After signing a housing contract, it repeatedly made difficulties and did not cooperate with the online signing. The Shanghai court ruled that the seller compensated 2 million

It is agreed to purchase a real estate at a price of about 10 million yuan. However, during the signing process, the seller repeatedly refused to sign the online signing, and even asked the buyer to pay 5 million yuan in advance to buy a house. After being rejected, the seller simply announced the termination of the contract unilaterally. Unexpectedly, the Shanghai Court supported the buyer's claim in both trials, and the decision of the seller agreed to pay 20%of the house price, that is, 2 million yuan.

what is the problem?

In late August 2020, Mr. Song and Ms. Wang jointly signed a house trading agreement at the intermediary company, agreed that Mr. Song purchased a real estate located in Songjiang under the name of Ms. Wang at a price of 10 million yuan. Two days after the agreement was signed, Mr. Song paid a deposit of 500,000 yuan through an intermediary, and then continued to raise the remaining money. According to the agreement, he must pay Ms. Wang for 5 million yuan to buy a house within two months in order to go through the online signing procedures.

In late September 2020, Mr. Song suddenly received the information from Ms. Wang, asking him to transfer 5 million yuan before September 30 before applying for online signing. This was more than 20 days earlier than the period agreed on the two parties. Mr. Song and the intermediary were surprised and refused. By October 14, the last period of the agreed agreed was about 10 days. Mr. Song contacted Ms. Wang through the intermediary and said that the 5 million yuan payment had been in place and could be paid according to the contract. I hope Ms. Wang cooperates with the online signing.

However, Ms. Wang said that because Mr. Song refused to pay before September 30, she could not settle bank loans and mortgage in front of this node, so she could not apply for online signing. Since then, the intermediary has communicated with Ms. Wang many times, and Ms. Wang insisted that she had to wait for the bank loan to pay off the online signing. It was dragged until mid -December 2020, and Ms. Wang proposed that Mr. Song would wait for Mr. Song to transfer money to his account before applying for online signing. This request was rejected by the intermediary, and the intermediary stated that it should be paid online first. If Ms. Wang is not assured, Mr. Song can ask Mr. Song to show the relevant funds. On the day before the two parties agreed to the online signing date, Ms. Wang changed the hexagram again and asked Mr. Song to pay a 20%liquidated damage to continue selling the house, otherwise the contract would be lifted.

Mr. Song resolutely disagreed that after Ms. Wang unilaterally announced the termination of the contract, she sued her to court. The court of first instance believes that Mr. Song and Ms. Wang signed the "Real Estate Trading Intermediary Agreement" to conclude the relationship between the housing sale contract. All should abide by performance. It can be seen through the evidence shown by the two parties that Ms. Wang's opinion or requesting the contract in the communication is inconsistent with her contract rights. This case is due to the contract of the contract due to the breach of the contract. After the contract is lifted, it has not yet been fulfilled and the performance has been terminated; if it has been fulfilled, according to the performance and the nature of the contract, the parties may request the restoration of the original state, take other remedial measures, and have the right to request compensation for losses. Based on this, Ms. Wang should return 500,000 yuan to Mr. Song and bear the liability for breach of contract and pay 2 million yuan in liquidated damages.

After the first trial, Ms. Wang believed that the liquidated damage was too high and appealed to the Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court. After hearing on the trial of the Shanghai Intermediate People's Court, the intermediary agreement signed by the two parties did not specify the order of the online signing time and the payment down payment. Unilateral relief is improper. Ms. Wang used the prerequisites for the online signing of the Internet to violate the agreement and constitute a fundamental breach of contract. The court of first instance in accordance with the agreed liability clause, and based on the principle of fairness and honesty trust, comprehensively considers the predictable rules and the rules of damage reduction. Reasonable punishment of breach of contract.

Based on this, the Shanghai No. 1 Middle School rejected the appeal and maintained the original sentence.

Liberation Daily · Shangguan News Original manuscript, reprinting without permission

Author: Wang Xianle

WeChat editor: nano

School counterpart: Jia Simin

- END -