>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Zhengzhou No. 2 Construction Company v. Wang Liangchu (Case of Dispute over the Breach of the Agreement on Sales of Public-owned House)
郑州二建公司诉王良础公有住房出售协议违约纠纷案
【法宝引证码】

Zhengzhou No. 2 Construction Company v. Wang Liangchu (Case of Dispute over the Breach of the Agreement on Sales of Public-owned House)
(Case of Dispute over the Breach of the Agreement on Sales of Public-owned House)
郑州二建公司诉王良础公有住房出售协议违约纠纷案

Zhengzhou No. 2 Construction Company v. Wang Liangchu
(Case of Dispute over the Breach of the Agreement on Sales of Public-owned House)@#
@#
@#
@#
BASIC FACTS@#
Plaintiff: Zhengzhou No. 2 Construction Engineering Company of Henan Province, address: Red Flag Road, Jinshui District, Zhengzhou, Henan Province.@#
Legal Representative: Deng Yukun, general manager of this company.@#
Defendant: Wang Liangchu, male, 78 years old, home address: Building No. 1, Courtyard No. 92, Yellow River Road, Jinshui District, Zhengzhou.@#
Zhengzhou No. 2 Construction Engineering Company of Henan Province (hereinafter referred to as Construction Company) filed a lawsuit with the People's Court of Jinshui District, Zhengzhou, Henan Province against Wang Liangchu (hereinafter referred to as Wang) for the dispute over the breach of the agreement on sales of public-owned house.@#
Construction Company complained that: Wang violated the agreement, and, without its consent, took the advantage of the reconstruction of Yellow River Road and privately excavated the wall and made a window and a door in the No. 11 apartment at Building No. 1, Courtyard No. 92, Yellow River Road, Jinshui District, Zhengzhou (the No. 11 apartment was purchased by Wang from Construction Company), and Wang's acts seriously affected the quality of Building No. 1 and the safety of other residents in this building. As the constructor and manager of Building No. 1, Construction Company had sent a notice to Wang and ordered him to restitute the altered house, however, Wang disregarded it. So, Construction Company pleaded the court to order Wang to observe the agreement and immediately restitute the altered house.@#
Wang defended that: 1. although Building No. 1 was built by Construction Company, Construction Company had already sold this building out. Since Construction Company was neither the owners' committee nor the house property manger of the No. 1 Building, nor the owner of this building, it had no right to file a lawsuit against Wang regarding the use of this building; 2. when Construction Company sold the No. 11 apartment at Building No. 1 to Wang, both sides had actually entered into an agreement, and Article 6 of this agreement does prescribe “no excavation of wall to make any door or window”. However, since the house had been sold, the purchaser was the new owner of the house and had the right to possess, utilize, seek proceeds from and dispose his own property according to Article 71 of the General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as General Principles of the Civil Law). Article 6 in the agreement infringes on the purchaser's ownership to the house and violates the General Principles of the Civil Law, and should be an invalid clause and have no legal force. Wang only exercised the ownership to his own house, and did not violate the agreement, so the complaint of Construction Company should be rejected.@#
......

 

