By Antitrust & Competition Group

On 23 December 2013, the All China Lawyers Association (ACLA) announced the establishment of the Antitrust Committee, showing that antitrust law has been recognized by the legal community in China as an important segment of the Chinese legal system.

The ACLA is the association of all admitted PRC lawyers.  It was established in 1986 according to the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Lawyers.  The newly established Antitrust Committee is one of the 22 professional committees under the ACLA.  Professional committees are responsible for providing guidance to lawyers regarding their practice, providing opinions and suggestions in the legislation process, and organizing workshops and conferences for communication of the latest development of the law.  We believe that the Antitrust Committee will provide a platform among antitrust practitioners, enforcement agencies, the judiciary and the academics and will play an active role in facilitating development of antitrust law in China. Continue Reading All China Lawyers Association Launched Antitrust Committee

作者：郑志斌、张婷 金杜律师事务所破产、重组与清算组

我国立法规定重整期间以管理人管理模式为原则，实践中绝大多数重整公司都是采用这种模式。具体到上市公司，截至2011年12月31日，中国已有34家上市公司进入重整程序，宏盛科技、中核钛白目前还未明确管理模式，其余32家公司中只有6家公司采取了债务人自行管理模式 ，其余26家公司都是管理人管理模式。管理人掌握公司的经营控制权，使原有股东大会、董事会和监事会的职权发生变化，董事会与经营管理层的委托代理关系中断，从而使股东丧失了控制公司的渠道。

（一）管理人行使重整期间的经营控制权

1、管理人取代原董事会的主要职权

根据《破产法》规定，管理人职权包括：接管债务人的财产、印章和账簿、文书等资料；调查债务人财产状况，制作财产状况报告； Continue Reading 管理人管理模式下公司控制权的变化——公司重整制度中的股东权益系列五

作者:郑志斌、张婷 金杜律师事务所破产、重组与清算组

根据《破产法》的规定，法院在重整程序中起着重要作用，重整期间的重大事项几乎都需要法院最终确认。法院全面监督管理人、债务人履行职责，即使债权人会议未表决通过重整计划，法院也可以依法强制批准，法院还能够决定重整的最终走向，在一定条件下，法院可不经利害关系人申请，直接裁定终止重整程序，宣告债务人破产。可以说，法院可能从来没有像在重整程序中如此全面、具体地介入到公司治理结构之中。根据我国《破产法》，法院职权可以归纳为以下几个方面：

1、对重整中主要法定程序拥有决策权

对于重整申请法院依法进行审查，有权决定重整程序能否启动。在受理重整申请后，只要在程序终结前，如果经审查发现债务人不符合法律规定的受理条件的，法院都可以裁定驳回申请。 Continue Reading 法院在重整程序中的地位——公司重整制度中的股东权益系列四

作者：尤杨、蔺楷毅、赵之涵 金杜律师事务所争议解决组

前言：信托兑付方面的案件近年呈上升趋势，相关业务由于出风险较多，也是媒体和法律界比较热门热门的话题，本专题拟集中探讨信托兑付领域的法律争议问题和实务中对各类风险和争议的处理技巧。

一、信托计划有关《支付协议》类文本的作用和意义

信托公司在设立信托计划时，经常会与融资方、融资方实际控制人等就将来债务偿还事宜办理强制执行公证（下称“强执公证”）。强执公证对于信托公司的好处显而易见：一旦交易对手不按期履约或履约不适当，信托公司无需通过诉讼程序即可直接向公证机构申请出具执行证书，进而向人民法院申请强制执行。 Continue Reading 信托实务专题之（一）：信托计划有关《支付协议》类文件的起草原则和技巧

作者：郑志斌、张婷 金杜律师事务所破产、重组与清算组

一、股东在破产清算中的地位和权利

破产清算是指在债务人丧失偿债能力时，经利害关系人的申请，在人民法院的主持下，强制执行债务人的全部财产，公平清偿全体债权人的法律程序或制度。

重整与破产清算有许多相同之处：第一，二者性质相同，同为特别程序而非一般民事诉讼程序；第二，二者均体现了债权人公平清偿这一原则；第三，两种程序的开始均以申请为原则；第四，程序开始后的效果是一致的，即与债务人财产有关的一切民事诉讼程序及执行程序中止；第五，程序开始的原因都有债务人不能清偿到期债务。 Continue Reading 股东在公司重整中的法律地位——公司重整制度中的股东权益系列三

