Home > Foreign Related Legal Services>Resources>Cases

Case 6: Determination of the nature of an investment immigration service contract and major contractual obligations
—Chen sued a consulting company for performance under the contract

Updated: December 23, 2022

Disputes often arise due to entrusted affairs in the process of investment immigration. This case involves a dispute over a transnational investment immigration service contract, and a claim that the trustee should fully perform its obligations in accordance with the stipulations and commitments in the commission contract.

In 2011, Chen signed an immigration service contract with a consulting company, agreeing that the consulting company would handle matters related to Chen's applying for the EB-5 immigrant Investor Program in the United States (Investors obtain residence permits in the United States via the EB-5 program). The consulting company provided Chen and his family with immigration application-related services. From May 2013 to August 2014, Chen and his family successively obtained immigrant visas and permanent residences (green cards) in the United States (valid for 2 years).

After 2015, the company dealt with a number of affairs for Chen such as the I-829 application, consultation with lawyers, and start of the renewal procedure. In 2019, Chen's application for renewal was rejected, and he left the United States and returned to China on the visa deadline. Chen sued the consulting company, demanding return of the investment funds, service fees and attorney fees, claiming compensation for losses in accordance with the Immigration Service Contract and Statement. The court held that the Immigration Service Contract, Statement of Situation, and Statement involved in the case should be taken as a whole, and determined that the two parties were in a commission contract relationship. Combined with the ascertainment of legal opinions, including the policies of the EB-5 immigrant investor program in the United States, the court explored the true intentions of the parties and determined that the consulting company has the contractual obligations to help Chen identify investment projects in the destination country of immigration, choose projects with less risk as investment, and follow up the investment projects. The consulting company made a clear promise to help Chen and his family to obtain a permanent green card and minimize the economic losses, and it should fulfill the promise according to the agreement. The court agreed part of Chen's request, ruling that the consulting company should pay Chen the investment principal of US $500,000 and 25,000 yuan.


BICC holds symposium with visiting Pakistani judges

Judge of Beijing No 4 Intermediate People's Court shares experiences in construction of international commercial courts

Judges from BICC deliver lectures on practices of foreign-related commercial laws at China University of Political Science and Law

Most Requested
One-stop Service Platform
Copyright © Beijing International Commercial Court.
All rights reserved.
Presented by China Daily.