May 31, 2010
---------------------
Monday
>>>Welcome visitor, you're not logged in.
Login   Subscribe Now!
Home User Management About Us Chinese
  Bookmark   Download   Print
Search:  serch "Fabao" Window Font Size: Home PageHome PageHome Page
 
Wan Xuequan and Wan Bing v. Di Ping and Other Persons (Case about disputes over a house sale contract)
万学全、万兵诉狄平等人房屋买卖合同纠纷案
【法宝引证码】
 
  
Wan Xuequan and Wan Bing v. Di Ping and Other Persons (Case about disputes over a house sale contract) 万学全、万兵诉狄平等人房屋买卖合同纠纷案
[Judgment Abstract] [裁判摘要]
When a family member living together with other family members sells under his or her name a house under the name of other family members to any other person, whether such act is valid for the house owner must be judged on the basis of whether the house owner knows in advance and consents to the sale of the house. To this end, the people's court shall make a comprehensive judgment in light of whether the property certificate and keys of the house are held by the house owner, payment of consideration, the duration in which the buyer actually occupies the house as well as the relevant testimony of witnesses. 共同居住的家庭成员,以自己的名义将其他家庭成员名下的房屋出卖给他人,该行为对房屋所有人是否有效,须判断房屋所有人是否事前知晓且同意。为此,人民法院应当结合房屋产权证书、钥匙是否为房屋所有人持有,对价支付情况,买受人实际占有房屋持续时间以及相关证人证言等综合判定。

BASIC FACTS
 
Plaintiff: Wan Xuequan, male, 67 years old, Chinese Han, domiciled in Jiangdu District, Yangzhou City, Jiangsu Province. 原告:万学全。
Plaintiff: Wan Bing, male, 38 years old, Chinese Han, domiciled in Jiangdu District, Yangzhou City, Jiangsu Province. 原告:万兵。
Defendant: Di Ping, male, 92 years old, Chinese Han, domiciled in New District, Zhenjiang City, Jiangsu Province. 被告:狄平。
Defendant: Guan Yun, female, 67 years old, Chinese Han, domiciled in New District, Zhenjiang City, Jiangsu Province. 被告:管耘。
Defendant: Ding Qiyuan, male, 71 years old, Chinese Han, domiciled in New District, Zhenjiang City, Jiangsu Province. 被告:丁齐元。
Plaintiffs Wan Xuequan and Wan Bing filed a lawsuit with the People's Court of Jiangdu District, Yangzhou City, Jiangsu Province against defendants Di Ping, Guan Yun, and Ding Qiyuan for disputes over a house sale contract. 原告万学全、万兵因与被告狄平、管耘、丁齐元发生房屋买卖合同纠纷,向江苏省扬州市江都区人民法院提起诉讼。
Plaintiffs Wan Xuequan and Wan Bing alleged that: On July 5, 2000, defendants Di Ping, Guan Yun, and Di Qiyuan sold the roughcast house with the area of 85.12 square meters, Room X in Building X of Criminal Police Group located in Dongfanghong East Road, the former Jiangdu Township and the affiliated garage to plaintiffs and both parties concluded a house sale contract. As agreed, plaintiffs made the down payment of CNY100,000 to defendants, who then delivered the keys and old property certificate to plaintiffs, and plaintiffs decorated the house and have been living in the house up to now. In 2012, the new property certificate was issued upon approval. Plaintiffs have repeatedly required defendants' assistance in the handling of house ownership transfer formalities, but defendants always ignored and turned a deaf ear. Therefore, plaintiffs filed a lawsuit with the People's Court of Jiangdu District and requested the Court to order that defendants should assist in the handling of house ownership transfer formalities and bear the liquidated damages and economic losses of CNY1,289.2 in total. 原告万学全、万兵诉称:2000年7月5日,被告狄平、管耘、丁齐元将坐落在原江都镇东方红东路刑警大队X幢X室面积 85.12平方米的毛坯房和附属车库卖给原告,并签下房屋买卖协议。原告按协议约定先行给付了被告10万元,被告向原告交付了房屋钥匙和老房产证,原告即对该房进行装修入住至今。2012年核发新证,原告多次要求被告协助办理过户手续,但被告始终置若罔闻,不予理睬,故诉至法院,请求判令被告协助办理房屋过户手续并承担违约金和经济损失合计1289.2元。
...... 被告狄平辩称:被告狄平没有与任何人签订过房屋买卖协议,讼争房屋为狄平所有,任何人无权处分该房屋,原告的诉讼请求无事实和法律依据,请求法院依法驳回原告的诉讼请求。
 被告丁齐元、管耘辩称:原告万兵提供的房屋买卖协议是原告与丁齐元签订的,被告狄平和管耘未签字。丁齐元确实收到原告购房款定金1万元,并出具了收条。管耘和丁齐元确实收到原告购房款合计10万元,并由管耘出具了收条。但狄平对卖房事实并不知情。
 
