On the economic and legal aspects of contract law, you know!

The discount** is mainly due to the low market price due to the backlog of goods, but according to the principle of good faith, the seller still has to fully and properly perform the contractual obligations, and the label should be recognized as a standard clause, because it exempts the merchant from liability and excludes the rights of consumers, and should be invalid.

Once the product is sold, it will not be returned or exchanged. This is an offer in contract law, and if you buy it, it is a promise.

(1) The steel mill shall fully and appropriately perform its contractual obligations in accordance with the provisions of the contract between the two parties. The steel factory ignores the contract's stipulation on the place of performance and should deliver the goods at site A, but delivers the goods at site B, which is a breach of contract.

The construction company negotiated with the steel factory several times, requiring it to transport 1,000 tons of steel to the construction site of place A as agreed in the contract, but the steel factory believed that it had fulfilled its obligation to deliver the steel as agreed in the contract, and the construction site of place B also belonged to the construction company of place A, so it did not agree to pay additional transportation fees to transport the batch of steel to place A, which obviously violated the principle of good faith.

Therefore, the construction company should be liable for the breach of contract for the losses caused by the delay in the construction period due to the breach of contract of the steel mill.

2) The delivery obligation agreed in the contract between the two parties is divided into two fulfillments, each time 1000 tons. Whether the breach of the first performance obligation results in the failure to achieve the purpose of the contract and whether it constitutes a "fundamental breach" is the key to whether the non-breaching party can refuse to receive the second steel.

Judging from the facts of the case, the delay of the first steel product caused a loss of 40,000 yuan, which shows that the construction of the construction company was not fatally affected and did not constitute a "fundamental breach of contract".

The second steel of the steel company was transported to A on October 30, which was in line with the contract. It can be seen that the construction company should receive the second 1,000 tons of steel.

The question is also that on October 30, the market steel ** fell sharply, can the construction company receive the 1,000 tons of steel at a low price in the market? In my opinion, no. The construction company shall pay the second payment of 1,000 tons of steel at the contract of 1,000 yuan per ton.

Some people may say that the performance of the steel company is delayed, and the contract law stipulates that there is a penalty mechanism for delay in performance, that is: if the delivery party delays delivery, the **** will be settled at the original price, and the **** will be settled at the market price. If the consignee delays the receipt, the **** shall be settled at the market price, and the **** shall be settled at the original price.

So, does the steel company's second 1000 tons constitute a delay in delivery? In my opinion, the second delivery of 1,000 tons was fully in line with the contract, and the construction company should not refuse to accept it, otherwise the construction company would be liable for breach of contract due to the delay in receiving it.

Some people may think, since the first 1,000 tons did not arrive, this 1,000 tons should be regarded as the first time, right? I think this understanding is very taken for granted and unfair. Because, for the first time, 1,000 tons constituted a breach of contract, and the steel company was liable for breach of contract; It would be unfair and just to take it as a matter of fact, and to regard the second delivery as a delay in the first delivery.

1. The steel mill bears the liability for breach of contract, and the loss of 40,000 yuan of the construction company is borne by the steel mill.

2. The construction company may not refuse to receive the second batch, and the act of refusing to accept it constitutes a breach of contract.

Reasons: 1. The contract between the two parties stipulates that the steel mill is responsible for transporting the steel to the construction site of the construction company A, and the steel mill fails to perform the contract according to the contract, so the steel mill should bear the liability for breach of contract and bear the losses of the other party.

2. The contract stipulates that October 30 is the delivery date, and the steel mill has not delayed the delivery, and the wrong delivery location of the first batch is an auxiliary obligation of the contract, not the main obligation, so it cannot be used as a reason for refusal.

Summary. Article 188 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China: The statute of limitations for requesting protection of civil rights from the people's courts is three years. Where the law provides otherwise, follow those provisions.

The limitation period is calculated from the date on which the right holder knows or should know that the right has been damaged and the obligor. Where the law provides otherwise, follow those provisions. However, if more than 20 years have elapsed since the date on which the rights were infringed, the people's courts will not grant protection, and where there are special circumstances, the people's courts may decide to extend the rights holder on the basis of the right holder's application.

According to the above provisions, the statute of limitations for claims is three years.

In economic activities, as long as the elements constituting an economic contract are complete, no disputes arise. (+ Hello, glad to answer for you.)

Article 180 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China: The statute of limitations for filing a request to the people's court for protection of civil rights is three years. Where the law provides otherwise, follow those provisions. The limitation period is calculated from the date on which the right holder knows or should know that the right has been damaged and the obligor.

Where the law provides otherwise, follow those provisions. However, if more than 20 years have elapsed since the date on which the right was infringed, the people's court will not protect it, and if there are special circumstances, the people's court may decide to extend it according to the application of the right holder. According to the above provisions, the statute of limitations for claims is three years.

A is a post-contractual obligation, and D is a fraudulent contract.

1. Article 293 of the Contract Law stipulates that the passenger transport contract shall be established when the carrier delivers the ticket to the passenger, unless otherwise agreed by the parties or otherwise in other trading customs. Article 302 The carrier shall be liable for damages incurred by the passenger during the carriage, unless it is caused by the passenger's own health or the carrier proves that it was caused by the passenger's intention or gross negligence. The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall apply to passengers without tickets who are exempt from tickets, hold preferential tickets, or are permitted by the carrier to board in accordance with the regulations.

Repay; No compensation for the cargo, Article 303 If the passenger's own belongings are damaged or lost during transportation, and the carrier is at fault, it shall be liable for damages.

2. Compensation: Article 302 The carrier shall be liable for damages to the passenger during the carriage, unless it is caused by the passenger's own health or the carrier proves that it was caused by the passenger's intention or gross negligence.

The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall apply to passengers without tickets who are exempt from tickets, hold preferential tickets, or are permitted by the carrier to board in accordance with the regulations.

3. If you don't compensate and get on the car illegally, the contract will not be completed. Article 294 Passengers shall carry the Passenger with a valid ticket. If a passenger travels without a ticket, overtravels, skips a class or holds an invalid ticket, he/she shall pay the fare and the carrier may collect additional fare in accordance with regulations.

If the passenger does not pay the fare, the carrier may refuse carriage.

In view of the fact that some people have answered the above from the legal provisions, I will analyze the following from the perspective of legal theory:

1) The bus company should compensate Li for his losses because he has a contractual relationship with the bus company, and the bus company has violated the duty of care in the contract and should be liable.

2) Not compensating Zhang for his medical expenses Because Zhang did not have a contractual relationship with the bus company, he only met the bus driver and hitchhiking, which was an act of friendship and did not belong to the contractual relationship in the Contract Law, so if Zhang sued for a contractual relationship, the court would not accept it. However, Zhang can claim for infringement.

3) No compensation, first of all, the contract emphasizes a consideration act, that is, there is no right without obligation. In the above case, Chen did not pay the fare, so there was no contractual relationship between him and the bus company, which was an illegal act of forcibly entering the bus. Therefore, the bus company does not bear its medical expenses.

According to China's contract law, there are three types of contract validity, namely: invalid, voidable, and pending.

1. Invalidity Cases:

1. The content of the contract is illegal.

2. Where both parties to the contract maliciously collude to harm others or the public interest, 3. The parties cover up the criminal activities by contractual means.

4. Contracts in which one or both parties have no corresponding capacity to conclude contracts and cannot be retrospectively recognized5, and some special contracts that require a statutory form and do not meet the formal requirements are invalid ab initio.

2. Voidable Contract:

1. A contract entered into under duress due to the danger of a person.

2. Contracts concluded due to fraud.

3. Causing significant losses to the misinterpreting party due to a major misunderstanding.

4. Because of obvious unfairness.

3. Validity to be determined:

1. A minor has entered into a contract that is inconsistent with his or her capacity and needs his guardian to chase the person 2. A contract that does not have the right to dispose of other people's property.

A contract, an agreement signed by both parties for a common purpose. The terms and conditions are clearly written one by one.