Since late March 2022, the highly infectious new variant of novel coronavirus, Omikron, has made the situation of epidemic prevention and control in Shanghai more serious. Shanghai people actively responded to the call of the government, strictly implemented the prevention and control policy of "staying at home", and pressed the pause button for entertainment and cultural activities, which has also had a huge impact on Shanghai, a city famous for rich cultural and recreational activities, One of the most representative is that various exhibition activities are difficult to hold as scheduled. Given that the specific time for the extension of the exhibition cannot be determined, there are also many confusion between the exhibitors and the organizers on how to properly handle the performance of the exhibition contract. This article mainly summarizes the guiding opinions in judicial practice on issues related to the inability of the exhibition contract signed between the organizers and the exhibitors to be held on time due to epidemic prevention and control requirements, With a view to helping both parties properly handle disputes over exhibition contracts.

1、 Necessary Conditions for Cancellation of Exhibition Contract

The occurrence of an epidemic is not a sufficient and necessary condition for the termination of the exhibition contract. If a party to the contract invokes force majeure to request the termination of the exhibition contract, the following conditions must be met:

1. The exhibition time and location should be within the period and area from the government department's announcement of the initiation of the ban on public cultural and recreational activities to the lifting of the ban

Answer question 3 according to the Series of Questions and Answers of the Shanghai Higher People's Court on the Application of Law in Cases Involving the COVID-19 (II) (2020 Edition): "It is determined according to the actual impact of the COVID-19 on the performance of the contract, the realization of the purpose of the contract, or the exercise of the rights of the parties in the specific case. Generally, it can be determined according to the response time of the provincial people's government in the place where the contract is performed or where the parties are located to initiate and terminate the response to major public health emergencies. If the provincial people's government in the place where the parties are located or where the contract is performed fails to initiate the response to major public health emergencies, it can be determined according to the response time of "The time for the people's government to initiate and terminate the response to major public health emergencies shall be determined." Accordingly, if it is necessary to determine that the performance of the exhibition contract cannot be held as scheduled due to epidemic prevention and control, the exhibition time and place agreed in the exhibition contract should be within the period and area from the government department's announcement of the initiation of the ban on public cultural and entertainment activities to the removal of the ban measures. Otherwise, it is difficult to prove that the extension of the exhibition is due to the epidemic.

2. Epidemic prevention and control have made the fundamental purpose of exhibition contracts impossible to achieve

According to Article 3 (7) of the Several Opinions of the Shanghai High People's Court on Judicial Services to Ensure Epidemic Prevention and Control and Economic and Social Development, "contract disputes such as sales, leasing, tourism, accommodation, goods transportation, processing and contracting, and construction projects that are unable to perform or have a significant impact on the rights and interests of enterprises affected by the epidemic should be accurately understood in the Civil Code." Spirit, reasonably determining the responsibilities of all parties. For contract disputes where the parties request termination of the contract or exemption from liability for breach of contract based on the impact of the epidemic, accurately identify the temporal and spatial stages and scope of the epidemic, the causal relationship between anti epidemic prevention and control measures, and the breach or inability to perform the contract. According to the specific circumstances of the case, it is necessary to properly and prudently handle the case by layer and classification. If there is a malicious breach of contract, it is not easy to confirm the termination of the contract based on strict contractual responsibility; "In the event of force majeure or changes in circumstances and other relevant legal provisions, the dispute shall be properly handled based on the actual impact of the epidemic on the case." In addition, On April 1, 2022, the Shanghai Municipal Bureau of Justice also issued the "Guidelines on Issues Related to Contract Performance during the Epidemic Prevention and Control Period" (hereinafter referred to as the "Guidelines on Contract Performance Issues"), which states that "it was originally planned to hold a large-scale event in the near future, but it is now impossible to predict whether it will be held on schedule due to a sudden epidemic. Can this be understood as force majeure? How should the parties to the contract handle it?" "First of all, it is recommended to determine whether the current preparatory work directly affects the scheduled holding of subsequent formal activities. In other words, the inability to carry out the preparatory work directly leads to the inability or inability to hold subsequent formal activities as scheduled. If the preparatory work has a direct and irreplaceable decisive role in the holding of formal activities, it may constitute a situation of force majeure; however, if the difficulties of the preparatory work are not sufficient to guide "If the formal event cannot be held, or even if it cannot achieve the originally agreed contractual purpose, it may be difficult to identify it as force majeure."

