Legal professionals, please come in! Urgent! Thank you 5

as required by law;

1. The four contract foremen belong to the partnership and should bear joint and several liability.

2. You and the contractor belong to the employment relationship, and the contractor should bear the responsibility of the employer.

3. You are now almost three months after the operation, if the ** is over, you can directly sue the four contractors to the court, apply to the court for disability identification, and require them to bear joint and several liability.

First of all, it depends on whether the contractor you are with has the construction qualification, that is, the business license, if not, see if the contractor is with the company, if it is a contractor, you also belong to the company where the contractor works, so that you can apply to the labor department for work-related injury identification, and then conduct labor ability appraisal, and then conduct labor arbitration, you can get compensation, if the company does not recognize your labor relationship, then you must first conduct labor dispute arbitration, determine the labor relationship, and then go down, By the way, the burden of proof is reversed in labor arbitration, that is, if the company cannot prove that there is no employment relationship between you and the company, it will be deemed to have an employment relationship. If you reconcile, you won't have to be so troublesome.

The four of them are general partnerships, and the relationship between you is an employment relationship, and in the case of an employment relationship, the employer will be liable for the personal injury of the employee during the work, and the four of them are jointly and severally liable unlimitedly, that is, any one of them has the responsibility to fully compensate you, which should win the lawsuit, but you are mainly worried that they have no money? The partners of the general partnership are jointly and severally liable for the debts of the partnership with all their property, and it is better that they do not have it, and if they have, they will take it out to repay the debt, and you can apply to the court for enforcement, and the court will compensate you for their property by selling and auctioning it. Moral damages are not easy to say, but they apply to facts that have special significance to the victim, and you can claim compensation for lost work expenses during your hospitalization, and you can also claim that the legal costs be borne by the losing party.

I'm just a student, and the answers may be biased, but I hope it will help you and wait for someone to have a better answer. But since there is a lawsuit? Why don't you go to a lawyer?

Contract Law: Article 224 The lessee may, with the consent of the lessor, sublease the leased property to a third party. Lessee subleases.

The lease contract between the lessee and the lessor continues to be valid, and if a third party causes losses to the leased property, the lessee.

Damages should be compensated.

If the lessee subleases without the consent of the lessor, the lessor may terminate the contract.

The answer to this case can only be said that the sublessee has agreed to it in accordance with Article 224 of the Contract Law, and the contract between A and B is valid; The sublease contract between B and C is valid; But is C's sublease to D with the consent of A (the property owner)? If C subleases to D without A's consent, the lease contract is null and void.

Later, when the original lease contract was not terminated, A leased it to D again, and of course, the contract of the latter one of "the second marriage of this daughter" was bound to be invalid.

Handling opinion: The contract signed between A and D is invalid, and A should refund the rent to D, and bear the reasonable losses during the period when the rent has been paid; C has no right to dispose of the sublease contract, and if A or B does not agree, C must also refund the rent paid by D, and shall also bear the reasonable loss during the period of rent paid; For this purpose, B has the right to lease the use for the duration of the contract. It is not until the lease contract between A and B is terminated that the contract of the other object can be re-agreed.

1 A is not liable after the rent is returned.

2 Party B can continue to have the right to use it.

3. B has the right to the transfer money of C's proceeds, because B has the right to revoke the transfer agreement signed by C without the consent of Party B. 4

1.A is not liable for the return of B's rent.

2.B also continues to have the right to use the store.

3.B has ownership of the transfer proceeds of C. However, B is in breach of contract, so C can claim liquidated damages or claim back the transfer money.

4.D and A signed a tenancy agreement. Therefore, A is held accountable because of the rental contract signed with A.

I don't understand why the contract hasn't come into effect here.

5.There is no need for your additional points.

You will need to consult a lawyer for specific questions. Nothing is clear in this case. How to make it clear.

1) I don't understand why it takes a few months for the agreement between A, C and D to take effect.

Contracts are generally effective from the moment they are signed. Since it didn't take effect. Then come as agreed.

2) B transfers without A's consent, and if A later does not agree, then all assignments are invalid.