In March 2022, the outbreak of the epidemic in Shanghai caused most enterprises to stop production. As the epidemic was gradually controlled, Shanghai has successively released a number of "white lists" of enterprises that resumed work and production. Meanwhile, Shanghai and various districts have also issued guidelines for industrial and commercial enterprises to resume work and production. However, enterprises that resumed work and production are limited to five categories: urban operation support, epidemic prevention material support, important function support, continuous production operations, and supporting infrastructure support. In a short period of time, employees of enterprises that have resumed work may not be able to return to work normally due to epidemic prevention and control measures, resulting in short-term job shortages in enterprises that have resumed work, while a large number of labor forces in enterprises that have not yet resumed work are idle. Under this short-term employment conflict, if the idle labor force of enterprises that have not yet resumed work is transferred to those that have not yet resumed work, on the one hand, it can help the enterprises that have resumed work to resume production smoothly; On the other hand, enterprises that have not resumed work can continue to enjoy employment subsidy support, reducing the pressure on wage payment. The author of this article analyzes the legal relationship under the "shared employment" model in order to provide guidance for enterprises to share employment.

The COVID-19 is raging, and various regions have taken different closure and control measures, and closure and control have also had an impact on the signing of contracts between enterprises. In general, when a contract is concluded in the form of a contract, both parties need to sign, seal, or fingerprint the contract. During the pandemic, affected by containment measures, the parties to the contract may not be able to sign the same contract. If one party signs and seals the contract and sends the scanned copy to the other party by email, and the other party signs and seals the scanned copy before sending it back by email, is the contract concluded in this way valid?

Since late March 2022, the highly infectious new variant of novel coronavirus, Omikron, has made the situation of epidemic prevention and control in Shanghai more serious. Shanghai people actively responded to the call of the government, strictly implemented the prevention and control policy of "staying at home", and pressed the pause button for entertainment and cultural activities, which has also had a huge impact on Shanghai, a city famous for rich cultural and recreational activities, One of the most representative is that various exhibition activities are difficult to hold as scheduled. Given that the specific time for the extension of the exhibition cannot be determined, there are also many confusion between the exhibitors and the organizers on how to properly handle the performance of the exhibition contract. This article mainly summarizes the guiding opinions in judicial practice on issues related to the inability of the exhibition contract signed between the organizers and the exhibitors to be held on time due to epidemic prevention and control requirements, With a view to helping both parties properly handle disputes over exhibition contracts.

In the past few years, I have participated in M&A transactions, and I feel that Chinese companies are increasingly using lockbox mechanisms (or de facto lockbox mechanisms) to complete M&A transactions in the process of overseas M&A. This is also consistent with the trend observed by practitioners in other regions of the world (Ireland, the United Kingdom, South Africa, and other places). As a Chinese practitioner, I would like to make some observations on this trend.

Question 1: The man and the woman have entered into an engagement, and the man has given the bride price to the woman. After the woman contracted COVID-19, can the man repent and ask for the return of the bride price?

According to the provisions of the Company Law, the expiration of the business term specified in the company's articles of association is one of the reasons for the dissolution of the company. If the company is dissolved due to the expiration of the business term, a liquidation group should be established within 15 days from the date of the occurrence of the reason for dissolution to begin self liquidation. The question is, if the company's business term has expired but has not yet been dissolved, can its shareholders or creditors directly apply to the people's court for compulsory liquidation of the company on the grounds that the company has not established a liquidation team to conduct liquidation within the time limit? This article reveals the answer to this question through a case of the Supreme People's Court.

The epidemic situation of novel coronavirus pneumonia (hereinafter referred to as "COVID-19"), which broke out in Wuhan, Hubei Province in January 2020, has developed rapidly and spread throughout the country. At that time, the whole country was fighting the epidemic; After the epidemic has been effectively controlled, it has entered the normalization stage of epidemic resistance.

Recently, I watched a movie called "Secret Visitor", and due to the professional sensitivity of legal professionals, I began to think about an interesting plot in it: the male host's son died in a school bus accident, and the school bus driver was found to have no legal responsibility after trial. The male host couldn't accept this reality, so he took the school bus driver who had been in a coma for a long time to his basement. When the driver woke up, he told him that he was wanted for legal responsibility for the car accident. The driver was afraid of going to jail, so he asked the host to take him in. The host agreed to let him stay in the basement, but made him think about turning himself in. The male host collected all the TV and newspapers at home, keeping the driver informed of the outside situation. In this way, the driver has been cheated and spent three years in the basement of the man's house until he learned the truth later.

On April 19, 2022, the Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau reported a case of illegal business of driving up prices: after investigation, since April 10, the suspect Gao has illegally rented others' food business license to open a shop on the network platform, stockpiled a large number of vegetables, eggs, chickens, ducks and other food, and significantly raised the price for external sales, with a cumulative sales of more than 1.75 million yuan and an illegal profit of more than 1.5 million yuan. At present, suspect Gao has been taken criminal coercive measures by Jing'an police according to law due to his suspicion of illegal business operation, and the case is under further investigation.