Therefore, we believe that during the performance of exhibition contracts, if there is a sudden outbreak of epidemic prevention and control during the preparation process of the event, it is necessary to further determine whether the epidemic prevention and control measures will directly lead to the failure to achieve the purpose and effect of the formal exhibition event, that is, if only the short-term publicity work in the early stage is delayed to a certain extent, but does not lead to the failure of the long-term exhibition, Although the epidemic has caused some impact, but has not yet reached the point where the fundamental purpose of the contract cannot be achieved, it is difficult to claim the termination of the contract solely on the grounds of force majeure.

2、 Handling of Cancellation of Exhibition Contract

1. Timely notification and negotiation

During the performance of exhibition contracts, exhibition organizers typically undertake a series of tedious and complex tasks such as booking venues, early publicity, coordinating cargo transportation, and so on. According to Article 590 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "the Civil Code"): "If a party is unable to perform the contract due to force majeure, it shall be partially or wholly exempted from liability based on the impact of force majeure, except as otherwise provided by law. If the contract is unable to be performed due to force majeure, it shall promptly notify the other party to mitigate the losses that may be caused to the other party, and shall provide evidence within a reasonable period of time. If force majeure occurs after the party's delay in performance, it shall not be exempted from liability for breach of contract.", If the organizer is unable to hold the exhibition on schedule due to force majeure during the preparation process, it is necessary to promptly communicate with the partner, notify the extension matters, and provide the policies and regulations issued by the relevant government departments as evidence. This notification obligation is a legal obligation, and it is recommended that the organizer promptly perform it to avoid disputes caused by increased losses to the exhibitors due to not timely notification. At the same time, both parties should promptly negotiate on solutions such as extension, change of location, or cancellation, and pay attention to retaining relevant evidence materials during the negotiation process.
2. The cancellation of the exhibition contract due to force majeure does not constitute the cancellation due to breach of contract, and the exhibitor has no right to require the organizer to bear the penalty for breach of contract

According to Article 590 of the Civil Code, if a party is unable to perform the contract due to force majeure, it shall be partially or completely exempted from liability based on the impact of force majeure, except as otherwise provided by law. In addition, Question 11 of the Series of Questions and Answers of the Shanghai Higher People's Court on the Application of Law in Cases Involving the COVID-19 (II) stipulates that artistic performances, concerts, sports competitions, etc. are canceled due to the epidemic situation. Because of the obvious gathering nature of such activities, and the outbreak of the epidemic situation constitutes force majeure for the performance of such contracts, the ticket buyer can apply to the organizer for ticket refund, Neither party shall be liable for breach of contract upon termination of the contract. Therefore, epidemic prevention and control is due to force majeure and not the unilateral fault of the organizer. If the exhibition contract is terminated due to force majeure, it is not appropriate for the organizer to pay additional liquidated damages to the exhibitor.

However, what deserves our attention is that according to Article 2 of the Guiding Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Proper Trial of Civil Cases Involving the COVID-19 in accordance with the Law (I), if a party claims partial or full exemption from force majeure, he shall bear the burden of proof on the fact that the force majeure directly led to partial or full inability to perform civil obligations. Based on this, we believe that exhibition organizers have the obligation to prove force majeure, and should pay attention to preserving the release of epidemic prevention and control policies and relevant evidence that they have fulfilled their obligations of timely notification and negotiation. If it is difficult to prove, they will bear the adverse consequences of not being able to prove it.

3. After the termination of the contract, the deposit, advance payment, or exhibition fees paid by the exhibitor shall be refunded

According to Item 2, Paragraph 5, Article 1 of the Guiding Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Proper Trial of Civil Cases Involving the COVID-19 in accordance with the Law (II) issued by the Supreme People's Court, "The people's court shall support the lessee's request to terminate the lease contract and return the advance payment or deposit for the temporary site lease contract reserved for specific purposes such as exhibitions, conferences, temple fairs, etc., when the epidemic situation or epidemic prevention and control measures lead to the cancellation of the activity." According to this, in judicial decisions, it is generally believed that if an exhibition contract is terminated due to force majeure, the exhibitor has not generally enjoyed relevant services or obtained contractual benefits due to participation, and therefore has the right to require the organizer to refund the deposit, advance payment, or all exhibition fees previously collected [1]

4. The costs paid by the organizer for the exhibition and the corresponding fees for the services enjoyed by the exhibitors shall be weighed and deducted from the refunded fees. The organizer shall bear the burden of proof for the paid costs

As mentioned earlier, in the process of signing exhibition contracts with exhibitors and preparing for exhibitions, the organizers often need to undertake many complex tasks such as early publicity, booking venues, coordinating goods transportation, and coordinating the transportation and accommodation of exhibitors. In these tasks, a large amount of costs may have been incurred. For example, if an exhibition cannot be held as scheduled due to force majeure due to the epidemic, it is not the organizers' wish, either, The organizers will also suffer significant losses as a result. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Question 1 of the Series of Questions and Answers of the Shanghai Higher People's Court on the Application of Law in Cases Involving the COVID-19 Epidemic (II), the handling of contract disputes involving the COVID-19 Epidemic should adhere to the principle of equity of interests and properly resolve conflicts and disputes. In the trial of specific cases, it is necessary to equally protect the legitimate rights and interests of all parties in accordance with the law, while actively guiding the parties to uphold the principles of mediation and consultation, mutual understanding and accommodation, sharing risks, and overcoming difficulties, properly resolve conflicts and disputes, and effectively safeguard economic development and social stability.

Therefore, in judicial decisions, it is generally believed that the sponsor has provided the corresponding fees for the relevant services to the exhibitors [2], as well as the expenses that the sponsor has paid for organizing the exhibition, and the people's court will, as appropriate, deduct them from the fees returned by the sponsor to the exhibitors.

In addition, the organizers should also pay attention to the following two points:

Firstly, the organizer shall bear the burden of proof for the corresponding fees received by the above exhibitors and the payment made by the organizer for the preparation of the exhibition. If the organizer fails to fulfill the burden of proof for the above two types of fees, if it is unable to provide corresponding contracts, invoices, payment vouchers, and other evidentiary materials, the occurrence of such fees will not be recognized by the people's court, and the organizer will bear the burden of failing to provide evidence on its own, That is, these expenses cannot be deducted from the repayable amount [3].

Secondly, in terms of deductibles, not all expenses incurred by the organizers related to the preparation of the exhibition can be deducted. In judicial practice, it is generally believed that such expenses must be actually incurred and necessary, and incurred due to the contract involved in the case. Generally, the expenses paid by the sponsor during the preparation process mainly include exhibition hall rental expenses, construction expenses, promotional expenses, website production expenses, travel and transportation expenses, catering and accommodation expenses, personnel salaries, entertainment expenses, office rental expenses, and so on. However, personnel salaries, entertainment expenses, and office rental expenses are the costs that the sponsor, as a normal enterprise, inevitably incurs, and are generally difficult to be included in the deductible range [4].

3、 Jurisdictional matters

Due to the particularity of the scale of exhibition activities, organizers often enter into exhibition contracts with dozens or even hundreds of exhibitors, so exhibition contracts generally use the format contracts provided by the organizers. In the format template of the exhibition contract provided by the general organizer, regarding dispute resolution matters, the organizer generally agrees to submit any dispute to the people's court of the organizer's location for litigation resolution. As for the jurisdictional agreement, the main disputes currently focus on how to determine the "host location" to clarify the jurisdiction court, and whether the jurisdictional agreement is invalid due to standard terms, as follows:

1. Determination of the corresponding jurisdiction court in the host's location

According to Article 35 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (Revised in 2021), parties to a contract or other property rights and interests dispute may, by written agreement, choose the jurisdiction of the people's court of the place where the defendant has his domicile, where the contract is performed, where the contract is signed, where the plaintiff has his domicile, where the subject matter is located, and other places that are actually related to the dispute, but may not violate the provisions of this Law on hierarchical jurisdiction and exclusive jurisdiction. Accordingly, the exhibition contract is not an exclusive jurisdiction. Without violating the level of jurisdiction, the parties have the right to make an agreement in the contract on the jurisdiction court in which future disputes arise. As mentioned earlier, in general exhibition contract disputes, as the exhibition contracts signed by the organizers and exhibitors are mostly format contracts provided by the organizers, the governing agreement is mainly reflected in the location of the organizers, and the actual place of operation is used as a footer or specified in the contact terms. In practice, due to considerations such as tax planning, many sponsors have different regions where their industrial and commercial registration places and actual business operations are located. In this case, the people's court generally believes that the address disclosed by the organizer in the exhibition contract concluded by both parties should be used as the connection point for determining the jurisdiction of the court.

