According to the circle of friends of Mining Haihui employees, Ketuan Zhan has issued a document on May 25 requesting the dismissal of Liu Luyao, CFO of Bitmain. (The screenshot does not cover the ID number. The intentional releasers and disseminators are suspected of violating citizens' personal information. Everyone must have basic legal knowledge.)

Ketuan Zhan then issued a new document, requesting HR director Suo Chao not to transfer the company's labor relations to other companies without authorization.

You may be wondering, who owns Bitmain? Does Ketuan Zhan have the authority to remove Liu Luyao from his post? The following are my collations and inferences based on public information.

First of all, the main body of Bitmain is registered in Cayman, Cayman controls the Hong Kong company, Hong Kong company controls Beijing Bitmain and other Bitmain companies in the mainland, and Beijing Bitmain also controls some mainland Bitmain subsidiaries.

At present, Cayman and Hong Kong are under the control of Wu Jihan and Liu Luyao, while Zhan Ketuan temporarily obtained the legal person of Beijing Bitmain through administrative reconsideration due to a procedural error when the other party changed the legal person. According to previous reports from Tiantian Lianxun, the business license of Beijing Bitmain is still in the hands of the police, and the official seal should be in the hands of Jihan Wu. Wu Jihan should be seeking to continue to change the Beijing Bit legal person through Hong Kong.

The second question, without an official seal and a business license, does a legal person have the right to fire employees?

The Beijing Court Network under the Beijing Higher People's Court explained it this way:

According to Article 38 of the "General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China": "According to the law or the articles of association of a legal person, the person in charge who exercises powers on behalf of the legal person is the legal representative of the legal person." The legal representative exercises powers on behalf of the legal person, and the legal person shall bear the responsibility for external actions in the name of the legal person, and the official seal is not a necessary condition for the contract to be valid. In the process of signing a contract, after an offer and an acceptance, the two parties express their agreement, and the contract can be established. As the legal representative of the company, the legal representative has the right to sign the contract to confirm the contract.
However, there are exceptions. Article 50 of the "Contract Law of the People's Republic of China" stipulates: "Contracts concluded by the legal representative or person in charge of a legal person or other organization exceeding the authority, unless the counterparty knows or should know that the representative act is valid." Therefore, if you still sign a contract with the other party’s legal representative knowing that the legal representative has exceeded his authority, the contract with the legal representative’s signature but no seal is not binding on the legal representative’s unit.

On the surface, the legal person can remove Liu Luyao from Beijing Bit. But look at the second paragraph of the court website's explanation, that is, whether the legal person and the person in charge have this authority? This again depends on the articles of association of Beijing Bitmain, and we cannot see the latest articles of association of Bitmain at present. Beijing Bitmain is also a 100% shareholder of Hong Kong Bitmain controlled by Wu Jihan. In theory, Beijing Bitmain can change its articles of association and legal person. So this fell into a Rashomon.

At present, Ketuan Zhan is filing a lawsuit in Cayman. Investors and employees also hope that the two sides can follow the judgment of Cayman, and the loser can just withdraw according to law. The continuous tossing between the two parties in Beijing will not only affect the normal operation of the company, but also cause dissatisfaction with the government. In theory, the government should have warned both parties not to continue to engage in trouble during this sensitive period. If this continues, the biggest winner may still be Dr. Ma Yang, who defeated Ketuan Zhan in 2019.