On The Gambling Agreement

In view of China’s national conditions,immaturity of the capital markets as well as the limitations of the various laws and regulations,private enterprises just in its infancy, there is usually such a contradiction:The rapid development of their own desire for capital from banks and other mainstream domestic financing channels can not get less than financial capital.To alleviate the problem, the emerging private equity fund investment entities rise in the country. Then the concept of private equity fund created in order to control the risk of various agreements ensuing agreement on gambling is one of them.This article is more well-known through the past two years in the private equity sector "HAIFU case" as the starting point, a detailed study of the concept of an agreement on gambling."HAIFU case" experienced a total of Lanzhou Intermediate People’s Court of First Instance, Gansu Province Higher People’s Court of second instance and the Supreme People’s Court, and the results of each trial are not the same, but the case is the first cause of the "VAM" due to litigation, high research value.A long time, for VAM misunderstanding or more in the article, I elaborated on their point of view. Retrial for the "Admiralty case", the Supreme Court judgment, the majority of scholars, lawyers and so give a "positive view of the VAM". Expressed reservations about the author in the text and a detailed analysis of the human cases, explained his views.In addition to the the article introduction part, the total is divided into five parts:The first chapter,"HAIFU case" review. This chapter in the first section, a brief description of the basic facts of the case "HAIFU Case", Section II-Section IV describes the Court of First Instance, Gansu High Court upheld the outcome of the trial and the Supreme People’s Court for retrial, show cases evolution of twists and turns. By the Admiralty case "as the cutoff point in the last one of this chapter, the author put forward a series of questions to be answered in the following.The second chapter, On the basis of an agreement on gambling theory. VAM is an exotic investors and financiers designed according to the actual situation, a valuation adjustment mechanism. It is based on comes from an "incomplete contract theory. Now the main categories:equity bet on gambling and cash. Of course, the specific classification. General from the main body of VAM, standards, incentives to analyze the characteristics of VAM.Chapter III, the legal nature of an agreement on gambling. The majority of domestic scholars to stay majority agreement on gambling in economics level, occasionally on the legal nature of the analysis. This chapter, the author attempts based on the point of view of the legal research to uncover the legal nature of the agreement on gambling and elaborate:atypical contracts, bilateral contract, aleatory contract.Chapter IV, the legality of an agreement on gambling. Agreement on gambling is an atypical contract, academics and practitioners have different views on the legality of an agreement on gambling."HAIFU case outcome of the trial of the case "and repeatedly explained the problem. This chapter begins with information on the current conflict gambling agreement with the domestic legal system, and from the the autonomy principle civil legal acts and prejudice to the right of the third person point of view analysis of the legality of an agreement on gambling.Chapter V, Rethinking the Supreme Court retrial verdict. The Supreme Court recognized the validity of an agreement on gambling is in fact divided into two, and not like a lot of public opinion said as fully recognized the effectiveness of an agreement on gambling. This chapter first affirmed the Supreme Court recognized the effectiveness of the gambling agreement between the investors and the shareholders of the target company, and its negative effect on gambling agreement between investors and target companies questioned on this issue.