2. The court of the host location where the agreed jurisdiction court is located is generally not only invalid due to standard terms

According to Article 496 of the Civil Code, if a contract is concluded using standard terms, the party providing the standard terms should follow the principle of fairness to determine the rights and obligations between the parties, and take reasonable measures to remind the other party of provisions that have a significant interest in the other party, such as exemption or mitigation of its responsibilities. The party providing the standard terms should explain the provisions in accordance with the other party's requirements. "If the party providing the standard terms fails to perform the obligation of presenting or explaining, resulting in the other party not paying attention to or understanding the terms that have a significant interest in it, the other party may claim that the terms do not become part of the contract.". Specifically, in the event of an exhibition contract dispute, if the exhibitor invokes some of the contract terms as standard terms provided by the organizer, which are not binding on it, it is necessary to satisfy that the content of the standard terms itself is a provision that exempts or alleviates the responsibility of the organizer and has a significant interest in the exhibitor. In judicial practice, people's courts generally believe that a jurisdiction agreement, even if it is a standard clause, does not exclude the main rights of the exhibitor, nor does it belong to a clause that specifically reminds the other party of the exemption or limitation of the responsibility of the provider of standard clauses. Therefore, it is generally difficult to obtain court approval for claiming that the agreement is invalid only on the grounds that the court with the jurisdiction of the agreement is the standard clause in the place where the main organizer is located.

epilogue

Admittedly, the COVID-19 in 2022 has brought more than a month's haze to Shanghai, a metropolis known for its colorful cultural and entertainment activities. People gathering activities, including exhibitions, have stagnated, which has caused varying degrees of losses to both the organizers and exhibitors. However, it is in this situation that enterprises of all parties should adhere to the principle of "mutual understanding and accommodation, sharing risks, and overcoming difficulties", strictly implement the epidemic prevention and control policy, watch out for each other, actively adopt mediation and reconciliation methods, share short-term difficulties, and jointly welcome the more colorful magic capital after the epidemic ends.

References and Notes:

[1] In the case of a dispute over the exhibition contract between Guangdong Meizhiyi Biomedical Technology Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Maotong Exhibition Service Co., Ltd. (Case No.: (2020) Hu 0112 Min Chu No. 29799), on November 29, 2019, Party A (organizer) Maotong Company signed an "Exhibition Contract" with Party B (exhibitor) Meizhiyi Company, agreeing that Party B shall participate in the Russian International Beauty Exhibition in April 2020. The exhibition will be held from April 23 to April 25, 2020. The booth fee is 500 euros/square meter * 9 (booth number 15-2), totaling 4500 euros; Registration fee of 400 euros per company, totaling 400 euros; The registration organization fee is 3000 yuan per company (3000 yuan has been discounted), totaling 0 yuan; The group fee for personnel is 16000 yuan/person * 3 (starting from Guangzhou, with a discount of 1000 yuan), totaling 47000 yuan. The total cost is 86200 yuan (booth fee of 4900 euros * 8=39200 yuan; personnel fee of 47000 yuan), and the deposit is 30000 yuan. Party B shall pay off the deposit for the booth or personnel within three working days, and shall not retain the booth beyond the time limit. The balance shall be paid off before February 23, 2020. Exhibition fees include: booth fees, registration fees, and group fees. Other expenses shall be handled in accordance with the exhibition instructions, confirmation letters for exhibition related matters, payment notices, and other agreements. Meanwhile, The "Exhibition Contract" stipulates that: "After the signing of the contract, if Party B proposes to withdraw from the exhibition, the deposit paid by Party B will not be refunded. If the actual expenses incurred by Party A exceed the deposit amount, Party A has the right to recover from Party B. Party B shall not change the exhibitors within 60 days before the exhibition starts, and any increase in expenses or impact on the exhibition caused by changing the exhibitors shall be borne by Party B. Party B's exhibitors shall set out in groups according to the unified itinerary customized by Party A, such as due to airlines, etc Party A shall not be responsible for flight delays or flight cancellations caused by force factors; Party B agrees to all exhibition rules and regulations of the organizer, strictly abides by the laws of China and the country where the exhibition is held, and is fully responsible for the behavior of the exhibitors; Party B agrees to the adjustment of Party B's booth and booth number by the exhibition organizing committee and the final interpretation right of the exhibition organizing committee; "Exhibitors' instructions, booth drawings, confirmation letters on exhibition related matters, application forms for standard booth configuration, and payment notices are annexes to this contract." On December 7, 2019, Meizhiyi Company paid a total deposit of 60000 yuan under the above two contracts to Maotong Company through bank transfer according to the agreement. On May 21, 2020, the Middle East (Dubai) International Beauty and Hairdressing World Expo 2020 hosted by Lankford Exhibition Middle East Co., Ltd. issued a notice of extension for the exhibition. The notice said that the exhibition was initially postponed to August 2020 due to the COVID-19, and announced that the new holding date was from November 23 to 25, 2020. The People's Court of Minhang District of Shanghai held that the deposit is a form of guarantee for the performance of the contract. Although the contract in question stipulates that the deposit will not be returned if the plaintiff withdraws, this clause does not apply to situations of force majeure. According to relevant laws and regulations, if a contract cannot be performed due to force majeure, it shall not bear civil liability. The plaintiff's claim for the defendant to return the deposit is supported by law

