转自：北京日报客户端 汇源控制权之争愈演愈烈。1月8日，汇源集团通过公众号宣布，重新接管北京汇源食品饮料有限公司 （以下简称"北京汇源"）和汇源果汁的相应订货。声明中，汇源集团称上海文盛资产管理股份有限公司 （以下简称"上海文盛"）并非果汁生产企业，不具备任何生产果汁的经验，对果汁的上下游产品安全缺 乏任何有效的管理经验。因此，汇源集团不认可体系外的果汁原料采购合同、下游经销商签订非汇源集 团生产却冠以汇源品牌的任何产品供销合同等。截至目前，上海文盛并未就此声明作回应。在股权结构 上，上海文盛仍是北京汇源的大股东，同时是"汇源"等一系列商标的所有者，汇源集团要想夺回控制权 仍有不确定性。 这是汇源半年以来，第四次发布声明。2025年8月9日，北京汇源发布《致全体股东及转股债权人的公开 信》，公开披露文盛资产重整资金未到位，其承诺的投资总额中尚有8.5亿元已逾期一年以上，且经北 京汇源11次催缴仍未实缴；8月24日，北京汇源再次发布声明称，公司公章及营业执照正、副本均由专 人负责保管，全程处于安全、有效管控状态，从未发生遗失、失控或交由他人保管的情况；12月19日， 汇源集团发布严正声明称，指出上海文盛未履行《 ...

汇源控制权之争愈演愈烈。1月8日，汇源集团通过公众号宣布，重新接管北京汇源食品饮料有限公司（以下简称"北京汇源"）和汇源果汁的相应订货。声明 中，汇源集团称上海文盛资产管理股份有限公司（以下简称"上海文盛"）并非果汁生产企业，不具备任何生产果汁的经验，对果汁的上下游产品安全缺乏任 何有效的管理经验。因此，汇源集团不认可体系外的果汁原料采购合同、下游经销商签订非汇源集团生产却冠以汇源品牌的任何产品供销合同等。截至目 前，上海文盛并未就此声明作回应。在股权结构上，上海文盛仍是北京汇源的大股东，同时是"汇源"等一系列商标的所有者，汇源集团要想夺回控制权仍有 不确定性。 1月8日，汇源集团在声明中提到，北京汇源重整一案，受到社会各界的广泛关注。重整方案实施以来，汇源集团按照《重整投资协议》按时、全面履行了自 身义务。但同时，上海文盛资产管理股份有限公司（以下简称"上海文盛"）承诺的投资总额中，有8.5亿元拒绝支付，已经投入的7.5亿元，拒绝按照《重整 投资协议》的约定投入北京汇源的经营管理，造成北京汇源始终处于依靠重整投资前的自有资金高负荷运转的状态。 责保管，全程处于安全、有效管控状态，从未发生遗失、失控或交由他人 ...

信网·信号新闻1月1日讯近期现货铂金价格一路飙涨，消费者段先生本想在小红书平台"低价锁定"的投资金条，却因商家拒发而落空。2025年12月，段先生 在小红书金大生旗舰店分两单购入Pt999铂金投资金条，其中价值2.5万元的50克大单，在铂金价格大幅上涨后遭商家以"缺货"为由拒绝发货，仅能获得60元 无门槛券赔付。12月31日，信号新闻(0532-80889431)搜索多家电商平台发现，如今同款商品价格普遍在3万元至3.5万元，60元补偿远不足以覆盖金价上涨带 来的重新购买差价。平台方已确认商家行为违规并将实施处罚，但依据现有规则，超时未发货赔付完成后订单即终止，消费者需自行承担市场价格波动的风 险。 商家接单后不发货已构成根本违约 消费者可依据实际损失要求提高赔偿 企查查平台信息显示，小红书平台上的金大生旗舰店由深圳市鑫金尔曼珠宝有限公司负责运营。12月25日，信号新闻发现该店铺商品已全面下架；值得注意 的是，该公司在另一家电商平台开设的金大生珠宝旗舰店，目前经营状态正常。 信号新闻律师专家库成员、北京市隆安（青岛）律师事务所史士辉律师分析，依据《中华人民共和国民法典》，消费者成功下单并支付货款后，与商家之间 ...

南京东南美容医院有限公司（下称 "东南美容医院"）因网络宣传推广合作纠纷，将网红"虫虫 chonny"诉至南京市建邺区人民法院，要求其返还合同款 45.69 万元及逾期利息、律师费等，涉案金额 合计暂达 48.3379 万元。令人意外的是，医美公司在维权过程中发现，该网红在签订合作协议前已移民 国外，这为款项追回增添了变数。 东南美容医院与"虫虫 chonny"交涉的微信聊天截图显示，"虫虫 chonny"对医美公司统计的引流人数有 异议，她认为应该算在引流人数内的人员，医美公司没有算入，同时"虫虫 chonny"对自己在东南美容 医院做的手术不满意。 目前，南京市建邺区人民法院已受理该案，相关审理工作正在推进中。 浙江铁券律师事务所高级合伙人张永辉律师认为，根据《民法典》第四百六十五条，依法成立的合同受 法律保护且仅对当事人具有法律约束力。南京东南美容医院与"虫虫 chonny"签订的《独家网络宣传推 广合作合同》，若双方具备相应民事行为能力、意思表示真实且不违反法律强制性规定，应认定为有效 合同。尽管"虫虫 chonny"在签订合同时隐瞒已移民事实，但合同本身不存在法定无效情形，其效力不 受影响。不过，若 ...

Core Viewpoint - The company Bianai is facing widespread criticism from consumers due to issues related to order fulfillment after a significant price error on its mini-program, where products were sold at drastically reduced prices but were not shipped [2][3][4]. Group 1: Consumer Reactions - Consumers reported that after placing orders for items at extremely low prices, they received notifications stating that their orders could not be fulfilled due to "system errors" [2][4]. - Many consumers expressed dissatisfaction with the company's response, feeling that a small cash compensation of 30 yuan was insufficient to address the issue [2][3]. - Some consumers have taken legal action against the company, claiming that the refusal to ship constitutes a breach of contract [6]. Group 2: Company Response - Bianai's official customer service stated that the pricing errors were due to a page malfunction and that the prices displayed on the page are now corrected [4][7]. - The company has offered a compensation of 30 yuan for canceled orders, but consumers have reported mixed experiences in receiving this compensation [4][6]. Group 3: Financial Background - Bianai, controlled by Bianai (Hong Kong) Limited, has undergone three rounds of financing, with a recent valuation of 20 billion USD (approximately 142.14 billion RMB) after receiving 70 million USD (approximately 5 billion RMB) from Tiger Global Management [7]. - The company has achieved a gross merchandise volume (GMV) of 6 billion RMB in 2024, maintaining a 30% annual growth rate over the past two years [7]. Group 4: Brand Image and Marketing Issues - Bianai has faced criticism not only for the shipping issues but also for its controversial advertising, which has been described as "eye-catching" and inappropriate by consumers [9][11]. - The brand has been associated with complaints regarding product quality, misleading advertising, and poor customer service, with over 800 complaints recorded on consumer platforms [9][11]. - The founder of Bianai acknowledged the competitive pressure from brands like Uniqlo and private labels, indicating a need for the company to improve its brand image [11].

蕉内官方客服向《 BUG》栏目表示："之前页面异常，导致价格有异常。已经紧急修复处 理了，价格以页显示为准。只 可以 在订单 取消后补偿 30元 。 " 文 |《BUG》栏目 张奥 近日，蕉内品牌因 "下单却不发货"而遭到广泛质疑。 有消费者透露，蕉内小程序突然出现大幅折扣，包括羽绒服、冲锋衣、保暖套装等原价数百 元的商品，最低仅 22元。购买后，蕉内却拒绝正常发货。 "少量现金补偿就能打发了？""靠一条短信解决问题？"消费者们提出质疑。 价格异常取消订单， 律师：违约，应该发货！ 近日，蕉内官方小程序突然出现大幅折扣，大批消费者纷纷下单。有消费者表示，其分为两 次下单，共购买了 20多件商品，总价762元。其中袜子、内裤、男士保暖套装等大部分商 品单价均为22元，女士厚绒打底裤、女士薄绒打底裤、女士堆堆领肌底衣单价69.5元。 当天晚上，该消费者收到了短信称：由于系统原因，所购商品无法正常发出。 该消费者认为，所谓 "系统故障"等理由不能成立。如果确实存在系统异常，商家也应向消 费者告知异常原因和处理结果。此外，"系统故障""页面异常"等本质是企业或者平台的问 题，不应由消费者"买单"。 类似的情况并非个例 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses a case where a consumer, Mr. Zheng, faced a loss due to an e-commerce platform unilaterally canceling his gold purchase order, raising questions about the platform's practices and consumer rights [1][10]. Group 1: Incident Overview - Mr. Zheng purchased 50 grams of gold at approximately 900 yuan per gram, totaling 45,000 yuan, but the order was canceled after it entered the delivery stage, resulting in a loss of over 1,800 yuan due to price fluctuations [1][7]. - The platform claimed that orders could be canceled if the purchase quantity exceeded normal consumption needs, which Mr. Zheng disputed as he successfully purchased gold using a different account [2][9]. Group 2: Legal Perspective - A lawyer stated that Mr. Zheng had formed a valid sales contract upon payment, and the platform's cancellation constituted a breach of contract, requiring compensation for all losses incurred [10][11]. - The lawyer emphasized that the platform's actions violated the principles of good faith and contractual obligations, as there was no reasonable basis provided for the cancellation [10][11]. Group 3: Compensation and Consumer Rights - Mr. Zheng's claim for 2,000 yuan in compensation was met with only a 200 yuan offer from the platform, which the lawyer deemed unreasonable, suggesting that actual losses should be compensated [11]. - The lawyer recommended that Mr. Zheng could escalate the matter to consumer protection authorities or pursue legal action if the platform did not adequately address his claims [11].

