China Red Bull’s latest response: Enjoy the rights stipulated in the Agreement for 50 years in accordance with the law

In response to Thailand’s recent statements and public opinion hype related to the 50-year “Agreement” on its Weixin Official Accounts, China Red Bull issued a statement on the evening of March 3 in response, stating that it enjoys the rights stipulated in the 50-year “Agreement” in accordance with the law, and refuted Thailand’s Tiansi statement.

The full text of the statement is as follows:

Recently, Thailand’s Tiansi published a ten-thousand-word article on its Weixin Official Accounts on the significance of the 50-year “Agreement”. Previously, Thailand’s Tiansi and relevant parties flatly denied that they had signed the 50-year-old “Agreement” and publicly claimed that there was no such agreement. The obvious change in attitude and the information disclosed in writing prove that Thailand’s Tiansi has believed that the 50-year-old “Agreement” is authentic and that the agreement is of decisive significance in identifying the dispute over the China Red Bull series. Our company declares the following:

1. Thailand’s Tiansi statement no longer explicitly denies that it has signed the “Agreement” for 50 years or claims that the agreement does not exist. In fact, it already believes that the agreement is true.

1. The 50-year “Agreement” clarifies that Party C is a company with Zhongtai Red Bull or other name approved by the government. Thailand’s Tiansi used a partial generalization and deliberately erased the second half of the definition of Party C in the “Agreement”, trying to imply that the authenticity of the 50-year “Agreement” was in doubt, but instead wanted to cover it up.

In particular, the effective ruling of the Beijing City Higher People’s Court (2023) Jingminzhong No. 935 has determined that China Red Bull is the subject of the 50-year Agreement and enjoys the rights stipulated in the agreement.

2. Tiansi of Thailand emphasized that the 50-year “Agreement” was not stamped with the official seal of the company. On the signing page of the “1998 Joint Venture Contract”, the company’s official seal was not stamped when Tiansi signed it, and Ms. PAVANA is the signing representative of Tiansi Thailand. Obviously, Ms. PAVANA’s signature and signature and official seal are both practices for Thailand’s Tiansi to sign agreements to the outside world, and Thailand Tiansi recognizes the legitimacy and effectiveness of these two signing methods. Thailand’s Tiansi juxtaposed the signature page of the “95 Joint Venture Contract” with the “Agreement” for comparison, but deliberately did not compare it with the “98 Joint Venture Contract” in order to mislead the media and consumers and disrupt the audio-visual audience.

3. The original 50-year “Agreement” has been verified and signed by a judicial appraisal agency as authentic. Faced with the judicial appraisal opinion, apart from outright denial, Thailand Tiansi could not explain why the “Agreement” had Ms. PAVANA’s autograph. The factual basis for the first-instance judgment of Shenzhen Qianhai Court to determine the authenticity of the 50-year “Agreement” was judicial appraisal opinions and had nothing to do with the notarization certificate of Beijing Dongfang Notary Office. Faced with the unchangeable fact of the authenticity of the 50-year “Agreement”, Thailand’s Tiansi is undoubtedly resisting stubbornly and confusing right and wrong.

The original text of the first-instance judgment of Shenzhen Qianhai Court is as follows:

The original judicial appraisal opinion is as follows:

4. Thailand’s Tiansi quoted it out of context and concealed up the fact that the arbitration tribunal did not review the agreement because the 50-year Agreement was not within the scope of arbitration cases in the case ruled by the Shenzhen International Arbitration Court, and used its failure to adopt the agreement to insinuate the authenticity of the agreement, maliciously distorts the facts, and deceives the media and the public.

2. Thailand’s Tiansi deliberately confused the 50-year “Agreement” with the joint venture contract, replacing the agreement signed between the resource party and the joint venture company with a shareholder agreement. It only talked about the rights of shareholders and did not talk about the obligations of the resource party, which was full of loopholes.

1. The joint venture contract does not have the effect of changing or replacing the 50-year Agreement. The fact that the 50-year “Agreement” and the joint venture contract signing entities and different legal relationships has been recognized by the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court. Thailand’s Tiansi denied the 50-year joint venture contract with a 20-year term. The “Agreement” stipulates that China Red Bull’s 50-year term benefits cannot be established. It used its control entity to maliciously obstruct China Red Bull from extending the operating term through a board resolution, which is a malicious breach of contract.

2. The 50-year “Agreement” is directly related to the legalization of Red Bull Beverage in China. While Thailand’s Tiansi cannot operate Red Bull Beverage in China, it cooperates with China state-owned enterprises and has reached a 50-year exclusive operation agreement by the joint venture company. After the signing of the 50-year Agreement, the parties have not jointly signed any other agreements, and there is no agreement to change or terminate the 50-year Agreement. Thailand’s Tiansi intends to tamper with history to cover up its dishonest, unethical and illegal behavior of maliciously breaching contract and seizing joint venture benefits.

3. The Supreme People’s Court has found that the dispute between China Red Bull and Tiansi of Thailand regarding the use of the Red Bull trademark and the production of Red Bull beverage has been filed in a separate lawsuit and should be resolved separately. While the relevant case was being tried, Thailand’s Tiansi arbitrarily edited and pieced together facts and adjudication documents, quoted them out of context, and distorted facts. This is its consistent practice of trying to interfere with judicial and market order, and its usual means of concocting false news, deceiving, and misleading the public.

4. Thailand’s Tiansi’s long discussion on the significance of the 50-year “Agreement” has already demonstrated that the agreement has a decisive impact on the Red Bull dispute. If Thailand Tiansi publicly acknowledges the real existence of the agreement, it will have absolute negative effect on the dozens of lawsuits and thousands of reports it has launched since 2016. This is also the 50-year “Agreement” that has had on Thailand Tiansi. The fatal effect of competition restrictions.

China Red Bull believes that judicial authorities at all levels will make a fair and impartial determination of the 50-year Agreement and provide fair and just protection to the legitimate rights and interests of China Red Bull and its small and micro enterprises in its huge industrial chain. China Red Bull is the actual founder, operator and main contributor of Red Bull beverages and its brand in China. It will take legal measures in accordance with the law to resolutely safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of enterprises and partners.

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and Thailand and the 50th golden year of China-Thailand friendship. China Red Bull is a witness, participant and beneficiary of its 30-year history. At present, the production and sales of Red Bull in China are normal. We will, as always, provide high-quality products and services to jointly build satisfactory consumption and repay the long-term trust and support of consumers and partners!

 red Bull vitamin beverage co., Ltd.

 3 March 2025