The house was sold the next day, and the demolition announcement came!The homeowner cried and said that he lost 1 million overnight, and he announced the buyer and the agent.

On the second day of the household transfer formalities, the government promulgated the collection announcement. The seller immediately felt that he had lost money, wanted to regret it, and refused to deliver the house.

Recently, the Ningbo Lizhou Court tried such a case of disputes in the house trading contract.

The house was sold the second day, and the demolition announcement came

The original homeowner sued buyers and intermediaries

In 2021, Aunt Liu, who lives in Soochow Town, Lizhou, commissioned his friend Xiao Yang to help him find a suitable second -hand house in the Laojiang East location.

Xiao Yang used an intermediary company in Ningbo to find a 55 -square -meter house that was selling. The landlord is Mr. Chen.

Later, Mr. Chen signed a house trading intermediary contract with Aunt Liu and a intermediary company in Ningbo. Aunt Liu paid Mr. Chen's total purchase payment of 2 million yuan to Mr. Chen.

A few days later, Aunt Liu and Mr. Chen signed a house trading contract. On the same day, the two parties went through the house transfer procedures and agreed to deliver the house the next day.

However, the next day, the People's Government of the Lizhou District of Ningbo City issued an announcement that the house that Mr. Chen had just sold was within the scope of the proposed collection of the announcement ...

Knowing that the house might be demolished, Mr. Chen immediately contacted Aunt Liu and Xiao Yang and wanted to cancel the second -hand housing transaction.

Aunt Liu naturally refused to. After the communication was unsuccessful, Mr. Chen not only refused to deliver the house, but also sued Aunt Liu and an intermediary company in Ningbo to the Puzhou Court, and listed Xiao Yang as a third party to request the order:

Lift the housing buying and selling intermediary contract and the housing sales contract.

During the trial, Mr. Chen cried and said that according to the demolition policy, my original house could replace a set of resettlement houses of more than 90 square meters. The two defendants told that they were going to be demolished, but intentionally concealed ...

Aunt Liu answered three points:

I am old and entrust Xiao Yang to find a house. Mr. Chen actively sells the house. This transaction is your love.

Secondly, the news that the community where this house is located may be demolished. It is well known that even the security guards at the entrance of the community know. How can Mr. Chen be unknown as an owner? Moreover, I have paid the house full amount, the transfer procedures have been completed, and the house sale contract has been fulfilled.

Because the demolition work is still underway, whether the house will eventually be demolished, there is no conclusion, and Mr. Chen's complaint is violated with integrity.

The court rejected the plaintiff's entire litigation request

How did the court judge?

After the trial, the Luanzhou Court rejected all the plaintiff's claims. The reason given by the court is as follows:

The house trading contract between the plaintiff and the two defendants, the house trading contract between the plaintiff and the defendant Liu was established and took effect.

Mr. Chen and Aunt Liu's agreement on the price, transfer and delivery time of the house involved in the case are all from the true will of the two parties. On the day of the signing of the house buying and selling contract The request of Aunt Liu and Xiao Yang.

After visiting the community where the house involved in the case was located on the spot, the judge learned that the area had been circulating for a long time. Mr. Chen was listed on a number of intermediary companies to sell houses, and he should understand the basic situation of the house in order to finally determine the price of the house. Therefore, Mr. Chen should have a certain predictability for the house involved in the case, and incorporate the factors within the scope of the price of pricing, and the final transaction price was not lower than the normal market price of the community at that time.

Aunt Liu has paid the contract for the contract agreed in full, and the house transfer procedures have been completed. Mr. Chen cannot prove that continuing to deliver the house will have a significant unfair effects. Therefore, Mr. Chen advocated the termination of the contract in accordance with the principle of situation changes, and the court did not support it.

The second trial of the case maintained the original judgment. At present, the judgment of the case has taken effect, and the house involved has been delivered.

Judge

Zhang Boping, the undertaking judge of the case, introduced that the plaintiff in the case was relieved by the situation to the contract.

The principle of situation change means that after the contract is valid, the basis of the parties cannot be attributed to the parties (the unpredictable things of the parties), resulting in the basics of the contract shake or lose. The purpose of the contract should be allowed to change the content of the contract or terminate the contract.

The principle of changes in the situation has changed dramatically that the foundation established in the contract, which causes continuing to be fulfilled to be failed to be fair, led to obvious benefits of one party, and the other party is obviously damaged.

The reason for the principle of changes in the situation in this case is:

I. The news that the house involved in the house is about to be demolished for a long time. The plaintiff is listed in a number of intermediary agencies in order to sell the house. It should understand the basic situation of the house that is about to face the house, and the factors are included in the scope of the price of pricing. Essence

Second, the principle of situation changes only considers whether the "continuing to perform the contract" is failed to be fair. The house trading contracts of the two parties in this case have completed the full payment and transfer procedures, and the defendant's contract obligation has been fulfilled. The plaintiff's contract purpose of signing the contract of the house sale and selling contract has been realized, so there is no situation of continuing to perform the contract.

Article 533 of the "People's Republic of China" stipulates:

After the contract was established, the basic conditions of the contract had a major changes that the parties could not foresee when the contract was concluded and did not belong to the business risk. Continue to perform the contract is obviously unfair to the parties.If the negotiation cannot be negotiated within a reasonable period, the parties may ask the people's court or arbitration agency to change or terminate the contract.Source 丨 Ningbo Lizhou Court, Daily Economic News, Ningbo Evening News, Metropolis Express, etc.

Image source 丨 Vision China

Edit 丨 Zhang Lan

- END -