On August 1, 2025, the Supreme People's Court held a press conference to release the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of Law in the Trial of Labor Dispute Cases (II)" and typical cases, and answered questions from reporters. Chen Yifang, member of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court and Chief Judge of the Civil First Division, Wu Jingli, Vice Chief Judge of the Civil First Division of the Supreme People's Court, and Zhang Yan, Second level Senior Judge of the Civil First Division of the Supreme People's Court, attended the press conference. At the press conference, Chen Yifang, member of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court and presiding judge of the First Civil Court, introduced the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of Law in the Trial of Labor Dispute Cases (II)" and the basic situation of typical cases. The press conference was chaired by Ji Zhongbiao, Deputy Director of the News Bureau of the Supreme People's Court.
Typical Cases of Labor Disputes
catalogue
Case 1: After a worker hired by an individual who subcontracts a construction project is found to have a work-related injury, the contractor is responsible for paying the work-related injury insurance benefits - Dispute over Work Injury Insurance Benefits between a Construction Company and Zhang
Case 2: Mixed employment of affiliated enterprises, the people's court can determine the labor relationship based on the worker's claim and combined with the case - labor contract dispute case between Wang and a digital company
Case 3: The employee intentionally fails to enter into a written labor contract, and the employer is not responsible for paying double the salary - labor dispute case between Ran and a hotel or a tourism company
Case 4: The non compete obligation of employees should be commensurate with the scope of trade secrets and confidential matters related to intellectual property they are aware of - Non compete Dispute Case between A Pharmaceutical Company and Zheng
Case 5: If an employee violates the non compete obligation agreement while employed, they should bear the liability for breach of contract in accordance with the law - the non compete dispute case between Huang and a textile company
Case 6: The agreement regarding non payment of social insurance premiums is invalid, and the employee has the right to request the employer to pay economic compensation when terminating the labor contract on this grounds - Labor Dispute Case between Zhu and a Security Company
Case One
After the individual hired by the subcontracted construction project is found to have a work-related injury, the contractor is responsible for paying the work-related injury insurance benefits - a dispute case of work-related injury insurance benefits between a construction company and Zhang
【 Basic Case 】
A certain construction company subcontracted the contracted project to Liu. In August 2021, Liu hired Zhang to work at the construction site. On October 10, 2021, Zhang fell from a height while working and was diagnosed with a lumbar spine fracture. The effective judgment has confirmed that there is no labor relationship between a certain construction company and Zhang. On March 14, 2023, the human resources and social security department issued a "Decision on the Determination of Work Injury", which determined that the accident injury suffered by Zhang was a work injury, and a construction company was responsible for the work injury insurance liability for the accident injury suffered by Zhang. After appraisal by the Labor Capacity Appraisal Committee, it was determined that Zhang's level of labor dysfunction is level 8, and his level of self-care disorder has not reached level 8. He will be suspended from work and receive a six-month salary. Zhang applied for arbitration to a labor and personnel dispute arbitration committee, requesting a construction company to pay the work-related injury insurance benefits that should be enjoyed for Level 8 disability. The labor dispute arbitration committee supports it. A certain construction company is dissatisfied and has filed a lawsuit with the people's court.
【 Judgment Result 】
The trial court believes that according to the "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Work Injury Insurance Administrative Cases", the assumption of work injury insurance liability does not necessarily require the existence of a labor relationship as a prerequisite. In the case of subcontracting construction projects to individuals, in the event of a work-related accident, the contractor with the qualifications of the employer shall bear the liability for work-related injury insurance. In this case, a construction company subcontracted the project to Liu, and Zhang, who was hired by Liu, was injured during the construction process and has been identified as a work-related injury. Although there is no labor relationship between a certain construction company and Zhang, as the contractor of the project involved in the case, the construction company still needs to bear the responsibility of work-related injury insurance. In the case where a construction company did not pay the work-related injury insurance premiums for Zhang, the trial court ordered them to pay the corresponding work-related injury insurance benefits to Zhang.
Typical significance
As an important component of the social security system, work-related injury insurance is of great significance in safeguarding the rights and interests of injured workers and promoting social equity. In practice, some contractors subcontract their contracted business to organizations or individuals who do not have legal business qualifications in order to avoid the labor law obligations of direct employment. Such organizations or individuals often do not have sufficient capacity to assume corresponding legal responsibilities. Article 3, Paragraph 1 of the "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Work Injury Insurance Administrative Cases" stipulates: "If the social insurance administrative department determines that the following units are responsible for work-related injury insurance, the people's court shall support:... (4) If the employing unit violates laws and regulations by subcontracting the contracting business to an organization or natural person that does not have the qualifications of an employing entity, and the employees hired by the organization or natural person are injured or killed on the job while engaging in contracting business, the employing unit shall be responsible for work-related injury insurance;..." After a work-related injury occurs, the worker may apply to the social insurance administrative department for the determination of the work-related injury or the contractor as the unit responsible for work-related injury insurance. After determining a work-related injury, if the contractor fails to pay the work-related injury insurance premiums for the worker, the worker may demand that the contractor assume the responsibility of paying the work-related injury insurance benefits. In this case, the rule that the contractor bears the responsibility of paying work-related injury insurance benefits and other employment obligations not only reflects a negative evaluation of subcontracting and subcontracting behavior, but also enables workers to obtain timely relief after work-related injuries occur, which is conducive to improving and regulating the order of the construction market and fully protecting the legitimate rights and interests of workers.
