UPDATE: COURT DISMISSES NJ'S APPEAL ON COURT'S DECISION TO UPHOLD THEIR CONTRACT WITH ADOR + THEY IMMEDIATELY FILED ANOTHER APPEAL
Added 2025-04-16 20:21:13 +0000 UTCNewJeans Appeals Court’s Injunction Ruling Against Independent Activities
The members of NewJeans have filed an immediate appeal following the court’s decision to dismiss their objection to an injunction that restricts their ability to carry out independent activities.
According to their legal representative, the appeal was submitted on April 16, just hours after the Seoul Central District Court’s 50th Civil Division (presided over by Chief Judge Kim Sang-hoon) upheld its earlier decision to grant the injunction filed by ADOR. The court reaffirmed, “This injunction is legally justified.”
Previously, on March 21, the court granted ADOR’s request for an injunction to "preserve the agency relationship and prohibit the members from signing advertising or promotional contracts independently." The ruling accepted ADOR’s claims in full.
In such cases, if an injunction is granted, the opposing party—in this case, NewJeans—can file an immediate objection. However, if the objection is dismissed, they have the right to appeal to a higher court.
NewJeans submitted their objection on the same day the injunction was granted, but the court dismissed it. The group promptly appealed the dismissal, initiating a second trial in this legal dispute between the artists and their agency.
The legal conflict traces back to November of last year, when NewJeans held an emergency press conference and declared that their exclusive contract with ADOR had been terminated due to the agency's breach of contract. Following this, the members announced plans to continue their careers under a new group name, NJZ, and began independent promotions.
ADOR responded by filing a lawsuit to confirm the validity of the exclusive contract, arguing that a subjective claim of “broken trust” cannot serve as legal grounds for termination. The agency also sought and received an injunction to prevent the members from continuing independent activities.
If the court’s injunction remains in effect, NewJeans will be prohibited from engaging in any solo or group activities without prior consent from ADOR—at least until the outcome of the main lawsuit is determined.
Meanwhile, the main lawsuit filed by ADOR against the NewJeans members is still underway. The second hearing in that case is scheduled for June 5.
source https://n.news.naver.com/article/009/0005477607?sid=102
Comments
It shows how they REALLY believed they were in the right this whole time. Now reality catches up and they are shocked to hear that they won’t get through with it all. I hope it’s a first step to realize how MHJ isn’t always right. And what do they expect ? They don’t bring any kind of new evidence and just appeal over and over again ?! It’s their damn right - sure. But they don’t have any kind of new evidence and it won’t change things. It was totally predictable what will happen - but that these girls really won’t be able to do anything now is tragic. They messed it all up. Adults around them failed them so bad
Jess
2025-04-18 14:39:36 +0000 UTCWhat is up with these girls? Their behavior is just very suspect. They've basically ruined their careers before they really got to take off, even more than they had. It's sad and, at this point, b-o-r-i-n-g.
Rockermom (Helen V)
2025-04-18 07:47:15 +0000 UTCYou really thought this out 🙃.
Shon Ro
2025-04-17 15:51:09 +0000 UTCWas this ever answered. I'm really curious too... Aren't their limitations on things like this before it becomes contempt of court.
Shon Ro
2025-04-17 15:46:43 +0000 UTCI'm glad it was debunked quickly. He apparently loves all things bunnies (the real ones) and I don't think it was related to new jeans at all.
Shon Ro
2025-04-17 15:45:42 +0000 UTCThey will just keep at it, and keep it tied up in the courts for years, maybe until their contract expires.
Christine
2025-04-17 02:14:49 +0000 UTCI wonder how long it will be before Sejong drops them as a client to protect the company's reputation. At some point, people are going to take their busniess to other law frms not wanting to be asoceated with the ferm in the middle of a very public poop show.
Erika Yates
2025-04-17 02:03:31 +0000 UTCThe 'objection' was a necessary action by NJ'a as they could then appeal their case to the higher courts, who is known to give a broader consideration of the law especially regarding how the outcome could 'affect the people' involved. NJ might get some validation for the 'totality' of their grievances. The higher court appeal might find their 11 pts as evidence of a declining faith in Ador's management, viewed as compounded incidents warranting a loss of trust 'belief 'by NJ, though not sufficient as evidence for termination of a contract. If the court sees this 'belief' by NJ members is plausible in terms of causing them emotional distress or potential harm, it will help their larger case. (next hearing in June). Also if the court recognizes that this 'belief' could hamper the performance and creativity of NJ, thus reducing their ability to be a viable asset under Ador, them staying under contract with Ador could be questioned. I would think that at this juncture is where 'negotiations' happen, i.e. 1) allowing NJ to leave the contract, provided NJ's pay an amt agreeable to Ador. That amount will probably include a determination of: the $ already invested by Ador, the 'potential' earnings if the contract was completed; 2) damages suffered to Ador's company brand and the lessening of NJ brand value due to several contract breech (recent actions taken by the members), and the elongated media presence. 3) BUT there will most likely be a consideration of NJ's emotional suffering regarding uncertainties surrounding MHJ removal that led to their unilateral termination that could reduce the monies owed to Ador, especially if the higher court recognizes continuation is detrimental to NJs mental wellbeing. 4) Ador could allow NJ's contract to be bought out by a 3rd party agreeable to both NJ and Ador for this to be possible but it is doubtful NJ members would agree to the terms of the existing contract and would insist on a new contract with whoever agrees to pay their debt; and/or 5) request the judge make the final determination if the parties cannot find a place to negotiate regarding the dissolution or continuation of the contract and its terms. On a personal note I believe NJ members have always had the right to leave, but needed to pay the fees. I also think many of their actions in the past few months identified as 'contract breaches' were done to lower their brand value, which reduces the amt of $ that can be claimed by Ador, and a 3rd party 'outside Korea' could pay the penalties. Because the amt of $ Ador needs to invest to repair NJ brand image in SKorea will be considerable at this stage. ofc it can be done, but who would want to work with them, what would their rebrand be, and could they have achieved the heights everyone once believed was possible? But if NJ sign with a company from China, SE Asia, the US, or Australia even and promote a newly branded NJ girl group in their regions, that is also plausible. I enjoy following the courts response to the cases as presented to them, not easily determined at times. Unfortunately, there was way too much media influence surrounding this situation, which I believe has been detrimental to the SK public who has been undergoing serious challenges to their socioeconomic and political systems. Looking forward to the closure of these cases with NJ & MHJ.
HHK Maunaowakea
2025-04-17 00:14:55 +0000 UTCHow many times are they allowed to appeal an injunction? and tho Ador hasnt yet sued, why isn't the court charging the girls for continuing in their fraudulent filings?
Seda
2025-04-17 00:10:05 +0000 UTCMy head hurts with the nonsense, and now a producer at Hybe is getting backlash because he jumped on a massive stuffed bunny in a store - the fans are deciding it is emotional abuse under the child care act, because he's causing emotional damage to the minors. FFS - the idiocy.
Nix
2025-04-16 23:57:46 +0000 UTCI think it's a bad move to have the same legal team as mama roach. Isn't it a bit unethical? They have now tied these 2 cases together when they should have always been separate. I've always wondered if mama roach has something on or a relationship with somebody with that firm for them to continue to put their reputation on the line with poor legal advice and bad legal moves. If this is the #2, #1 firm is showing, them up by leaps and bounds. Unless they have some deep dark secret shocker for the trial. I don't see this ending well for the "6" members.
DwareTanya
2025-04-16 22:55:50 +0000 UTCI hope Ador is finished playing nice. Time is money, and Newjeans repeatedly losing has to be adding up for everyone.
Shon Ro
2025-04-16 22:55:36 +0000 UTCthis entire things an interesting subject on its own.
Fairlane Raymundo
2025-04-16 21:48:37 +0000 UTCYes Sejong has a reputation to protect but I wonder that it isn't already irreparably harmed with this case.
Liz
2025-04-16 20:58:44 +0000 UTCThat or NJ is defying their lawyer's advice. I find it hard to believe the #2 law firm in SK is advising them to fight a losing battle. They have a reputation to protect.
Fairlane Raymundo
2025-04-16 20:36:37 +0000 UTCThe waste of money on frivolous legal arguments is really something. At some point, these folks, the members and their parents are going to have to face the reality of owing a tremendous amount of money for breach of K.
Sara-Ellen
2025-04-16 20:26:34 +0000 UTCI think that their lawyers are just using them as a cash grab at this point. They have nothing new to add. And the girls and their parents are too dumb to see this.
Kitty Kat
2025-04-16 20:23:29 +0000 UTC
