100 points to find the answer to the case question of liability for breach of contract law, anxious

If Company B, as the source of the first performance of the contract, fails to pay the processing fee as agreed in the contract, its behavior should be a breach of contract, but Company A did not propose to terminate the contract when Company B failed to pay the processing fee within the time limit agreed in the contract, so the processing contract is still legally binding on both parties, and Company B should still pay the processing fee in advance, and Company A is also obliged to deliver the goods.

However, because the local fire department believed that there were serious safety hazards in the production workshop of Company A and required it to stop work for rectification, it was clear that Company A would not be able to deliver the goods within the time limit agreed in the contract.

According to Article 68 of the Contract Law, Company B has the right to assert an uneasiness defense and suspend the performance of its obligations. On the other hand, if Company B is required to pay the processing fee in advance, the interests of Company B will be seriously damaged because Company A is obviously unable to perform the contract.

In this case, Company B, as a party to the contract that performed first, failed to pay the processing money as agreed in the contract.

breached the contract, but Company A did not propose to terminate the contract when Company B failed to pay the processing fee within the time limit agreed in the contract.

The processing contract is still legally binding on both parties, and Company B should still pay the processing fee in advance, while Company A is also obliged to deliver it.

Goods. However, due to the fact that the local fire department believes that there are serious safety hazards in the production workshop of Company A, it is required to stop work for rectification.

This can be clearly known that Company A will not be able to deliver the goods within the time limit agreed in the contract, according to Article 1 of the Contract Law.

Company B has the right to.

Assert a defense of uneasiness and suspend the performance of its obligations. On the other hand, if Company B is required to pay the processing fee in advance, Company A has already made it clear.

If the contract cannot be performed, the interests of Company B will be seriously damaged.

However, Company B cannot claim liability for breach of contract. Because according to our country.

Contract Law.

When one party loses the ability to perform its obligations, the other party can only suspend the performance of its obligations, and the performance is suspended.

After the trip, the other party shall also be notified immediately, and performance shall be resumed when the other party provides appropriate security. After the suspension of performance, the other party.

Only if the ability to perform is not restored within the term of the contract and the appropriate security is not provided, the party whose performance has been suspended may terminate the contract.

Cause. Therefore, when Company B learns that Company A will not be able to perform the contract, it can only suspend the performance of its obligation to pay the processing fee, but cannot go straight.

Company B is requested to bear the liability for breach of contract.

Company B's conduct constituted an anticipatory breach of contract, and Company A's inability to actually perform the contract also constituted an anticipatory breach of contract, because it was impossible for the parties to perform the contract in fact, and the court should order both parties to terminate the contract.

A can assert the right of defense to perform first, because B should have paid the processing fee in advance but failed to do so, and A can defend on this ground. Moreover, A's inability to perform the contract is not due to its own reasons, but to force majeure, which is also a defence. However, B obviously constituted a breach of contract, and B constituted a fundamental breach of contract because it failed to pay the processing fee as agreed before A was suspended for rectification, and Party A should be compensated for the losses caused by his actions.

Company A requested the local fire department to suspend work for rectification because the local fire department believed that there were serious safety hazards in the production workshop of Company A. Therefore, objectively there is no ability to perform the obligation, resulting in the performance of the contract is in fact impossible, which is an act of non-performance of the contractual obligation.

Company B's failure to pay the processing fee within the agreed time limit and its failure to perform its contractual obligations by its own behavior is an anticipatory breach of contract.

Therefore, both parties shall bear their respective responsibilities.

Let's just talk about case 2. 1. Contractual relationship to be performed to a third party. 2. Contract of carriage.

Article 288 A contract of carriage is a contract in which the carrier transports passengers or goods from the place of departure to the agreed place, and the passenger, shipper or consignee pays the fare or transportation costs. 3. No, it is not a party to the contract, and it does not have the right to the contract.

4. It cannot be established. The carrier is selected by Mr. Liu, and shall be liable for the negligence of the carrier.

A: Yes. The reasons are:

1. Contracts signed between citizens and legal persons on an equal and voluntary basis are protected by law on the basis of not violating laws and administrative regulations. Although the resolution of the shareholders' meeting of Company A must be subject to a special resolution of the shareholders' meeting when transferring machinery and equipment, it is only an internal regulation of Company A, and Company B is not aware of this situation, therefore, the internal regulations of Company A cannot be used to oppose the agreement signed between Company B and Company A, so the contract should be deemed valid.

2. It can be established, according to the provisions of the Contract Law, the party who performs the obligation first finds that the business condition of the other party to the contract has seriously deteriorated, and can suspend the performance and require the other party to provide a guarantee, and after the other party provides the guarantee, the party that performs the obligation first shall perform, in this case, Company A exercised the right of defense of uneasiness, and if Company B does not provide a guarantee, Company A can suspend the performance, so the reason for Company A's suspension of performance can be established.