[2] In the case of a dispute over the service contract between Guangzhou Yiweizhou Trade Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Youtian Exhibition Service Co., Ltd. (Case No.: (2021) Hu 0112 Min Chu 9965), on August 23, 2019, the original defendant signed an "Application for Exhibition" to reach a consensus on the defendant's participation in the February 2020 Asian Clothing and Accessories Expo in Berlin, Germany (20202.18-2.20). The application (contract) agreed that:... Exhibition fee: 1 Booth fee: 30000 yuan/9 square meters x 1=30000 yuan; 2. Registration fee: 1000 yuan for enterprises; 3. Personnel fee: 21000 yuan/person=42000 yuan (including: international round-trip air tickets, foreign star class accommodation, transportation during foreign periods, tour guides, and guides); 4. Visa service fee: If we apply for a special offer of 1000 per person, please indicate that it does not include the visa fee charged by the consulate and the amount of insurance required for the visa. If we apply for it ourselves, the visa service fee will not be charged. Total discount: 73000 yuan. The exhibition terms of this application form agree as follows: 2. Once this application form is confirmed, Party B (the defendant) shall pay the booth deposit and registration fee of 20000 yuan only within two days, and within two days after the booth number is determined, Party B shall pay the remaining amount of the booth+30% advance payment for the personnel. The remaining amount shall be subject to the preparation process and Party A shall issue a separate payment notice. 5. In case of force majeure such as war, strikes, natural disasters, flight delays, etc., Party A shall not be responsible for the losses caused to Party B. 6. If the organizer cancels the exhibition, Party A (the plaintiff) will refund the booth fee to Party B, the registration fee will not be refunded, and the personnel fee will be refunded by 70%. The terms and conditions under the contract also stipulate matters such as personnel's refusal to sign and intellectual property rights. The People's Court of Minhang District of Shanghai held that the plaintiff's request for the return of exhibition fees should be supported, but the plaintiff should share the reasonable expenses incurred by the defendant in performing the contract before the contract was terminated. As for the expenses to be borne by the plaintiff, they must be actually incurred and necessary for the performance of the contract in this case. Since the defendant has already obtained visas for three persons for the plaintiff, the visa service fee of 3000 yuan should be deducted. For personnel fees, according to the exhibition application, the fees consist of international round-trip air tickets, foreign star accommodation, transportation during foreign periods, tour guides, and tour guides. Currently, as the defendant has not provided evidence to prove that the actual expenses have been incurred, considering the preparation work and expenses made by the defendant in performing the contract, it is determined that the plaintiff should bear a service fee of 5000 yuan to the defendant as appropriate. As for the registration fee and booth fee, as the plaintiff did not participate in the exhibition, and there is currently no sufficient and valid evidence to prove that the defendant has applied to the exhibition organizer for registration and confirmed the actual amount of the booth expenses, and the defendant has not supplemented relevant evidence according to law, the people's court will not accept the defendant's defense opinion that the fee has been incurred.

