The Contract Dispute Between Mr.Cao And Shenzhen Fuanna Co.,ltd.

Stock-ownership incentive is a kind of employee incentive mode in which grants to senior management or core technical personnel by employer and expecting that they can work hard and serve enterprise for a long time,so as to share the profit from enterprise.But actually,it is a double-edged sword between advantages and disadvantages in practice,as a kind of human resource management ways.In recent years,the disputes between employee and employers is gradually increased because of stock-ownership incentive.Local courts have different opinions on whether it is a labor disputes or a civil disputes in their judicial practice.The contract dispute between Mr.Cao and Shenzhen Fu Anna Co.LTD is a typical case between employee and enterprise because of shareholder incentive earnings.During the trial,the plaintiff and the defendant had a heated debate on the nature of the case and the application of law.The court has determined that this case belongs to the contract dispute after the first trial,second trial,retrial.And judged Mr.Cao to refund huge equity income to Fu Anna Co.,Ltd.There are 3 main points about this dispute.Firstly,this case is an ordinary civil and commercial contract dispute or labor dispute.Secondly,the agreement in "Commitment Letter" whether it has legal effect that the employee promised not to resign within three years.Thirdly,whether the employee shall bear the default responsibility if he violates "Commitment Letter".The "Commitment Letter" is a variation of the original equity incentive agreement based on the equal consultation between the employers and employees.After detail analysis of this case,the legal relations involved in various implementation modes of equity incentive are sorted out from different implementation modes of equity incentive.The author thinks that the equity incentive dispute should be judged by combining the specific scheme of equity incentive and the real legal relationship under the scheme.The equity incentive dispute between labor and capital can not be simply classified as labor dispute or contract dispute.