VIP Class Notes (Ally)

Vocabulary

rebellion: 叛逆

unintentionally: not based on intent

technicalities: details

My mom didn’t influenced because she retired.
My mom wasn’t influenced much because she is retired.

They have to save themselves by themselves.
They have to figure out a way to save themselves.

If they have the problem to buy oxygen.
If they have the problem of buying oxygen.
If they cannot acquire enough oxygen on their own

Today I will talk about an interesting case regarding distributor contract dispute.

Case Background： These
is the first case after Acea integration. Sales team unintentionally found out that one of our
resellers sold Acea reagents beyond the agreed region in the executed Distributor
contract. Because of/Due to the reseller’s default, we unilaterally terminated the DR contract.
The reseller was extremely angry when they received our termination letter. They
thought we were the ones that broke the contract and not them, and they were determined to sue us. They
hired attorneys who flew 2000 kilometers across China in
order to bring the suit against us. They claimed we should indemnify their damage
which is more than 2 million.

Difficulties: The biggest difficulty we
have here providing evidence. We didn’t have any direct evidence that can prove the
reseller had sold outside of the agreed region. The reseller also knew about this. They
knew it was impossible for us to get such evidence because we couldn’t know who exactly was the end-user they sold to.

The strategy of our Respondence in this case: Of course, the
basic rule under civil law is “Who advocates who proves “ and it looks like we need
to provide the evidence to support our termination. But this not the case
here. The object of the disputed contract are reagents. Reagents are not a normal
good. They are directly related to human health and are strictly supervised by the
government. As such/So, the reseller has the responsibility to establish a Sales Record System under Chinese jurisdiction. In other words, the reseller should bear the burden
of the providing evidence of their sales record. So we counterclaimed that the reseller pay
us the liquidated damages for they broke the contract.

Result: The court fully supported our claim; they thought the burden of proof should be held by the reseller. The
court held that since the reseller couldn’t prove the actual end-user, so the court had reasonable doubt that the reseller sold outside of the agreed region.
The court made the decision that the reseller needed to compensate us 300K.