case Mainland China English summary

Jiachen v. Haima: Evidence and Burden-Shifting in Personality Confusion

嘉宸公司与海马公司股东损害公司债权人利益责任纠纷案

A Supreme People's Court First Circuit report explaining when a creditor's evidence of personality confusion is strong enough to shift the burden to the shareholder.

Brief English Introduction

The First Circuit treated veil piercing as an evidence problem as much as a doctrine problem. Creditors often face an information disadvantage, so burden-shifting may be appropriate once their evidence creates reasonable suspicion of abuse; weak evidence of personnel or property overlap, however, is not enough.

Use It For

Use this case to make students specify what evidence proves commingling and what evidence merely raises suspicion.

Teaching Notes

The case is helpful for litigation design. Ask students to build two files: one for the creditor trying to trigger burden-shifting, and one for the shareholder trying to show independent accounts, assets, decisions, and operations.