郑州二建公司诉王良础公有住房出售协议违约纠纷案@#
【裁判摘要】@#
一、建筑物区分所有权人只能在该建筑物中自己专有的部位行使所有权四项权能,未经该建筑物的其他区分所有权人和物业经营管理者、维修者许可,不得对该建筑物的共用部位行使权利。@#
二、公有住房售出单位对公有住房的共用部位承担着维修责任。售出单位在与公有住房买受人签订的售房协议中,为了不加重自己一方在住房售出后的维修负担,约定买受人不得实施有碍公有住房共用部位安全的行为,这样的约定没有限制买受人正当行使自己的权利,因此是合法有效的。@#
@#
原告:河南省郑州市第二建筑工程公司,住所地:郑州市金水区红旗路。@#
法定代表人:邓玉坤,该公司经理。@#
被告:王良础,男,78岁,住郑州市金水区黄河路92号院1号楼。@#
原告河南省郑州市第二建筑工程公司 (以下简称郑州二建公司)因与被告王良础发生公有住房出售协议违约纠纷,向河南省郑州市金水区人民法院提起诉讼。@#
原告诉称:被告违反协议约定且未经原告同意,趁黄河路改造之机,在其从原告处购买的郑州市黄河路92号院1号楼11号住房内擅自开窗扒门,其行为严重影响 1号楼的房屋质量和其他住户安全。作为1号楼的建设者和管理者,原告曾向被告发出通告,限令其将改动的房屋恢复原状,但被告置之不理。请求判令被告遵守协议约定,立即将擅自改动的房屋恢复原状。@#
被告辩称:1.1号楼虽然由原告建设,但原告已将该楼房出售。现在原告既不是 1号楼的业主委员会,也不是1号楼的物业管理者,更不是1号楼的房屋所有权人,无权因1号楼的使用问题起诉被告。2.原告向被告出售1号楼11号住房时,双方确实签订过协议,该协议第六条里也确实有“不准开门、挖窗”等规定。房屋既然出售,买受人就是房屋新的所有权人,依照《中华人民共和国民法通则》(以下简称民法通则)第七十一条规定,有权对自己的财产行使占有、使用、收益和处分的权利。协议第六条侵害买受人对房屋的所有权,违反了民法通则的规定,是无效条款,没有法律约束力。被告只是对自己的房屋依法行使所有权,并不违约,应当驳回原告的起诉。@#
郑州市金水区人民法院经审理查明:@#
郑州市金水区黄河路92号院1号楼,是原告郑州二建公司于1980年底建设的五层公有住宅楼房,其中的11号房间位于一层且临街,分配给本公司职工、被告王良础居住。1996年住房制度改革中,郑州二建公司以成本价每平方米649元向职工出售公有住宅楼房。在折算了工龄等项优惠后,王良础以10 540.29元价款,购买了建筑面积56.82平方米的11号房间。@#
公有住房出售并由买受人住用5年后,依法可以进入市场流通。2000年9月1日,为办理房屋进入市场流通所需的房屋所有权证,以原告郑州二建公司为甲方,被告王良础为乙方,双方补签了一份《公有住房出售协议书》。协议书除约定由乙方享有 11号房间的所有权外,还在第五条约定:住房售出后,甲方负责国家规定保修期内的正常维修;保修期过后,乙方负责自用部分的维修,甲方负责1号楼外墙面、走廊通道及其他共用部位的维修。第六条约定了售出房屋的管理办法,其中①为:未经甲方同意,乙方不得实施挖门、开窗、打隔墙等改变房屋结构的行为,不得移动设备位置,不得在房上加层,否则应负责恢复原状,拆除违章建筑;②为:售出的房屋不得出租,乙方要改变房屋使用性质,必须经甲方同意,并办理有关手续;③为:乙方要爱护房屋共用部分,不得侵占房屋共用部分,也不得妨碍他人对房屋共用部分的正常使用。@#
协议签订后,被告王良础取得了1号楼11号房间的所有权证。2004年,王良础在11号房间的临街墙上开挖了门窗。原告郑州二建公司认为王良础的行为违约,在劝阻无效后提起本案诉讼,要求王良础将该房屋恢复原状。@#
@#
郑州市金水区人民法院认为:@#
双方当事人所签的《公有住房出售协议书》,是双方当事人的真实意思表示,且不违背法律规定,应当认定合法有效。《中华人民共和国合同法》第八条规定:“依法成立的合同,对当事人具有法律约束力。当事人应当按照约定履行自己的义务,不得擅自变更或者解除合同。”“依法成立的合同,受法律保护。”被告王良础在取得1号楼11号房间的所有权后,违反双方所签协议的约定,未经原告郑州二建公司许可,任意在11号房间墙上开挖门、窗,改变了1号楼的承重结构,且对楼上住户造成不安全隐患。民法通则一百一十一条规定:“当事人一方不履行合同义务或者履行合同义务不符合约定条件的,另一方有权要求履行或者采取补救措施,并有权要求赔偿损失。”在王良础违约后,郑州二建公司有权要求王良础依照民法通则一百三十四条第一款第(五)项的规定,恢复11号房间原状。@#
......


Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥500.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese