Contract Law Case Study 2, please help me to take the exam tomorrow

1.Feng and Chen's mortgage relationship is valid, and according to the Guarantee Law, they can create a mortgage on their own property without the need to go through registration procedures.

2.Feng and Zhu's pledge is valid. The pledge needs to be transferred to possession, and the speaker has been transferred to possession, which is valid.

3.Zhu and Jiang are in a contractual relationship.

4.It should be Chiang who has the right of retention in priority. Then there is the pledge and finally the mortgage. Of the three types of security, the lien takes precedence.

5.The deposit and liquidated damages cannot be applied at the same time, and only one or the other can be chosen.

6.The prefectural seed station demanded payment of freight, and the request could be supported. Article 62 of the Contract Law stipulates that if the place of performance is not clear, the performance shall be at the place where the party performing the obligation is located.

7.Feng's claim for exemption on the ground of force majeure could not be established, because after delivery, the ownership was transferred to Feng, and the risk was also transferred to Feng.

1. Valid, the chattel mortgage agreement does not require registration as a condition for its validity.

2. Valid, the movable property pledge takes effect from the date of delivery.

3. Contracting contract relationship.

4. It will be better than Zhu over Chen, because when co-existing, the lien is better than the pledge, and the pledge is better than the unregistered mortgage.

5. No, you cannot.

6. It can be supported, because if there is no agreement on the place of delivery, the movable property shall be subject to the clause of the location of the performance obligor.

7. No, because the risk is borne from the date of delivery, the chick has been delivered, and its loss is borne by Feng.

The court will uphold Company A's claim, but Company A must provide evidence of the size of the losses caused to the company during the partnership between the two directors, rather than the $320,000 of the income earned to Company A.

Unfair competition is suspected here, and the behavior of Zhuang and others is obviously illegal and constitutes an infringement of the company's trade secrets, and the court should support their claim If the loss cannot be calculated, it will be measured by the benefits obtained by the infringing party.

(1) Liability for breach of contract is based on the principle of no-fault liability, and fault is the exception. The main circumstances of fault liability are:

1.Gift Contract:

Article 189 of the Contract Law stipulates that if the donated property is damaged or lost due to the donor's intention or gross negligence, the donor shall be liable for damages.

2.Liability of the carrier for damage to the passenger's own belongings in the passenger contract:

Article 303 of the Contract Law stipulates that if the carrier is at fault for the damage or loss of the passenger's own articles during transportation, it shall be liable for damages.

3.Escrow Contract:

Article 374 of the Contract Law stipulates that during the custody period, if the custodian causes damage or loss to the custodian due to the improper custody of the custodian, the custodian shall be liable for damages, but the custodian shall not be liable for damages if the custodian proves that he is not grossly negligent.

4.Warehousing Contracts:

Article 394 of the Contract Law stipulates that during the storage period, if the stored goods are damaged or lost due to the custodian's improper storage, the custodian shall be liable for damages. The custodian shall not be liable for damages if the nature or packaging of the stored goods does not conform to the agreement or the effective storage period exceeds the effective storage period.

2) The gym in this case is not a free contract, because the gym is a for-profit place, although there is no charge for the storage package, but the free storage cabinet provided to the customer is for its profit-making service, in fact, the cost of the stored items has been included in the service cost, so it should be recognized as a paid contract. In the performance of this contract, the client fails to fulfill the obligation to inform and should bear the corresponding legal consequences, so it can only claim compensation according to the general goods.

Personal opinion.

Party A is responsible, because the risk of loss is borne by the seller before the subject matter is transferred; The calf is owned by A, because the fruits produced are owned by the seller; A bears it, because the ox belongs to A; The contract is a contract of pending validity; Ding has the right to acquire the cattle because Ding is a bona fide third party; Effective; Rent can be paid at the end of the term; The deposit rule applies to both parties, i.e. it works for both parties!

1 Ma's claim could not be upheld by the court. According to the provisions of paragraph 3 of Article 62 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China: "If the place of performance is not clear, if the payment of currency is made, the performance shall be performed at the location of the party receiving the currency; If the immovable property is delivered, it shall be performed at the location where the immovable property is located; Other subject matter shall be performed at the location of the party performing the obligation.

The place of performance of this contract shall be the livestock station. Therefore, the obligation to transport dairy cows from the animal husbandry station to Ma's cattle farm should be borne by Ma.

2. Ma's claim for exemption from liability on the basis of force majeure is not established. In the case of monetary debts, since money is a general equivalent, it does not belong to the subject matter of the contract, but is only a means of payment, so there is no issue of force majeure. Article 109 of the Contract Act provides:

If one of the parties fails to pay the price or remuneration, the other party may require it to pay the price or remuneration. ”

3 Cannot be used at the same time. According to Article 116 of the Contract Law, "if the parties agree on both liquidated damages and deposits, the other party may choose to apply the liquidated damages or deposit clause when one party breaches the contract." Therefore, liquidated damages and deposit liability cannot be applied at the same time.

This commercial is an offer.

The refusal of the store to sell the men's car on the grounds that it is not sold to the lady is a violation of the terms of the offer.

The parties have formed a contract and the contract has come into force.

Contract Law; Article 15 An invitation to make an offer is an expression of the intention to make an offer to oneself by others. Price lists, auction announcements, tender announcements, prospectuses, commercial advertisements, etc. are invitations to make offers. Where the content of a commercial advertisement complies with the provisions of the offer, it is deemed to be an offer.

Article 21 An acceptance is an expression of the offeree's intention to agree to the offer.

Article 25 The contract shall be formed when the undertaking takes effect.

Article 26 The notice of acceptance shall take effect when it reaches the offeror. If the acceptance does not require notification, the acceptance shall take effect when the acceptance is made in accordance with the trading customs or the requirements of the offer.