On September 14, 2022, the Second Department of Anti monopoly Law Enforcement of the State Administration of Market Supervision and Administration announced the "Notice of the State Administration of Market Supervision and Administration on the Decision of the State Administration of Market Supervision and Administration on Approving the Anti monopoly Review of the New Joint Venture Case between Shanghai Airport (Group) Co., Ltd. and Eastern Airlines Logistics Co., Ltd. with Additional Restrictive Conditions". The case has attracted considerable attention from the public. Because it is not only the first time that China's antitrust law enforcement authorities have imposed restrictive conditions on the merger and acquisition of two Chinese enterprises, but also the first case of conditional concentration of operators in the civil aviation cargo industry and the airport industry, which deserves the attention of state-owned enterprises, as well as civil aviation cargo, logistics, and airport related enterprises.

When the people's court decides to accept a bankruptcy application, the execution money that has been deducted from the account of the execution court but has not yet been paid to the applicant for execution appears to have been out of the actual control of the person subjected to execution. Can it be considered that the execution money has been paid to the applicant for execution?Or does the execution amount still belong to the bankruptcy property of the person subjected to execution?This article will reveal the answer to this question through the analysis of relevant cases.

一、信托进入不良资产处置的路径讨论目前不良资产企业及信托公司积极的介入了房产企业的不良资产管理业务。本月中信信托首单资产隔离财产权信托项目成功落地，“中信信托·顺义上和府财产权信托项目”、“中信信托·密云上河院财产权信托项目”于8月份在中国信登完成了初始登记。该项目为中信信托、中信银行与中信城开共同设立的业内首单以资产隔离为目的，以项目底层资产作为信托财产的财产权信托项目，通过运用信托机制，落实“

一、什么是S基金顾名思义，有二级（secondary）的基金，则对应应该有一级（primary）的基金。在传统的一级基金（primary fund）的场景里，投资人认购基金发行的份额，承诺根据基金管理人的打款通知支付投资款，以供基金管理人投资单体项目（单体模式）或挑选项目投资（盲池模式），等待项目成熟退出后获得基金分配的收益和本金。与按照一般性募集程序发行的一级基金（primary fund）相比，S基金则是专注于投资私募股权投资二级市

After the "owner's loan suspension" incident in July 2022, the CBRC issued three voice responses, and on July 28, 2022, the "guaranteed delivery building" was written into the Politburo meeting document. This means that "ensuring the delivery of the building" has become the top priority of real estate work this year.

According to the provisions of Interpretation II of the Company Law, if a shareholder of a limited liability company is negligent in performing its liquidation obligations, resulting in the loss of the company's main assets, account books, important documents, etc., and is unable to carry out liquidation, thereby causing losses to the company's creditors, the creditors have the right to petition the shareholders to assume joint and several liabilities. However, neither the law nor the judicial interpretation clearly stipulates the starting point of the limitation of action for disputes over corporate liquidation liability, and there is considerable controversy over this issue in practice. So, when should the limitation of action for disputes over corporate liquidation liability be calculated? This article will clarify the answer to this question through two classic cases.

《刑法修正案九》审议通过后，虚假诉讼罪被列入刑法调整范围。近年来，虚假诉讼案件呈高发趋势。笔者通过中国裁判文书网和威科先行等工具进行检索，获取北京市2016-2021年间虚假诉讼罪裁判文书共63份，发现北京市虚假诉讼罪案件在数量、时空分布等方面存在一定的特点，故以此作为样本具有一定的代表性。在样本选择过程中，关键词锁定为虚假诉讼罪，案由筛选选择刑事案件，地域选择北京市，检索后排除重复、无效样本，实际有效一审

For example, in the (2017) Hu 0110 Min Chu Case No. 5113, the court held that although the "Contract for the Joint Production of the 30-episode TV Series

Recently, a personal insurance contract dispute case we represented was tried by the People's Court of Chaoyang District, Beijing, and the Beijing Financial Court. The case was finally settled through mediation. Although the case is concluded, the legal issues involved in the case are still worth considering.