, which have been labeled with the "Sanyang" trademark and sold in the market.
What kind of responsibility does a behavior like the boss in the play need to bear?
The judge interprets the law
"Sanyang" is a registered trademark, and the use of the "Sanyang" trademark on the same kind of goods without the permission of the trademark registrant is a situation of using the registered trademark of others without permission, which infringes the exclusive right to use the registered trademark of the trademark owner, and shall bear legal liability such as compensation for losses in accordance with the law. At the same time, if the circumstances are serious or the amount of illegal gains is relatively large, such an act of affixing the "three sheep" cards as false and real may be investigated for criminal responsibility.
Legal Links
Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China
Article 57: Any person who commits any of the following acts shall be deemed to have infringed the exclusive right to use a registered trademark:
(1) Without the permission of the trademark registrant, using a trademark identical to its registered trademark on the same kind of goods;
(2) Without the permission of the trademark registrant, using a trademark similar to its registered trademark on the same kind of goods, or using a trademark identical or similar to its registered trademark on similar goods, which is likely to cause confusion;
(3) Selling goods that infringe upon the exclusive right to use a registered trademark;
(4) Forging or manufacturing the logos of others' registered trademarks without authorization, or selling counterfeit or unauthorized trademarks;
(5) Replacing the registered trademark without the consent of the trademark registrant and putting the goods with the replaced trademark on the market;
(6) deliberately facilitating the infringement of others' exclusive right to use a trademark, or helping others to infringe on the exclusive right to use a trademark;
(7) Causing other damage to the exclusive right to use a registered trademark of another person.
Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China
Article 213: Whoever, without the permission of the owner of the registered trademark, uses a trademark identical to the registered trademark on the same kind of goods or services, and if the circumstances are serious, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years and/or a fine, and if the circumstances are especially serious, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years and shall also be fined.
Article 214: Whoever sells goods that he knows to be counterfeit registered trademarks, and the amount of unlawful gains is relatively large or there are other serious circumstances, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years and/or a fine;
Four
Plot recap
After the death of Boss Jin, Mrs. Lin went to the Jin Meilin Hotel to collect the 200,000 debts he owed, Lu Meilin refused to pay off on the grounds of "who borrows and who pays back", Mrs. Lin asked: "Are you husband and wife?" Lu Meilin was speechless.
Should Lu Meilin be liable for her husband's debts?
The judge interprets the law
In the play, the amount of Boss Jin's loan far exceeded the daily needs of ordinary families at that time, and its purpose was to use it for stock speculation with his lover, not for the common life of husband and wife or production and operation, so the above loan should not be recognized as a joint debt of husband and wife, and Lu Meilin, as a non-debtor, should not be liable for the repayment of this debt.
Legal Links
Civil Code of the People's Republic of China
Article 1064: Debts incurred by both husband and wife as a result of a joint signature of the husband and wife or an expression of common intent by one of the husband and wife after the fact, as well as debts incurred by one of the husband and wife in his or her own name during the existence of the marital relationship for the daily needs of the family, are joint debts of the husband and wife.
Debts incurred by one of the spouses in his or her own name during the existence of the marital relationship in excess of the daily needs of the family are not joint debts of the husband and wife, unless the creditor can prove that the debts were used for the common life of the husband and wife, joint production and business, or based on the common intention of the husband and wife.
Contributed by: Changping Court
Editor: Lin Xiaoping, Guo Jin
Review: Zhang Zhongtao