[3] In the Civil Case of Exhibition Contract Dispute between Zhejiang Qingyuan Oudi Industrial Co., Ltd. and Liu Xintong (Case No.: (2021) Hu 0116 Min Chu No. 7165), the plaintiff and the defendant Lan Ju Company signed a "Exhibitor Booth Contract for the 2020 Bologna International Beauty Exhibition, Italy" in 2019, agreeing that the plaintiff entrusted the defendant Lan Ju Company to handle the booth application for the 2020 Bologna International Beauty Exhibition, Italy, on behalf of the defendant, with a total cost of 119800 yuan, At the same time, it is agreed that the defendant must provide the plaintiff with a booth for the International Beauty Exhibition in Bologna, Italy, from March 12 to March 16, 2020, as agreed in the agreement; If the defendant fails to provide the plaintiff with a booth, the defendant will refund the booth fee paid by the plaintiff; If the exhibition cannot be conducted normally due to irresistible natural or man-made disasters such as war, famine, earthquake, etc., the plaintiff shall negotiate with the exhibition organizer on its own, and the defendant shall provide assistance and follow-up, but shall not bear joint liability. On November 29, 2019, the plaintiff paid the defendant 119800 yuan of fees under the contract through transfer. In this case, due to the defendant's absence and failure to submit defense opinions or evidentiary materials, the Shanghai Jinshan District People's Court ruled that the defendant should refund all fees and bear the loss of fund occupation during the period of not returning on time.

In the case of a dispute over the service contract between Jiangyin Rulong Biotechnology Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Gaodeng Commercial Exhibition Co., Ltd. (Case No.: (2020) Hu 0115 Min Chu No. 80904), on July 2, 2020, the plaintiff Rulong Co., Ltd., as Party B, entered into a contract involving the case with the defendant Gaodeng Co., Ltd., as Party A, Both parties agree that Party B shall participate in the 2020 Yiwu International Epidemic Prevention Material Procurement Fair held by Party A as the executive agency of the exhibition and held at the Volunteer International Expo Center from August 3 to 5, 2020. Party A provides 3 of the exhibition number A004 × 3 standard booths, 4; Party B shall pay Party A a booth fee of 39200 yuan within 2 working days after signing the contract involved, i.e. before July 4, 2020. Article 3 of this agreement stipulates that the agreement shall take effect after Party B has paid off all the exhibition fees, and the breaching party shall bear the losses caused by the other party's breach of contract. On July 2, 2020, the plaintiff, Rulong Company, paid the defendant, Gaodeng Company, a booth fee of 39200 yuan. On July 31, 2020, Zhang Mou, an employee of the sales department of the defendant Gordon Company, informed the plaintiff through WeChat that Rulong Company had delayed the exhibition in Yiwu due to the epidemic, and the venue of the exhibition was changed to Shanghai. The plaintiff refused to participate in the Shanghai exhibition. In the trial, the defendant Gordon Company raised the defense that the change of venue was caused by the force majeure of the COVID-19 and that it had paid the preliminary expenses for the exhibition in question. In this regard, the Shanghai Pudong New Area People's Court held that the defendant Gordon Company did not provide any evidence to prove the above factual claims, and the contract involved was signed in July 2020, Therefore, at the time of contracting, both parties had already anticipated the COVID-19 epidemic, which may affect the holding of the exhibition; Therefore, the defendant Gaodeng Company's aforementioned defense reasons lack factual basis, and the People's Court will not accept them.