 扬州市江都区人民法院经一审查明:
 万兵系万学全与徐伯兰(已故)之子,管耘系狄平与孙秀珍(已故)之女,丁齐元系管耘之夫,丁海燕系管耘与丁齐元之女。
 被告狄平于1996年从原江都市法院分得一套房改房,1999年4月该房开始拆除重建,2000年初狄平因该房拆迁始获得本案诉争房屋。2000年7月5日,原告万学全、万兵与被告签订房屋买卖协议一份,双方约定将狄平名下的坐落在原江都镇东方红东路刑警大队X幢X室和车库出卖给原告。双方约定房屋价款10.8万元,付款方式为:协议生效后由原告先付定金1万元,被告交付老产权证时再付9万元,被告协助办理房屋过户手续后,付清余款8千元。协议签订当日,被告丁齐元代狄平收到万兵购房定金1万元,并出具收条一份。
 2000年8月22日,被告管耘、丁齐元代被告狄平收到原告万兵购房款9万元,同日,管耘出具10万元收条一份(包括2000年7月5日丁齐元收到的1万元),丁齐元将诉争房屋的老房产证及钥匙交付原告。原告自此对诉争房屋装修、入住,并居住至今。
 2012年11月2日,案外人丁海燕出具收条一份,以办新证为由从原告万学全、万兵处借走诉争房屋老产权证,之后为被告狄平办理了新房产证。由于被告一直未履行协助过户义务,为此,原告诉至一审法院,请求判令:被告协助将诉争房屋过户至原告名下;被告支付违约金及相关经济损失1289.2元,并承担本案全部诉讼费。
 法院审理中,被告丁齐元、管耘、狄平就原告万学全、万兵提供的房屋买卖协议中狄平的签名提出笔迹鉴定申请,因狄平始终拒绝出庭提供笔迹样本,加之丁齐元、管耘阻止法院直接接触狄平以查明本案事实,法院对被告的鉴定申请未予准许。
 另查明,被告狄平之妻于农历2000年正月初二去世。原告万学全之妻徐伯兰在诉讼过程中于2013年5月28日去世。狄平在诉争房屋出卖前至诉讼发生时一直与被告丁齐元、管耘共同生活。
 扬州市江都区人民法院一审认为:
 依法成立的合同受法律保护。被告丁齐元和管耘2000年就收到原告万学全、万兵的10万元购房款,并且向原告交付了讼争房屋的钥匙和老产权证,原告占有该房屋后装修并使用至今,三被告一直未提出异议。关于三被告认为被告狄平对房屋出卖一事不知情的辩解,证人夏元庆、邹凤香证实,狄平在房屋出卖后多次来江都时谈及房屋出卖事宜,对房屋出卖的事实和价格等完全知晓。狄平在讼争房屋出卖之前即与丁齐元和管耘共同生活至今,三被告的辩解完全违背客观事实,且与常理不符,法院依法不予采信。本案中,原告按约交付了价款,被告也交付了房屋,双方房屋买卖合同关系依法成立,房屋买卖协议有效。虽然双方签订的《房屋转让协议》存在一定瑕疵,但不影响房屋买卖的效力,故原告要求被告协助办理房屋权属变更手续的诉讼请求符合法律规定,法院予以支持。被告在讼争房屋过户条件成就后,拒绝履行过户义务,有悖诚信,显属无理,应负此次纠纷的全部责任。原告要求被告承担违约金和经济损失的诉讼请求,于法无据,法院不予支持。
 ......



Dear visitor,you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases . If you are not a subscriber, please subscribe . Should you have any questions, please contact us at:
+86 (10) 8268-9699 or +86 (10) 8266-8266 (ext. 153)
Mobile: +86 133-1157-0713
Fax: +86 (10) 8266-8268
database@chinalawinfo.com


 


您好:您现在要进入的是北大法律英文网会员专区,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,请注册并交纳相应费用成为我们的英文会员 。如有问题请来电咨询;
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com


     
     
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝www.lawinfochina.com
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.
 
Home | Products and Services | FAQ | Disclaimer | Chinese | Site Map
©2012 Chinalawinfo Co., Ltd.    database@chinalawinfo.com  Tel: +86 (10) 8268-9699  京ICP证010230-8