Yesterday morning, Foshan Lightingâ€™s false complaints were heard in the Guangdong Higher Peopleâ€™s Court (hereinafter referred to as Guangdong Higher Peopleâ€™s Court), and Foshan Lighting and 13 plaintiff investors were appealed. At the end of the second instance, Foshan Lighting and the investors still did not reach a mediation intention, and the court did not issue a verdict. In November last year, due to alleged misrepresentation, the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court (hereinafter referred to as the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court) ruled that Foshan Lighting compensated more than 900 investors for nearly 60 million yuan in losses, and became the largest collective claim for A-shares in recent years. Due to dissatisfaction with the first-instance judgment, Foshan Lighting appealed to the Guangdong High Court. After the trial on April 9, the two sides held a heated debate on the six focus issues, but did not pronounce the sentence, the court recommended that the two sides exchange views and mediate as much as possible. Investor's attorney Li Jian said that inspired by the previous shareholders, many investors in the second instance joined the claim team. At present, there are more than 2,300 people, and the amount of the claim for Foshan Lighting has reached 330 million yuan. The second instance was not pronounced in court. At 9:30 am yesterday, Foshan Lightingâ€™s false accusation case was heard in the 4th floor of the Guangdong High Court. The scene consisted of 5 collegiate panels. The appeal seat was mainly Foshan Lighting Lawyer and a few were still dissatisfied with the results of the first trial. Investors act as lawyers, and the appealed seats are represented by 942 investors representing lawyers in professional securities dispute cases. According to the information, Foshan Lighting had a number of information disclosure violations in 2010 and 2011. Among them, as many as 15 companies were affiliated companies directly or indirectly controlled by their then relatives, such as Zhong Xincai's son, but Foshan Lighting did not disclose it in the annual report. In November 2012, the CSRC conducted an investigation and the company's share price fluctuated. On March 6, 2013, the CSRC issued a decision on punishment for Foshan Lighting. Subsequently, more than a thousand investors from various places began to claim for Foshan Lighting. During the period from 2013 to March 2014, a total of 1,303 investors sued Foshan Lighting on the grounds of false claims of securities. On November 14, last year, Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court made a first-instance judgment, ruling that the defendant Foshan Lighting compensated more than 900 investors. 59.31 million yuan. However, Foshan Lighting refused to accept the results of the first-instance judgment and appealed. In the second instance court, the appellant Foshan Lighting Lawyer believes that the violation of the letter is not a major matter, and further deduces that Foshan Lighting does not constitute a false statement of responsibility, but also has no direct responsibility for the investor's loss. The respondent on behalf of 942 investors had no objection to the judgment of the first instance and hoped to reject Foshan Lightingâ€™s appeal and maintain the original judgment. Subsequently, the appellant and the appellant defended around the six focus issues, including whether Foshan Lighting was punished by the Securities and Futures Commission for whether it was a major incident or a false accusation and whether there was a direct causal relationship with the stock price decline. Significant matters are clearly stipulated in the Securities Law. The Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court also made judgments and judgments, which constitutes a false statement. There is no doubt that the appellee's loss has a causal link with the appellant's false statement. Liu Guohua, director of Guangdong Benben Law Firm, said. Before the trial ended, the collegial panel asked whether the parties agreed to mediation. The investor's attorney expressed his willingness to accept mediation. Foshan Lighting's attorney said that Foshan Lighting did not grant mediation rights to the law firm, reserved opinions on mediation, and hoped that the investor would propose a mediation plan.
Citycoco is not a specific product but rather an label placed on Electric Scooter with big wheels. It is most likely a chinease word that does not translate well into english. ... Most likely it does not refer to Cacao and Co can be translated in Can, approve, certainly, be worth and many other words
You Can Check The Certification Information Of The Vehicle Through The Certificate Number And Standard Number Provided By Us. Europen Standard L1e-b Less 45km,eec&coc, E-mark Approved.at The Same Time, The Eec Standard Is Also The Most Stringent Access Standard In The World, Which Is The Most Standardized For The Environment And The Safety Of Drivers. So European Standards Are Almost Equivalent To World Standards.
Scooter-supplier.com Factory Located In Zhejiang, Produce The Top-quality Fat Tire Electric Scooter, Citycoco Scooter, And Harley Style Scooters, We Offer 24 Months Warranty. All Our Electric Motorcycle Are Eec/coc Certified, And We Have Warehouse In Europe Can Fulfill Orders Fast
Eec Citycoco,City Coco Bike,Electric Bike Citycoco,Eec 1500W Citicoco
ZHEJIANG JINGLANG MOTOR VEHICLE CO., LTD. , https://www.scooter-supplier.com