Cross examination of the first case of packaging a

  • Detail

Cross examination of "the first case of China packaging and decoration" was completed. On May 8, the lawsuit officially entered the cross examination link. Both parties explained and cross examined the authenticity, legality, relevance and probative power of the evidence provided by the other party. After nearly 10 hours of fierce cross examination, the cross examination of the case of Wanglaoji and Duobao red can replacement was completed. The presiding judge announced that the collegial panel decided to hold a formal hearing in the Guangdong high court at 9 a.m. on May 15

the lawyer representing Wanglaoji's great health pointed out that the authenticity of many evidences provided by JDB was insufficient, and the delaying tactics were staged again at the cross examination site, denying the evidences proposed by Wanglaoji without sufficient reasons

it is understood that the first evidence provided by JDB holds that before Wanglaoji trademark was authorized to Hongdao group in 1992, Chen Hongdao had authorized liangshihe (Guangdong Southern beverage factory) to produce red packaging, and there was no word Wanglaoji at that time

facts have proved that Liang Shihe gave false testimony. Wanglaojida pointed out through the park, scope, chain and intensive health attorney that JDB provided the eighth evidence. Page 9 of the judgment of Foshan intermediate people's court clearly stated that Dongguan Hong, including Dao, was established on September 19, 1995 and cancelled on August 31, 1998, How can Liang Shihe prove that an unincorporated company can entrust them to produce cool tea three years and two months in advance

the lawyer representing Wanglaoji health also pointed out that the content of the first evidence provided by JDB is not relevant to the case. Whether Dongguan Hongdao food and Beverage Co., Ltd. manufactures products for others or by itself, the decoration of the packaging box is not similar to the decoration of the case. At the same time, according to Article 55 of several provisions of the Supreme People's Court on civil litigation evidence, witnesses should testify in court and accept the questions of the parties, while Liang Shihe did not appear in court to accept the questions of the parties. The so-called Liang Shihe's testimony provided by JDB was not authentic and could not be accepted

the lawyer representing Wanglaoji's Great Health said that both the (2003) FZ fam San Chu Zi No. 19 civil judgment of Foshan intermediate people's Court of Guangdong Province and the (2003) Yue Gao fam San Zhong Zi No. 212 civil judgment of Guangdong Higher People's court had expressly identified Wanglaoji herbal tea as a well-known commodity. According to the anti unfair competition law, the unique decoration right of well-known commodities belongs to the maximum value of the legal impact strength and tortuous strength of well-known commodities; The drying temperature of wood flour filled PVC in advance is 110 ℃, which is a good operator, and can be transferred between different legal operators along with the goods

the relevant person in charge of Wanglaoji Health said that Guangyao has been producing and operating Wanglaoji herbal tea, and the red pot Wanglaoji herbal tea is only one of Wanglaoji herbal tea. As early as 1995, in the trademark use license contract signed between Guangyao and Hongdao group, the parent company of JDB, it was clearly agreed that Hongdao group was authorized to produce and operate red canned and red bottled Wanglaoji herbal tea

if there is no ownership, how can we authorize? The relevant person in charge of Wanglaoji Health said that the production and operation right of Wanglaoji has been recovered, and the exclusive decoration right has also been transferred back to Guangyao group along with Wanglaoji herbal tea. It is an indisputable fact that Hongcan belongs to Wanglaoji, and I believe that the law will protect justice

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI