Contract Dispute Between an Advertising Company in Xiamen and a Client

Case Summary

The Plaintiff, a certain advertising company in Xiamen, entered into an "Advertising Placement Service Contract" with the Defendant, a certain brand management company in Fujian. The contract stipulated that the Plaintiff would provide advertising placement services for subway and bus media in the Xiamen region, with a total contract value of 86 ten thousand yuan and a service period of 3 months. The Plaintiff fulfilled all advertising placement obligations as agreed and submitted comprehensive placement reports and monitoring data. However, the Defendant refused to pay the remaining 56 ten thousand yuan, having paid only 30 ten thousand yuan, citing unmet expectations regarding brand exposure and conversion rates post-placement. Consequently, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, demanding payment of the outstanding service fees and liquidated damages.

Key Dispute

1.Has the plaintiff fully fulfilled its contractual obligations for ad placement?

2.Is the defendant's defense that service fees should not be paid due to unsatisfactory campaign performance valid?

3.Does the liquidated damages claimed by the plaintiff comply with the contract agreement and applicable laws?

Case Strategy

1.Specific requirements for ad placement in the fixed-service contract, monitoring data submitted by the plaintiff to verify placements, placement reports, and communication records between both parties—key evidence.

2.The plaintiff submitted evidence showing that the contract only specified the media channels, placement locations, duration, and frequency of delivery, without stipulating performance metrics such as impressions or conversion rates. Therefore, the defendant's defense based on expected results lacks contractual basis.

3.The Plaintiff has fully fulfilled its placement obligations as stipulated in the Contract, and the Defendant shall pay the service fee accordingly.

4.Calculate the penalty amount for the defendant's overdue payment precisely according to the standard stipulated in the contract.

Processing Result

The court ruled that the defendant shall pay the plaintiff the outstanding service fees of 56 ten thousand yuan, and liquidated damages for late payment calculated at a rate of 0.05% per day on the principal amount of 56 ten thousand yuan (from the due date of the service fees until the date of actual payment in full); the defendant shall bear all litigation costs incurred in this case.

Similar Case Consultation