Recently,Cui Manhua,a senior partner of Gaopeng Law Firm,and Jiang Liyong,a lawyer team representing a case of"adding or changing the objection of the person subjected to execution",obtained a final and comprehensive victory in the Beijing Higher People's Court.The Beijing High Court finally revoked the first instance judgment and fully supported the lawsuit request of the Gaopeng lawyer team.

The case involves the confusion of personality in a one person company.Limited liability is the cornerstone of the company law system,and lifting the corporate veil is also the first lesson in company law.In view of the risk of confusion in the personality of a one-person company,Article 63 of the Chinese Company Law allocates the burden of proof to prove the independence of the company's personality to the shareholders of the one-person company.In practice,how to judge whether the shareholder of a one-person company has fulfilled the burden of proof when the shareholder of the one-person company has provided some financial information;"And what criteria should be met by the plaintiff's rebuttal to judge whether a shareholder of a one-person company has failed to fulfill the burden of proof,with varying standards of adjudication.".

In this case,the Gaopeng lawyer team fully demonstrated the evidence provided to a shareholder of a one-person company by submitting a fully detailed appeal,similar case search report,and court evidence and debate.The plaintiff's rebuttal only required proof,and the shareholder's evidence failed to meet the standard of high probability,rather than transferring the burden of proof to the plaintiff.

In the judgment of this case,the Beijing High Court held that:((2019)Jingminzhong No.365),"For a defendant of a one-person company,the plaintiff does not need to meet the proof standard that the property of the one-person company is mixed with the property of the shareholders,which is a highly probable fact,but only needs to meet the proof standard that the truth of the facts to be collected is unclear.".

The ruling in this case clarifies the criteria for determining the personality confusion of one person companies,and undoubtedly has important guidance and reference significance for similar cases in Beijing and even other regions of the country.Gaopeng Law Firm is pleased and congratulated for our lawyers'success in meaningful cases.

(This article is translated by software translator for reference only.)