[4] In the case of dispute over the exhibition contract between Shanghai Xinle Culture and Technology Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Daoyue Industry Co., Ltd. (Case No.: (2020) Hu 0107 Min Chu No. 11040), the plaintiff (as the exhibitor) and the defendant (as the organizing committee) reached a consensus on participating in the "Dubai Electronic Cigarette International Exhibition" organized by the defendant. For this reason, the defendant made the "Exhibition Contract" on September 18, 2019 and sealed it at the signing place before handing it over to the plaintiff. The contract stipulates: "... 1. The exhibitor shall pay 50% of the fee after signing the contract, and will not retain its original exhibition booking if it is overdue. The remaining 50% of the payment should be paid before February 10, 2020... 4. Attached is the Supplementary Instructions." Also an integral part of this contract... Supplementary notes... 4. After canceling the registration for the exhibition, units that are unable to participate due to exhibitors' reasons will receive 30% of the booth fee as compensation by the organizing committee before October 20, 2019, and the balance will be refunded; If the exhibition is withdrawn before December 20, 2019, the organizing committee will charge 50% of the booth fee as compensation. If the exhibition is withdrawn after December 20, 2019, the exhibition fee will not be refunded 6. The Organizing Committee reserves the right to change the date and location of the exhibition due to external factors. The Exhibitor should be notified of the date and location changes one month in advance, and the agreement remains valid. "If the organizing committee believes that the exhibition venue, exhibition time, and preparation work have been seriously damaged or hindered due to irresistible external conditions and are cancelled, the organizing committee will refund the exhibitor's participation fee." On September 18, 2019, the plaintiff paid the defendant an exhibition fee of 50000 yuan. Later, due to the outbreak of "COVID-19", the defendant informed the plaintiff on February 18, 2020 that the exhibition would be postponed to April 10-12 of the same year. On August 1, 2020, the defendant again notified the plaintiff that the exhibition was postponed to September 3-5, 2020. In August 2020, the defendant notified the exhibitors of the extension of the exhibition scheduled for early September by way of a public announcement, but the specific exhibition period was not specified. The Shanghai Putuo District People's Court held that the plaintiff's request for the return of exhibition fees should be supported, but the plaintiff should bear the expenses incurred by the defendant in performing the contract before the contract was terminated. As for the expenses to be borne by the plaintiff, such expenses must be actually incurred and necessary, and incurred for the purpose of performing the disputed contract in this case. The expenses claimed by the defendant in this case mainly include exhibition hall rental expenses, construction expenses, publicity expenses, website production expenses, travel and transportation expenses, catering and accommodation expenses, personnel salaries, entertainment expenses, and office rental expenses. Some of the construction expenses have not actually occurred, and personnel salaries Entertainment expenses and office rental expenses are costs that the defendant incurs as necessary for the normal operation of the enterprise and should not be borne by the plaintiff. Considering that all preparatory work for the exhibition includes two parts: the unique part of all exhibitors and the common part of the exhibition as a whole, the people's court determines 25000 yuan based on the actual occurrence, necessity, and relevance of the remaining expenses.

[5] In the case of exhibition contract dispute between Beijing Zhiqi Technology Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Miga Trade Exhibition Co., Ltd. (Case No.: (2021) Hu 0114 Min Chu No. 14928), on October 9, 2019, the plaintiff and the defendant signed the "Booth Reservation Application Form (Proxy Contract)" (hereinafter referred to as the "Contract"), agreeing that the plaintiff would participate as an exhibiting company in the Shenzhen International Unattended Retail Exhibition from February 17 to 19, 2020, and agreed that after the contract was signed, The defendant issued a booth confirmation letter to the plaintiff in writing, and the plaintiff paid the defendant (i.e., the organizer) a booth fee of 17600 yuan within one week after receiving the confirmation letter. Article 6 (C) of the Contract signed by the plaintiff and the defendant stipulates that in case of any dispute between the two parties and the negotiation fails, the people's court of the place where the exhibition organizer (i.e., the defendant) is located shall be selected for litigation resolution. The "Exhibition Booth Reservation Application (attached page) Exhibition Details" attached to the "Contract" (as agreed by both parties, the exhibition details are a valid part of the "Contract" and have the same effect as the "Contract") discloses the address of the defendant as "Room 905-909, Building L1-A, Greenland World Center, No. XXX Zhuguang Road, Shanghai". The People's Court of Jiading District, Shanghai believes that both parties have reached a consensus to determine the jurisdiction court based on the disclosure address. As "No. XXX Zhuguang Road, Shanghai" belongs to the jurisdiction of the People's Court of Qingpu District, Shanghai, the case should be transferred to the People's Court of Qingpu District for processing.
[6] In the case of exhibition contract dispute between Guangzhou Parrant Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. and Guangzhou Huanwei Advertising Co., Ltd. (Case No.: (2021) Yue 01 Min Zhong No. 30824), According to the "Exhibition Contract Indonesia" under which Parrant Company filed this lawsuit, "This contract is entered into by the authorized agent of the exhibitor, Event Marketing Services Limited (hereinafter referred to as the" exhibition organizer "), and shall become effective only after it is signed and accepted by the exhibition organizer.". The contract is signed with the seals and confirmations of Parrant, Huanwei, and Even tMarketing Services Limited. The address of Event Marketing Services Limited is located in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court held that the applicable law and jurisdictional provisions stipulated in the contract, even if they are standard terms, do not exclude PARENTER's main rights, nor do they belong to provisions that specifically remind the other party of the exemption or limitation of the responsibility of the provider of standard terms. PARENTER appeals that the provisions are invalid, lack legal basis, and are not supported.