杨浩云

Lawyer Yang Haoyun has been engaged in legal practice since 2014. During my practice, I have provided long-term legal advisory services to numerous real estate development companies, construction labor service companies, engineering consulting companies, and property management companies. I have assisted these companies in establishing compliance systems and employment risk assessment systems to avoid both external business risks and internal employment risks. In addition, Lawyer Yang Haoyun has also represented various disputes in the civil and commercial fields. Including disputes over reputation rights, disputes over owners' right of revocation, disputes over owners' right to know, disputes over property rights protection, disputes over divided ownership of buildings, disputes over property service contracts, disputes over lease contracts, disputes over equity transfer contracts, disputes over construction project contracts, disputes over decoration and renovation project contracts, disputes over intermediary contracts, disputes over tort liability, labor disputes, and disputes over damage liability of labor providers. Disputes over motor vehicle accident liability, private lending disputes, divorce disputes, etc.

1. (Reputation dispute) Dai sued Chen, a member of the preparatory group, on behalf of the owner, for his reputation dispute. Finally, the Internet court supported the agent's opinion, determined that Chen's comments in the WeChat group infringed Dai's reputation right, ordered Chen to apologize to Dai for three consecutive days in the owner's WeChat group, and compensate Dai for all the expenses paid to protect his rights;

2. (Reputation dispute) Acting the owner Lin Mou sued the director of the community industry committee Xie Mou for the reputation dispute. Finally, the Internet court supported the agent's opinion, determined that Xie Mou's remarks constituted a reputation infringement, ordered Xie Mou to apologize to Lin in the owner's WeChat group, and compensate Lin for the reasonable expenses paid for protecting his rights;

3. (Reputation dispute) Acting owner Li was sued by members of the community industry committee Wang, Xie and Yang in the case of reputation dispute. Finally, the Internet court accepted the agent's opinion, and determined that Li's remarks belonged to the owner's right of supervision and criticism according to law, and did not constitute infringement, and rejected all claims of Wang, Xie and Yang against Li;

4. (Dispute over Victimization Liability of Labor Provider) The representative of All Day New Company was sued by the employee's family for civil compensation of more than 740000 yuan. In the end, Haizhu Court adopted the representative's opinion and determined that All Day New Company was not at fault for the death of employee Chen, and only compensated the family with a loss of 50000 yuan as a beneficiary of the activity;

5. (Infringement Liability Dispute) The agent of Zhonghai Property was sued by the owner Ke for personal and property losses totaling more than 1.52 million yuan caused by a house fire. In the end, the Dongguan court adopted the agent's opinion and determined that Zhonghai Property did not need to compensate Ke for property losses and only bore 30% of the fault liability for personal losses. In the end, only more than 30000 yuan was compensated to Ke, reducing the losses of Zhonghai Property by 1.49 million yuan;

6. (Property Rights Protection Dispute) Agent Huifeng Property was sued by the construction unit for possession and use fees totaling over 1.1 million yuan (30800 yuan/month) due to the occupation of the basement. Eventually, Baiyun Court adopted the agent's opinion and determined the rental value to be 17878 yuan/month through judicial appraisal of the rental value, without the need to pay pre litigation possession and use fees, reducing Huifeng Property's losses by over 1 million yuan;

7. (Dispute over Owners' Right to Know) Agent owner Pan sued a state-owned property company for a dispute over owners' right to know and filed twelve litigation requests. In the end, except for two litigation requests where the property company has evidence that has been publicly disclosed and clearly no litigation materials, the remaining eight litigation requests were all supported by the court;

8. (Contract dispute) Agency Yuhetian Company and Zeng had a dispute over compensation for their father's non work related death. In the end, Haizhu Court adopted the agent's defense and determined that the fees paid by Yuhetian Company's insured unit were the amount agreed upon in the "Agreement" signed by both parties. Zeng's request for Yuhetian Company to pay more than 110000 yuan in non work related death compensation was rejected;

9. (Contract dispute) Yisen Company was added as an executed party by Guo, and ultimately Yuexiu Court accepted the agent's defense that "Yisen Company's capital increase and reduction actions occurred after the formation of the debt between Guo and Huacui Company, and did not infringe on Guo's expected interests in Huacui Company's debt repayment ability", and ultimately ruled to reject Guo's application to add Yisen Company as an executed party;

10. (Lease contract dispute) Agent Senna Company was sued by a fitness center in Panyu for returning the deposit and compensating for losses of over 1.43 million yuan. In the end, Haizhu Court adopted the agent's defense and only required the return of the deposit and compensation for losses of 186000 yuan, reducing the company's losses by 1.25 million yuan;

11. (Partnership contract dispute) Agent Lianying Company was sued by Yang for being the affiliated party to bear the responsibility of returning 1.68 million yuan of partnership property. The court ultimately adopted the agent's defense and found that Lianying Company was not the payer of the project funds, nor did it hold the partnership property of Yang and others. Yang's claim that Lianying Company should bear joint and several liability for the unpaid project funds was rejected;

12. (Gift Contract Dispute) Representing Huang in a lawsuit against his sister Huang Yuan over a gift contract dispute, after the agent sorted and collected evidence, Yuexiu Court finally supported all of Huang's claims and determined that the gift contract was valid, and Huang could obtain nearly 16 million yuan in demolition benefits based on this judgment, even though the transfer of ownership of the homestead and above ground buildings had not been processed;

13. (Dispute over Equity Transfer Contract) Agent Liu was requested by Liu Mouping to pay nearly 490000 yuan in agency fees and 60000 yuan in legal fees. After collecting and organizing evidence and presenting multiple defense reasons, the Guangzhou Arbitration Commission ultimately only supported Liu Mouping's arbitration request for a total of more than 90000 yuan, reducing Liu Mouping's economic losses by more than 460000 yuan;

14. Yang sued car owner Cai and the insurance company for compensation of over 1.18 million yuan in a motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute. The court ultimately supported the plaintiff's claim and ordered the insurance company to compensate Yang nearly 1.16 million yuan.