Case Two
Mixed employment of affiliated enterprises, the people's court may determine the labor relationship based on the worker's claim and combined with the case - labor contract dispute case between Wang and a digital company
【 Basic Case 】
A certain digital company is a one person company, and its legal representative and shareholder are both Mr. Liang. The legal representative of a certain technology company is Liang, and the shareholders are Liang (holding 60% of the shares) and Hu (holding 40% of the shares). The two companies are affiliated enterprises, and the business scope recorded in the business license overlaps. A certain technology company has released a recruitment notice, stating that Wang will start working on August 1, 2022 and will continue to work until February 22, 2023. During work, Wang's workplace hung a "certain digital company" brand, and the WeChat and QQ chat software used for daily work communication had the words "certain digital company". Both companies have not entered into a written labor contract with Wang, nor have they paid social insurance premiums or processed recruitment and dismissal procedures. Wang's salary was paid through Liang's personal account. Wang believes that a certain digital company and a certain technology company share office space, have the same business, and have mixed personnel. The two companies have formed mixed employment for him, so he chose to apply for arbitration to a certain labor dispute arbitration committee, requesting confirmation of his labor relationship with a certain digital company and payment of unpaid wages. The labor dispute arbitration committee does not support it. Wang was dissatisfied and filed a lawsuit with the People's Court.
【 Judgment Result 】
The trial court held that a certain digital company and a certain technology company are affiliated enterprises, and their business operations overlap. Liang also serves as a shareholder and legal representative of both companies, making it difficult for Wang to determine the actual employer. Although Wang applied for employment under the name of a certain technology company, there is a "certain digital company" brand posted in his workplace, and the communication software used for work communication is named "certain digital company". Wang's job responsibilities include the operation of a certain digital company, and he has reason to believe that he is providing labor for the company. The trial court ruled in favor of Wang's lawsuit request to confirm the existence of a labor relationship with a certain digital company and pay unpaid wages.
Typical significance
Mixed employment often occurs between affiliated enterprises. Affiliated enterprises adopt methods such as not entering into written labor contracts, artificially causing ambiguity in the ownership of labor relations, and shifting blame to each other in litigation, thereby achieving the goal of avoiding the responsibility of the employer. In the case of mixed employment of workers by affiliated enterprises without a written labor contract, the people's court mainly confirms the labor relationship based on the employment management behavior, comprehensively considering factors such as working hours, work content, labor remuneration payment, and social insurance premium payment. In this case, the People's Court, based on Wang's request and the employment facts, supported his lawsuit request to confirm the existence of a labor relationship with a certain digital company, and corrected the illegal behavior of the employer, such as evading obligations through mixed employment, in accordance with the law. This is conducive to fully safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of workers and guiding employers to regulate employment.
Case Three
The employee intentionally fails to enter into a written labor contract, and the employer is not responsible for paying double the salary - labor dispute case between Ran and a hotel or a tourism company
【 Basic Case 】
On December 11, 2018, Ran signed a labor contract with a certain Kanglv company, agreeing that the contract period would be from December 11, 2018 to December 10, 2023, and his position would be the head of the finance department. After the expiration of the labor contract, a certain Kanglv company repeatedly notified Ran through verbal and WeChat channels to renew the labor contract. Ran refused to renew the contract on the grounds that "the company is going to dissolve, and if you don't sign the contract, you can get double the salary". On April 30, 2024, Ran entered into a "Termination of Employment Contract Agreement" with a certain Kanglv company. Both parties agreed to terminate the employment contract and confirmed that the Kanglv company would not owe Ran any wages or other remuneration before April 30, 2024. A certain Kanglv company paid social insurance premiums for Ran until April 2024, and the calculation period for the economic compensation issued to Ran ends on April 30, 2024. In May 2024, a certain Kanglv company was deregistered, and its rights and obligations were inherited by a certain hotel. A certain agricultural tourism company is a shareholder of a certain health tourism company. Ran applied for arbitration to a labor dispute arbitration committee, requesting that a certain hotel or agricultural tourism company pay double the salary without a written labor contract. A labor dispute arbitration committee has issued a notice of non acceptance. Ran disagreed and filed a lawsuit with the People's Court.
【 Judgment Result 】
The trial court held that after the expiration of the labor contract between a certain Kanglv company and Ran, Ran continued to work, and the Kanglv company still paid labor remuneration and social insurance premiums for Ran in accordance with the original labor contract. During this period, a certain Kanglv company repeatedly requested to renew a written labor contract with Ran, but Ran refused to enter into it. In the case where Ran intentionally did not enter into a written labor contract, a certain Kanglv company is not responsible for paying double the salary, and a certain hotel and its shareholder, a certain agricultural tourism company, who inherit its rights and obligations, are also not responsible. The trial court ruled to reject Ran's lawsuit requests for payment of double wages and other related expenses.
Typical significance
Article 82 of the Labor Contract Law stipulates: "If an employer fails to enter into a written labor contract with an employee for more than one month but less than one year from the date of employment, it shall pay twice the monthly salary to the employee. If an employer violates the provisions of this Law by not entering into an open-ended labor contract with an employee, it shall pay twice the monthly salary to the employee from the date on which the open-ended labor contract should have been entered into." The rule of paying double the monthly salary without entering into a written labor contract by an employer is a provision made by law to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of employees and to urge employers to fulfill their legal obligations, and should not allow dishonest individuals to gain undue profits. This case clarifies that the rule of paying double wages does not apply to situations where workers intentionally fail to enter into a written labor contract with the employer, reflecting a clear value orientation, constraining and punishing behaviors that violate the principle of good faith, and guiding workers and employers to consciously fulfill their legal obligations.
Case Four
The non compete obligation of employees should be commensurate with the scope of trade secrets and confidential matters related to intellectual property that they are aware of - Non compete Dispute Case between A Pharmaceutical Company and Zheng
【 Basic Case 】
Zheng joined a pharmaceutical company (mainly engaged in biopharmaceutical business) as the Chief Technical Officer of the Production and Operations Department. During his tenure, Zheng had access to confidential information related to the production and control details of two drugs' chemical components at an affiliated company, Yi Pharmaceutical Company. Zheng submitted his resignation application on September 29, 2021 and entered into a non compete agreement, which stipulated a non compete period of 24 months. Zheng joined a biotech company as a senior vice president after leaving and informed a pharmaceutical company. In February 2022, a certain pharmaceutical company A applied for arbitration to a labor dispute arbitration committee on the grounds that a certain biological company and the company are both biopharmaceutical companies, and there is a competitive relationship between the two companies. Zheng violated the non compete agreement and requested that Zheng pay a non compete penalty of 7.1 million yuan, compensate for a loss of 1 million yuan, return the economic compensation already paid of 196185 yuan, and continue to fulfill the "Non compete Agreement". A labor dispute arbitration committee terminated the case on the grounds of exceeding the statutory deadline. A pharmaceutical company is dissatisfied and has filed a lawsuit with the People's Court.
【 Judgment Result 】
The trial court believes that, firstly, according to the legislative purpose, the scope of the employee's non compete restriction should be limited to the necessary scope of the non compete restriction system protection matters, and should be adapted to the scope of the related party's trade secrets and confidential matters related to intellectual property that the employee is aware of. The non competitive entity agreed upon between Company A and Zheng includes its affiliated company, Company B. Zheng has only been in contact with the confidential information of two drugs from a certain pharmaceutical company, and his non competition obligation should be limited to the aforementioned two drugs. Secondly, in non compete dispute cases, other employers with competitive relationships should refer to other employers who can provide products or services with a relatively close substitution relationship. In terms of the competitive relationship between biopharmaceutical companies, it should be determined based on the indications, mechanisms of action, clinical medication plans, etc. of the drugs being operated, and the substitutability between drugs should be evaluated. Comparing the products of a biological company where Zheng joined with those of a pharmaceutical company A and a pharmaceutical company B, although both include cancer treatment products, they are not interchangeable in terms of indications and medication plans. Based on this, the trial court determined that the company where Zheng joined does not belong to other employers that compete with A Pharmaceutical Company or its affiliates in operating similar products or engaging in similar businesses, and ruled to reject all claims of A Pharmaceutical Company.
Typical significance
Talents are one of the fundamental and strategic supports for Chinese path to modernization. The Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Further Comprehensively Deepening Reform and Promoting Chinese path to modernization proposed to "improve the orderly flow mechanism of talents". The provisions of the Labor Contract Law on non competition restrictions are mainly aimed at protecting the trade secrets of employers and confidential matters related to intellectual property, preventing unfair competition, and not restricting the orderly flow of talents. In the process of adjudicating non compete disputes, the people's court should balance the relationship between workers' independent employment and fair market competition, and promote the orderly flow and rational allocation of talents. In this case, the employee is a non compete person. In the case where the scope of non compete restrictions agreed upon by both parties includes affiliated companies of the employer, the people's court limits the non compete obligations of the employee to the scope of related party trade secrets and confidential matters related to intellectual property that the employee is aware of. At the same time, based on the application of the parties, allowing individuals with specialized knowledge to appear in court, assisting in the investigation of the technical principles, indications, medication plans, and the fact that the products operated by the new employer and the original employer do not have a close substitution relationship, it is confirmed that the two companies have no competitive relationship, effectively ensuring the orderly flow of high-tech talents.
