1、Brief Introduction to the Case
The plaintiff A Construction Engineering Co.,Ltd.and the defendant B Real Estate Co.,Ltd.signed and filed a Construction Engineering Construction Contract for a certain project on May 1,2011 through the bidding process.The filing contract agreed that the dispute resolution method was"applying to an arbitration committee for arbitration".On July 20,2011,the two parties signed a separate Construction Engineering Construction Contract,The contract stipulates that the dispute resolution method is"if mediation fails,bring a lawsuit to the people's court with jurisdiction in a certain city according to law.".The two parties actually performed in accordance with the"Construction Contract for Construction Projects"signed on July 20th,2011.After the project involved in the case was completed and passed the completion acceptance,the two parties confirmed that the settlement cost was RMB 72200000 yuan.The defendant still owed the plaintiff RMB 8700000 yuan for the project,which was not paid.Repeated demands were unsuccessful.Therefore,the defendant will be informed to the People's Court of C with jurisdiction at the project location.Before the first hearing,the defendant raised an objection to the court,Considering that the case should be arbitrated by an arbitration commission in accordance with the dispute resolution method agreed upon in the filed bid winning contract,we request that the plaintiff's lawsuit be dismissed.

It is a normal phenomenon for shareholders and directors of a company to have differences of opinion on daily business management decisions.The collision and communication of different opinions can also help improve the ability and level of shareholders,directors,and company management to analyze and solve problems to a certain extent.However,if differences or contradictions develop to a level that cannot be reconciled,resulting in a deadlock in the operation of the company,the underlying issues reflected may be a lack of scientific design at the top level of the company or a lack of trust in each other's capabilities among shareholders and partners.The transformation of the Supreme Law from a single"dissolution of a company"in the"Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China"(II)to the application of a multi stage dispute resolution mechanism in the"Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China"(V)is also intended to promote the internal ability of companies to start from deeper causes,By restructuring the top-level design and consolidating the trust foundation between shareholders,we can fundamentally rebuild the resolution mechanism for decision-making differences,avoid the occurrence of company dissolution,ensure the sound development of the enterprise,and promote the stable operation of the social economy.

2018 is an important year for China's anti monopoly law enforcement.Firstly,2018 marks the tenth anniversary of the implementation of the Anti monopoly Law.Secondly,2018 has undergone significant changes in the anti monopoly law enforcement agencies,from the previous pattern where the National Development and Reform Commission,the Ministry of Commerce,and the State Administration of Industry and Commerce were responsible for anti monopoly law enforcement,to the unified responsibility of the State Administration of Market Supervision for anti monopoly law enforcement.Therefore,relevant business concentration There is a unified regulatory body for the review of monopoly agreements and abuse of market dominance.As of November 2018,the reform of the antimonopoly law enforcement agencies at the level of the General Administration of Market Supervision has been completed.The establishment of the General Administration of Market Supervision is expected to further promote the integration and allocation of resources,which is conducive to further unification and strengthening of antimonopoly law enforcement.

"The United States is now imposing tariffs on goods valued at$11 billion in the EU!"US President Trump threatened to tax EU products on social media on the 9th in retaliation for EU subsidies to Airbus.In response,the European Union said it would soon take retaliatory measures.US media say it is difficult to break out a comprehensive trade war between the US and Europe,but this matter undoubtedly further complicates bilateral economic and trade negotiations and will harm the already shaken US Europe relationship.

Suggestions on reviewing the legality of the"Administrative Measures for the Identification,Investigation and Punishment of Illegal Acts in Construction Project Contracting and Contracting"issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development:

At the beginning of 2019,the State Administration of Market Supervision announced the"Provisions on Prohibiting Monopoly Agreements(Draft for Comments)",which provides more comprehensive provisions on prohibited monopoly agreements,and the introduction of the"safe harbor"system is one of its very distinctive features.The introduction of safe harbor rules makes monopoly agreements that do not constitute significant restrictions on competition presumed not to exclude or restrict competition,thereby benefiting from the exemption of"safe harbor".The following is an interpretation of the specific provisions on the safe harbor system in the"Provisions on the Prohibition of Monopoly Agreements(Draft for Comments)",and a comparative analysis with similar foreign legislation.

main points:
In foreign trade investigations with China,the discriminatory treatment originally targeted at state-owned enterprises has extended to the entire industry under investigation or downstream industries.In this regard,Chinese enterprises and the government should be prepared for a long-term and arduous game.

Introduction:Since the beginning of 2004,he has become a practicing lawyer and has rich legal practice experience,specializing in construction engineering and real estate,corporate mergers and acquisitions,cultural creativity,and other professional legal fields.He has been or is working for China Resources Group,McDonald's China headquarters,Bank of China Hong Kong,Beijing Construction Engineering,Guangzhou Shenzhen Railway,Liantai Group,Shenzhen Zhongzhou Group,Shenzhen Wealth Group,Shenzhen Tianli Group,Shenzhen Golden Guanghua Group,Haijixing Hengming Real Estate Group,Fenghuo Creativity,Seeing Culture,etc.provide professional legal services.

Huawei should not be surprised by the fact that Ms.Meng has been detained and faces extradition.The duration of bail hearings and the conditions of bail appear to be relatively harsh and rare.In fact,Canadian courts rarely refuse bail,except for a few highly harmful and malignant criminal offences.The Canadian Federal Criminal Code does not provide for discriminatory treatment even for non residents who are formally charged with criminal charges,based on the principle of the presumption of innocence.Ms.Meng has not even been criminally charged or convicted by the United States.This is a prerequisite for requesting extradition and arrest.These prerequisites are not met.The party requesting extradition clearly relies on the"temporary arrest"clause of Article 11 of the US Canada Extradition Treaty,"Emergency Moments".If the United States Department of Justice cannot submit the documents and evidence required by the treaty within 45 days,the Canadian courts must restore Meng's personal freedom.Fortunately and unfortunately,bail and extradition defenses require a high level of defense,requiring not only a comprehensive understanding and analysis of the integrity and reliability of extradition documents in a very short period of time,but also a profound understanding of the political and economic factors in the relations of the relevant countries,and a good and spotless legal counsel practice record.In addition to the court systems of both countries,extradition cases also directly involve the administrative,diplomatic,and law enforcement departments of at least two countries.The extradition law is ancient and brand new,belonging to the modern cold weapon.A slight carelessness may turn a live case into a dead case,making it difficult to overturn it.