The question of economic law is very urgent! I hope my friends online can help me!

The lease contract with B has been established, but since the claims are equal, the contract between A and C is also established, and since C has taken possession of the house in accordance with the contract, the contract between A and B must not be performed. At this time, B can only claim A's liability for breach of contract.

Civil acts, especially contractual acts, have a great deal of intent and do not matter as long as they do not violate mandatory regulations. A's practice of renting one room and two rents is certainly morally wrong, but he only violated the contract with B, so B can claim A's liability for breach of contract.

2.Disaster relief agencies can ask for this donation. Contract law has special provisions for such contracts:

Article 186:The donor may revoke the gift before the transfer of the right to the donated property.

The provisions of the preceding paragraph do not apply to gift contracts that are in the nature of social public interest or moral obligations such as disaster relief and poverty alleviation, or gift contracts that have been notarized.

Article 188:Where the donor does not deliver the donated property in a gift contract or notarized gift contract that has the nature of a social public interest or moral obligation such as disaster relief or poverty alleviation, the donee may request delivery.

Therefore, the donee can directly request the donor to perform the obligation.

2. The behavior of a company is considered a kind of publicity, and the audio-visual materials of the charity show can be used as evidence to sue for breach of contract.

1 The question is a bit vague How long to rent? Indefinite and fixed-term leases of less than six months are non-formalized contracts and do not need to be in writing, and if the parties have disputes over the term of the lease without a written contract, it is presumed that there is no indefinite lease contract. I assume that A and B have set up a non-formal contract, that is, a verbal agreement, and their acts are considered illegal, but it is difficult to obtain evidence.

Summary. 1.The remarks added by the steel mill on the waybill shall have certain legal effect, but the specific effect shall depend on the specific circumstances.

In this case, since the parties agreed on the method of cash on delivery in the purchase agreement, the remarks added by the steel mill on the waybill may be considered as a breach of the agreement between the parties. However, in practice, whether the remarks on the waybill are valid or not, it is also necessary to consider whether the clause has been recognized and accepted by Company A. 2.

The railway department is not obliged to supervise that Company A has to pay 30% of the price of the goods before it can pick up the goods. The role of the railway department is to transport goods, not to supervise the details of transactions between buyers and sellers. The liability of the railway authorities is limited to the carriage under the contract of carriage signed between the parties and does not have the duty to interfere with the performance of the contract.

3.According to the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China, the manner of transfer of ownership of goods shall be determined according to the agreement of the parties and the time of delivery. In this case, since the parties used the method of cash on delivery, the ownership of the goods should have been transferred to Company A after it had paid the full purchase price.

However, since Company A failed to pay the price as agreed, the ownership of the steel may still belong to the steel mill, and the specific situation needs to be determined according to the contract and the actual situation.

Can elaborate.

That's a lot of questions.

Sloppy. Brother please, I'm a non-law major.

So much to add Faha.

You voice me to text.

1.The remarks added by the steel mill on the waybill shall have certain legal effect, but the specific effect shall depend on the specific circumstances. In this case, since the parties agreed on the method of cash on delivery in the purchase agreement, the remarks added by the steel mill on the waybill may be regarded as a violation of the agreement between the parties.

However, in practice, whether the remarks on the waybill are valid or not, it is also necessary to consider whether the clause has been recognized and accepted by Company A. 2.The railway department is not obliged to supervise that Company A has to pay 30% of the price of the goods before it can pick up the goods.

The role of the railway department is to transport goods, not to supervise the details of transactions between buyers and sellers. The responsibility of the railway department is limited to the transportation in accordance with the contract of carriage signed by both parties and is delayed, and it does not have the duty to perform the contract of dry speculation. 3.

According to the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China, the manner of transfer of ownership of goods shall be determined according to the agreement of the parties and the time of delivery. In this case, since the parties used the method of cash on delivery, the ownership of the goods should have been transferred to Company A after it had paid the full purchase price. However, since Company A failed to pay the price as agreed, the ownership of the steel may still belong to the steel mill, and the specific situation needs to be determined according to the contract and the actual situation.

Neither A nor B is correct.