作者：郑志斌、张婷 金杜律师事务所破产、重组与清算组

股东作为债务人的出资人，在公司进入重整的情况下，股东与债权人的利益冲突异常尖锐，股东的地位较重整前受到严重冲击。然而，重整程序中股东的地位与破产清算中股东的地位又有着很大的区别。股东法律地位的变化导致了具体的股东权的变化。

一、重整前股东依据公司法享有的地位和权利

股东权是基于股东资格而依法享有的权利。通常包括：重大事项表决权；选举公司董事权、监事权；管理监督权；分派股利权；优先认股权；股份转让权；剩余财产分配权等。根据股东平等原则，任何股东均享有股东权，非依法律和章程规定，任何人不得予以剥夺。但是，股东地位平等并非其权限大小完全相同。 Continue Reading 股东权在公司重整程序中面临诸多限制——公司重整制度中的股东权益系列二

By Susan Ning, Kailun Ji and Kate Peng


Although the antimonopoly enforcement in China is still in its formative years, the significant progress made by China’s antimonopoly regulators has brought about far-reaching impacts on companies doing business in China.  Recently, the three anti-monopoly regulators, i.e. the National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC“), the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (“SAIC“) and the Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM“) published their latest enforcement achievements, and NDRC for the first time disclosed its case volume to the public.

Continue Reading Chinese antitrust regulators provided updates on their enforcement activities

By Susan Ning, Liu Jia and Kate Peng

China’s famous producers of premium liquor, Kweichow Moutai Co Ltd. (Maotai) and Wuliangye Group Co., Ltd. (Wuliangye) recently announced that they would correct their behaviors suspicious of AML violation.  The corrections were said to be made after the companies being “inspected” by the National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC”) and the relevant provincial pricing administration. It has been the hottest topic on China’s Anti-monopoly Law (the “AML”) after the resounding LCD panel case closed by NDRC in early this month.

Maotai and Wuliangye are both famous Chinese premium liquor brands and the price of their products is relatively high in tradition.  In early January, the companies issued notices respectively announcing punishments on the distributors who sold their products at a price below the lowest resale price set by the companies.  Maotai also punished the distributors who made cross-regional sales. It is reported that the chairman of Maotai even stated in a recent countrywide distributor meeting that the retail price of Feitian Maotai can not be less than 1,519 yuan and the price of group-purchase can not be less than 1,400 yuan, and that Moutai would sternly punish those who breach the price “fortress”.  Continue Reading NDRC Say No to Resale Price Maintenance – Company should be Cautious on Pricing Strategy

By Mark Schaub, Sun Liang, Wang Ni and Melanie Stoeckert  King and Wood Mallesons’ Corporate  Group

On 17 December 2012 the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”) promulgated the Guiding Opinions on Promoting Brand Consumption in China (the “Opinions”). The Opinions are not particularly interesting for what they do but for what they signal as to MOFCOM’s attitude towards brands, and in particular the importance placed upon the building and developing of Chinese brands.

The main concepts embodied in the Opinions are as follows:

Brands Matter

It is clear on a number of fronts, that the Chinese authorities are not content with China being relegated to producing for foreign brand owners or for producing no-name brand products. Continue Reading Go Forth and Build Brands in China

By Jiang Junlu and Jin Shan King and Wood Mallesons’ Labor & Employment Group

We receive a bunch of unwanted text messages, email spam, commercial calls and mail solicitations every day. All of a sudden, our identities and personal contact information are exposed in public, used by some individuals and institutions for illegitimate purposes with our permissions. We are all the victims of their illegalities.

On December 28, 2012, the Decision regarding Strengthening the Protection of Internet Information (the “Decision”) was passed by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, which was implemented on the same date. The era of online information protection begins. Continue Reading How to Protect Our Online Personal Information