Dancer Noze Sues Agency Over Payment Dispute, “Trust Has Been Destroyed After Months of Unsettled Accounts”
Noze is suing her agency over unpaid settlements. The agency argues that they had valid reasons for delaying the payment, citing Noze’s SNS advertisement controversy.
Dancer Noze is currently in legal proceedings with her agency over unpaid settlements. According to legal sources on April 9th, Noze filed a lawsuit against her agency, Starting House Co., Ltd., for confirmation of obligations and requested a preliminary injunction to stop the exclusive contract’s effect until the lawsuit concludes.
Noze’s representative stated that the dancer had not received her settlement payments for several months starting from April 2021. “We notified Starting House of contract termination in November 2021, and we filed a lawsuit to confirm that the contract was properly terminated,” said the representative.
Noze’s representative also claimed that Starting House postponed the payment despite repeated requests from Noze. In August 2021, the agency refused to pay her and stated, “We will review your activity and pay you again later,” according to Noze’s representative.
However, the agency only paid Noze after she notified them of the contract termination. Noze’s side, however, believes that the agency unilaterally calculated the amount, causing trust issues between the two parties.
Starting House claimed that they had valid reasons for delaying the payment. They argued that Noze’s SNS advertisement controversy had led to potential contract terminations and costly damage claims.
In July 2021, Noze received advertising fees from several small and medium-sized companies but did not post and deleted the posts within the deadline, raising suspicion of power abuse behavior. Noze later apologized for her behavior and suspended her activities.
Starting House stated, “We could have lost contracts or faced significant damage claims due to this controversy. After the issue was resolved, we paid her.” The agency also argued that Noze had a significant role in the contract termination and could not resume her activities in the entertainment industry soon. Starting House, therefore, requested the court to dismiss the preliminary injunction.
Source: Nate.
