Brief introduction of the case: Xu Baotong's lawyer team of Shanghai Jinkun Law Firm is handling a labor contract dispute, and entrusts Xu Baotong's lawyer team to ** the first-instance litigation and second-instance litigation stages. Since the employee did not file a pre-litigation property preservation, when the first-instance judgment was changed to the labor arbitration result, the defendant employer appealed, and the plaintiff was worried that the second-instance trial would be long, and if the company's capital chain was poor and it was unable to pay compensation after the end of the second-instance trial. In order to resolve the problem, Xu Baotong's lawyer team conducted a simple legal communication with the judge of the first instance, found a notice that the unit was being relocated, and a notice of substantial layoffs, and submitted it to the court of first instance as the urgency and necessity of preservation. In the end, it was recognized by the court of first instance and obtained the preservation ruling.
1. Legal provisions.
Article 161 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on the Application of the "Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" (effective as of April 10, 2022) In cases where a party appeals against a first-instance judgment, and before the second-instance people's court receives the reported case, the party has transferred, concealed, sold, or damaged property, and it is necessary to employ preservation measures, the first-instance trial court is to take them upon the application of the parties or ex officio. The preservation ruling of the first-instance trial court shall be promptly reported to the second-instance trial court.
2. Summary. When Xu Baotong and the lawyer team discussed the case internally, they summarized the experience of handling the case, and when communicating with the judge, they should look for the source of the law, and communicate and discuss with the judge with the law and the corresponding facts of the case.