FIFTY FIFTY Loses Legal Battle by Having Their Contract Suspension Plea Denied by Court
FIFTY FIFTY's plea for their exclusive contract suspension with ATTRAKT has been denied by the court.
Read more to know further details.
FIFTY FIFTY's Contract Breakup Bid Denied by Court's Decision
Earlier in June 28, FIFTY FIFTY members all filed a provisional disposition in order to suspend their exclusive contracts with their agency ATTRAKT.
Right after the first hearing, the case ended up on a mediation between the two opposing parties, according to the court's recommendation. However, the mediation fell out on August 16, since FIFTY FIFTY had no intention of proceeding and eventually, the battle returned to trial.
On August 28, the Seoul Central District Court has denied the contract suspension requests of all four FIFTY FIFTY members. According to sources, three reasons were laid out as to why the suspension needed to happen and why it was denied by the court.
READ MORE: FIFTY FIFTY Members File Lawsuit Against ATTRAKT to Suspend Exclusive Contracts
The first one was due to an alleged lack of transparency in finances.
The second reason was that of health negligence, with ATTRAKT not being able to take care of the members' health.
Finally, the third was due to an alleged lack of resources for the group's activities.
Despite these claims, the court concluded that evidence was still insufficient to allow suspension. When it comes to transparency in finances, the court claimed that there were "no indication of unpaid earnings owed to FIFTY FIFTY up to this point."
It also declared a certain omission on the company's April statement, which involves FIFTY FIFTY's April digital music revenue having marked as zero. This was soon evaluated when ATTRAKT became aware of the mistake.
The error was made by an employee from The Givers, Ahn Sung Il's company. The court also expressed its thoughts on FIFTY FIFTY's correction filing.
"There was no occurrence of FIFTY FIFTY filing a correction request and ATTRAKT not complying with these concerns.
There was also no instance of ATTRAKT violating their responsibility once or for a long time. It's difficult to consider this incident as a reason for irredeemable breach of trust."
Regarding ATTRAKT neglecting members' health, the court also opposed this viewpoint.
"To address the issue of FIFTY FIFTY member Aran's health, ATTRAKT had arranged for her diagnosis. Afterwards, the agency checked on her recovery and analysis, followed by their adjustment on the group's promotion schedule, as well as Aran's surgery date."
Lastly, the judge pointed out that FIFTY FIFTY didn't raise their concerns to ATTRAKT before filing contract suspensions.
It mentioned that if an agency had violated a contract, artists are legally obligated to send a 14-day grace period to the agency, before informing them of the violation committed.
But in FIFTY FIFTY's situation, members quickly pursued legal action immediately to suspend their contracts, instead of telling their grievances to ATTRAKT first.
"Because of Aran's surgery and some members being diagnosed with COVID-19, their activities temporarily stopped. The members then returned to their families.
Afterwards, they abruptly sent a notice to ATTRAKT saying they would now be terminating their exclusive contracts. There is no evidence proving the agency did not assess the request for correction, despite FIFTY FIFTY's request for correction."
Meanwhile, FIFTY FIFTY's attorney gave an update through a phone call with a news outlet.
"Nothing has ruled yet, since we still have to discuss the situation with the members. However, it's likely that we will appeal to the decision."
What are your thoughts on this?
Read KpopStarz for more K-pop news.