Core Viewpoint - The case highlights the complexities and risks involved in commercial leasing, particularly in competitive bidding scenarios where the qualifications and compliance of bidders are scrutinized [1][17][18]. Group 1: Auction and Leasing Details - A small shop of 51 square meters at Wuxi College was auctioned with an initial annual rent of 85 million yuan, totaling 255 million yuan for three years [1][7]. - The shop was later leased to another operator for an annual rent of 60 million yuan after the initial bidder failed to comply with the terms [1][12]. - The auction included various commercial properties, with starting prices ranging from approximately 42,120 yuan to 79,560 yuan per year for different types of businesses [3][14]. Group 2: Legal Dispute and Claims - Wuxi College filed a lawsuit against the initial bidder, seeking compensation for the rent difference amounting to 750,000 yuan due to the failure to sign a lease agreement [1][17]. - The initial bidder argued that the auction process had flaws, claiming that the auction company did not properly verify the compliance of the bidding documents [17][18]. - Legal experts indicated that both parties may share responsibility for the dispute, with the auction company potentially bearing a larger portion of the fault due to inadequate verification of the bidder's qualifications [18][19].

Core Points - The incident involving Damai.net's ticket sales for Lu Han's concert has sparked significant consumer dissatisfaction due to a scheduling error that led to the cancellation of ticket purchases [1] - Consumers who successfully purchased tickets received confirmation but later had their orders revoked, leading to claims of breach of contract against Damai.net [1] - The legal interpretation suggests that once a consumer successfully places an order and makes payment, a contract is established, and unilateral cancellation by the seller constitutes a breach [2] Group 1 - Damai.net's error in ticket sales for Lu Han's concert resulted in a public apology and a refund policy that included a 3% discount coupon for affected consumers [1] - Many consumers expressed their grievances on complaint platforms, highlighting the financial implications of the cancellation, including non-refundable travel expenses [1] - Legal expert Chen Yinjian clarified that if the error was unintentional, it may not qualify as fraud, which is necessary for consumers to claim triple compensation [2] Group 2 - According to the E-commerce Law, once a consumer submits an order and payment is made, the contract is binding, and the seller cannot unilaterally cancel it [2] - If the seller cannot fulfill the contract, they are obligated to refund and compensate for any losses incurred by the consumer, such as travel arrangements [2] - The conditions for claiming triple compensation require evidence of intentional fraud, which may not apply in this case as the error was attributed to staff mismanagement [2]

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights a legal dispute involving a fish pond leasing contract in Guangdong Province, focusing on the resolution process facilitated by a judge, emphasizing the importance of mediation in resolving agricultural disputes [1][2][3][4] Group 1: Contractual Dispute - A fish pond leasing contract was signed in January 2024 for nearly 2,000 acres, with an annual rent of 320 million yuan, which was not paid by the lessee, leading to a breach of contract [1] - The cooperative decided to convert the lessee's deposit into rent after multiple failed attempts to collect the overdue payment [1][2] - The lessee, facing financial difficulties, initially resisted the termination of the contract and sought to retain the equipment purchased for 1.2 million yuan [2][3] Group 2: Mediation Process - The judge intervened to mediate the dispute, advising both parties on the legal implications of their actions and the potential for financial loss due to delays [2][3] - The judge suggested a compromise where the lessee could sell the equipment at a reduced price to offset part of the owed penalty, promoting a win-win situation [3] - Ultimately, an agreement was reached where the contract was terminated, the lessee sold the equipment for 800,000 yuan, and the cooperative resumed operations of the fish pond [3][4] Group 3: Legal and Operational Outcomes - The cooperative successfully re-leased the fish pond, which was back in operation by early June, and received the rental payment promptly [4] - The article notes that the local court has a high mediation success rate, with 42.3% of cases resolved through mediation in 2024, indicating an effective judicial approach to conflict resolution [4]