民商案例演示文稿1.ppt

Teacher :Mr yin Name :Du luyao Study ID:201102110096 Major: Civil and Commercial Law One of the cases On December 20, 2011, the Supreme Peoples Court promulgated the Notice of the Supreme Peoples Court on Issuing the First Set of Guiding Cases, setting forth the initial set of four guiding cases. This event symbolizes the initial establishment of China’s system of guiding cases and is of epoch-making significance to our country’s judicial work. Shanghai Zhongyuan Property Consultancy Co., Ltd. v. Tao Dehua 上海中原物业顾问有限公司诉陶德华居间合同纠纷案 对合同法第424条的理解与思考 Basic Facts Plaintiff Shanghai Zhongyuan Property Consultancy Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Zhongyuan Company”) alleged that: Defendant Tao Dehua, by using information provided by Zhongyuan Company regarding a property located at Zhuzhou Road, Hongkou District of Shanghai Municipality, deliberately bypassed the real estate agency and directly concluded a real estate purchase contract in private with the seller In violation of the provisions of the Confirmation of Prospective Real Estate Purchase, Taos act is an act of maliciously concluding a deal without the involvement of the real estate agency. Hence, Zhongyuan Company requested the court to order Tao Dehua to pay liquidated damages of 16,500 yuan. Defendant Tao Dehua contended that: The original owner, Li (first name withheld), of the property at issue authorized multiple agencies to sell the property. Zhongyuan Company was not a sole agency with an exclusive control of information regarding the property, and Tao Dehua did not use information provided by Zhongyuan Company. Thus, there was no breach of contract for concluding a deal without the involvement of the real estate agency. At trial, the court found that: In the second half of 2008, in order to sell the property at issue, the original homeowner, Li, listed it at multiple real estate agencies. On October 22, 2008, a realtor from a real estate agency company in Shanghai brought Tao Dehua