On the afternoon of June 30, 2021, the second instance hearing for a dispute over the request to change company registration information was held at the Shanghai First Intermediate People’s Court. Our lawyers, representing the majority shareholder of the company, appeared in court as a third party to the original trial.

The appellant in this case was the chairman and legal representative of the company, as well as an indirect shareholder, director and former treasurer.The appellant claimed that they did not actually hold any position in the company, did not participate in its management, and were merely a "nominal" legal representative. They also stated that they had resigned from the company and therefore requested the court to remove their name from the "legal representative" field in the company’s business registration records.

In reality, the appellant was not merely a "nominal" legal representative. They were appointed as chairman and legal representative by the company’s shareholders’ meeting in accordance with the Articles of Association and were fully responsible for the company’s management and operations, controlling the company’s seal, business license, financial records, and other important documents. The company ceased operations in October 2017 and had its business license revoked in April 2019.

The first instance court ruled that the removal of registration could only be supported if the legal representative registration was inconsistent with the facts. The appellant failed to provide evidence that the company had passed a resolution to replace the legal representative and should therefore continue to fulfill their duties. Additionally, objectively, it is impossible to complete the business registration change procedures while the company’s business license is revoked.

During the second instance hearing, we presented arguments on whether the appellant was a "nominal" legal representative and whether the registration could be removed given the revocation of the company’s business license.

Currently, there is no unified judicial standard nationwide for cases involving the removal of registration. Such cases involve not only civil legal relationships but also administrative legal relationships. The realization of registration removal requires coordination between judicial and administrative authorities at the institutional level, and many practical issues remain to be explored.