The answer upstairs is completely incorrect.

1. The sales contract is a promised contract, so the two parties reach an agreement on the 15th, and the contract is established and takes effect, and the agreed performance period is 20 days. On the 16th, the painting had been sold to Wang Wu and delivered, so it was impossible for Li Si to perform the contract, and Li Si could demand Zhang San to bear the liability for breach of contract on the 16th, based on Article 108 of the Contract Law: if one of the parties expressly states or shows by its own behavior that it will not perform its contractual obligations, the other party may require it to bear the liability for breach of contract before the expiration of the performance period.

On the 20th of the month, it can of course be asserted, based on Article 107: if one of the parties fails to perform its contractual obligations or the performance of its contractual obligations does not conform to the agreement, it shall bear the liability for breach of contract such as continuing to perform, taking remedial measures or compensating for losses. Article 110:

If one of the parties fails to perform a non-monetary debt or the performance of a non-monetary debt does not conform to the agreement, the other party may request performance, except in any of the following circumstances: (1) it is legally or factually impossible to perform;

3. There is no problem in terminating the contract, Article 94 of the Contract Law stipulates that a party may terminate the contract under any of the following circumstances: (2) before the expiration of the performance period, one of the parties clearly states or shows by its own behavior that it will not perform the main debt;

Question 1: This case is a dispute over a sales contract, and the liability for breach of contract refers to the liability to be borne when one or both parties fail to perform or do not fully perform during the performance of the contract. In this case, there is only an oral agreement between the two parties, and there is no written agreement, and in the course of practice, a breach of contract can be determined or not, and I personally prefer that it does not constitute a breach of contract. 2. Because there is no written agreement, it is not possible.

3. No, from the perspective of statutory conditions, but the premise is that the existence of the contract is recognized.

1. Established and valid.

2. Company A's refusal to pay is okay on the grounds that Party B has not fulfilled its obligations in accordance with the contract and implemented the defense of uneasiness. Party B's reasons cannot be established.

3. There is a basis, and the basis is the agreement between them.

4. Party B's request cannot be supported, and the liquidated damages for one day are not high, which is in line with the prior legal provisions.

(1) Validly established. If the two parties voluntarily reach a contract and there is no illegal content, the contract will naturally be established (2) and there is a basis. The Contract Law stipulates that if the purpose of the contract cannot be achieved because the quality of the subject matter does not meet the quality requirements, the buyer may refuse to accept the subject matter or terminate the contract.

Party B's reasons cannot be established. The adjustment of the country's industrial policy is not a force majeure, and Company B should perform it in accordance with the contract.

3) There is a basis. If Company B breaches the contract, it shall bear the responsibility of paying liquidated damages in accordance with the contract, and Party A still has the right to require it to continue to perform the contract.

4) If the amount of liquidated damages is excessively higher than the losses caused, the parties may request the people's court or arbitration institution to appropriately reduce them. According to the judicial interpretation, if it is higher than 30% of the actual loss, it is deemed to be excessively higher than the actual loss.

For your question: the first question: the contract between the parties is in force;

The second question: Party A's refusal to receive the goods is based on the contract between the two parties, and Party A has the right to refuse to receive the goods; Party B's reason is not valid, because of the adjustment of industrial policy, Party B must provide evidence. If Party B cannot provide sufficient evidence, Party B's reasons are untenable.

In addition, Party B's reasons do not constitute force majeure, and from the perspective of contract law, may not constitute a valid reason for delaying supply.

The third question: Company A's request is reasonable, because Party B's delivery is delayed, and the delivery does not conform to the contract.

Fourth question: As for the level of liquidated damages, Company B can raise it with the court, and the discretion lies with the court, and the court will generally make a judgment based on the specific circumstances of each case. It is recommended that you communicate with the court during the litigation stage.

If Party A and B have no other agreement, the goods have been delivered when they are delivered to the carrier, and the risk shall be borne by the buyer. If both arbitration and litigation are agreed, the arbitration shall be invalid unless one party applies for arbitration and the other party does not raise an objection. It is best to go directly to the court to file a lawsuit, because if the arbitration is conducted first, the other party can also apply to the court for re-arbitration and apply for annulment of arbitration.

C bears ultimate responsibility because the car accident is not a force majeure.

1. It is not lawful, because the ownership of the goods has been transferred after delivery, and A's obligations have been fulfilled.

2. If you file a lawsuit with the court, because if you agree to arbitrate and sue, the arbitration agreement is invalid.

3. C shall bear the liability for compensation, because the carrier is only exempt from liability if the goods are damaged due to force majeure.