To answer the first question, A confuses the statute of limitations with the exclusion period, and the object of application of the exclusion period is the right of formation, such as the right of revocation, the right of rescission, and the right of retrospective recognition. If this period is one year, it is one year, and it will not change no matter what happens, so it is called the exclusion period; However, the right to claim litigation does not belong to the right of formation, and the exclusion period does not apply, and interruption or suspension is allowed. B, on the other hand, confuses the two concepts of interruption and abort, where interruption recalculates time, while abort is simply a pause and continues when the pause has disappeared.

In the question, Wang was hospitalized in Japan, which is considered an objective situation, and in the most six months, the statute of limitations has been suspended, when will it be restored, the question says, discharged, then continue to count from the beginning, there are still two months. So neither A nor B is correct.

Economic law is a legal department that carries out an overall, systematic, comprehensive, and comprehensive adjustment of socialist commodity economic relations. At the present stage, it mainly readjusts the economic management relations in which various organizations are the basic subjects in the process of social production and reproduction, and the relations of operational coordination within a certain scope.

It is necessary to grasp this concept from the following three points:

1) Economic law is the general term for economic legal norms.

2) Economic law is a general term for the legal norms that regulate economic relations, and (3) Economic law regulates a certain range of economic relations.

1. The concept of economic law:

Economic law is an economic law formed by adjusting the state's macroeconomic regulation and control of economic activities.

A general term for the legal norms of relationships.

Economic law has three basic meanings: economic law belongs to the category of law and belongs to the system of domestic law, but it is different from the other departments of law in the domestic law system.

2. Objects of adjustment of the economic law:

The object of adjustment of economic law is specific economic relations, not all economic relations, still less other social relations other than economic relations. Although the relationship of property donation and property inheritance is an economic relationship, it does not fall within the scope of the adjustment object of the economic law; Economic-legal relations and personal relations are not economic relations, let alone within the scope of the objects of economic law adjustment.

3. The status of economic law:

Economic law is an independent department of law, because the object of its adjustment has a specific scope, and it only regulates the economic relations that occur in the process of the state coordinating the operation of its own economy, and the object of its adjustment can be separated from the object of adjustment of other sectoral laws.

Economic law is an important department of law, and its important role is mainly manifested in the following aspects:

1. Adhere to the common development of the economy with public ownership as the main body and multiple ownership systems;

2. Guide, promote and guarantee the establishment and improvement of the socialist market economic system;

3. Expand foreign economic and technological exchanges and cooperation;

4. Ensure the sustained, rapid and healthy development of the national economy.

Fourth, the system of economic law:

The system of economic law is a unified whole composed of multi-level and complete economic law departments. It is generally accepted that the system of economic law should be structured as follows:

1. Enterprise Organization Management Law;

2. Market Management Law.

3. Macroeconomic regulation and control method.

4. Social Security Law.

Chapter I: Competition Law.

The Competition Law consists of three laws: the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, the Auction Law, and the Tendering and Bidding Law. Compared with the three, the Anti-Unfair Competition Law is more important.

In the 2004 bar examination, the latter two did not appear in the question, while the Anti-Unfair Competition Law issued a three-point question).

1. You can't refuse to receive the goods. The consequences of the actions of the person in the name of the person being the person and a bona fide third party within the scope of the authority shall be borne by the person being the recipient.

2. You can refuse to receive the goods. In this sales relationship, Li carried out the same civil act at the same time, which was an abuse of the right of the year, and the act was invalid. Leaked tremor.

3. You can refuse to receive the goods. If a person conducts a legal act with himself within the scope of his authority, it is an abuse of his right and the act is invalid.

2.Limited partners are not allowed to contribute capital with their services.

3.Legally, the general partner can contribute capital without money.

4.Mr. Li and Mr. Wang are general partners and should bear unlimited joint and several liability5A partnership is not allowed to be bought and sold**, the limited partner pays off the debt with the money he contributes, and the two general partners have to pay off all the money owed.

1. Person B has the right to request compensation from the product or the product producer who has suffered damage due to unqualified product quality.

2. Yes, a department store is the seller of the product and the product producer shall bear joint and several liability.

3. The seller of the product has the right to recover from the product producer for the compensation liability for product quality problems.