Multinational companies may experience culture clashes, incompatibility of Western corporate governance and legal resolution strategy problems. As one of the most successful joint venture models, the high-profile Danone v Wahaha dispute has accelerated into a two-year legal feud across jurisdictions against infringement of the famous Wahaha brand. The case represents a significant watershed, which reflects the status quo of controversy over cooperation and competition in China. Under the current legal framework, Danone's withdrawal serves as a wake-up call for both foreign investors and Chinese companies in the dramatically increasing cross-border merger & acquisitions situation. The seminal case perfectly illustrates unwritten issues about public opinion, nationalism and the rule of law. Danone v Wahaha has also been commonly conceived as a landmark case through the Chinese may judge the fairness of the Western judicial system, while Europeans may regard it as a touchstone for China's investment environment as well as the specific sphere of contracts. It also offers many lessons, including the need for watertight contracts, IP rights, and international arbitration.
展开▼
