- Joined
- Dec 10, 2023
- Posts
- 2,775
- Reaction score
- 3,308
- Points
- 15,220
- Location
- Kwangya
- Plus Coins
- ⨭3,179,700
- Pronouns
- She/Her
The NJZ vs Ador trial regarding the validity of their exclusive contract has officially begun.
I'll use this thread to post the updates on today's trial.
For starters: I would like to say that while Bunnies have showed up to the trial and are outside the courthouse with signs to show support, NJZ are not attending today's trial. Since this is not a criminal trial it was stated in news articles that neither party needs to physically show up for the trials, only their lawyers.
We have also gotten an update that the objection hearing for the injunction will be held in one week, on Wednesday April 9th at 2pm.
A mini summary before I go into everything:
NJZ's lawyers has given NJZ's opening statement on why they think their contract should be considered ended. They are arguing their contract was with the old Ador which is MHJ, not the current Ador which is new staff and management. They are arguing that although on paper the company is still Ador since the management is different they cannot fufill their contracts. They are also arguing that although their individual reasons for contract termination might seem insufficient, when all of them are combined together it proves irreparable damage and breech of trust.
Based on all of the articles i'm seeing, their main argument is that the contract and group cannot exist without MHJ and the old Ador management.
I am going to break the post here to do some of the back and forth of the judge's questions and Ador and NJZ's responses.
I am using Ador and NJZ, but please bear in mind that I really mean Ador's lawyers and NJZ's Lawyers.
I'll use this thread to post the updates on today's trial.
For starters: I would like to say that while Bunnies have showed up to the trial and are outside the courthouse with signs to show support, NJZ are not attending today's trial. Since this is not a criminal trial it was stated in news articles that neither party needs to physically show up for the trials, only their lawyers.
We have also gotten an update that the objection hearing for the injunction will be held in one week, on Wednesday April 9th at 2pm.
A mini summary before I go into everything:
NJZ's lawyers has given NJZ's opening statement on why they think their contract should be considered ended. They are arguing their contract was with the old Ador which is MHJ, not the current Ador which is new staff and management. They are arguing that although on paper the company is still Ador since the management is different they cannot fufill their contracts. They are also arguing that although their individual reasons for contract termination might seem insufficient, when all of them are combined together it proves irreparable damage and breech of trust.
Based on all of the articles i'm seeing, their main argument is that the contract and group cannot exist without MHJ and the old Ador management.
I am going to break the post here to do some of the back and forth of the judge's questions and Ador and NJZ's responses.
I am using Ador and NJZ, but please bear in mind that I really mean Ador's lawyers and NJZ's Lawyers.
Judge
When the judge asked if there's any possibility for an agreement or mediation, this is their responses:
Ador
"The Plaintiffs are hoping for an agreement"
NJZ
"It doesn’t seem like that’s the case at this time, and the defendants own mental states don’t seem to allow them to think about such things. For Now, it seems like that’s the case."
Judge
You’re talking about a breakdown in trust, but the dispute between Min Hee Jin personally and Hybe and its affiliates seems unrelated to whether (New Jeans) terminated the exclusive contract or violated its obligations under the exclusive contract.
NJZ
When the judge asked if there's any possibility for an agreement or mediation, this is their responses:
Ador
"The Plaintiffs are hoping for an agreement"
NJZ
"It doesn’t seem like that’s the case at this time, and the defendants own mental states don’t seem to allow them to think about such things. For Now, it seems like that’s the case."
Judge
You’re talking about a breakdown in trust, but the dispute between Min Hee Jin personally and Hybe and its affiliates seems unrelated to whether (New Jeans) terminated the exclusive contract or violated its obligations under the exclusive contract.
NJZ
We believe that each of the individual reasons for termination mentioned by the plaintiff is sufficient grounds for termination. However, even if each of those reasons may not be sufficient on its own, when all of them are combined, the conclusion that is reached is that the trust between the plaintiff and the defendant has been irreparably damaged.
If all the management is replaced, the past and current corporations may be the same on paper, but in reality, they are completely different corporations. I'm not just talking about Min Hee-jin. After Min Hee-jin was ousted and new management came in under Hive's instructions, the Ador that the defendants had a contract with in the past and the current Ador are only legally the same in form, but the current Ador has completely different values (from the past) and has become a different corporation.
Therefore, the New Jeans members can no longer fulfill their contracts with the current Ador, not the past Ador. The basic relationship of trust has been broken, so we cannot continue together. Rather than simply looking at Min Hee-jin, I hope the court will look into whether the past Ador and the current Ador are really the Ador that the defendants trusted in this situation where Min Hee-jin was ousted, and whether it is in the interest of justice to sentence the defendants to continue working together while trusting the current Ador.
Ador
This is their response to NJZ
In relation to producing, the defendant side is emphasizing that they cannot continue entertainment activities without Min Hee-jin and that they must go together. It is true that former CEO Min Hee-jin has contributed to what NewJeans is today to some extent, but to say 'NewJeans cannot exist without Min Hee-jin' makes no sense.
Above all, Adore is the number one industry in our country, and it is a subsidiary of Hybe, so it doesn't make sense that they couldn't find another producer and support (New Jeans). Considering that the defendants independently prepared and successfully completed the Hong Kong concert without Min Hee Jin's help, the claim that only Min Hee Jin could do it contradicts the defendant's own words and actions.
Right now it's 2pm in Seoul, I have no idea if today's trial is still ongoing (i'm assuming so since I haven't seen any final statements in source articles), or if its over because this is only Day 1 of the trial.
Some sources say this trial could last 3-5 years though i'm not too sure on that. I'm not a legal expert.
Here's my sources so far:
Source 1
Source 2
Source 3
Source 4
The next court date is June 5th
Last edited: