A topic of contract law, please help

The disposition of the property of others by a person without the right of disposition is to be determined.

The signing of the contract between B and C is an act of disposition without authority, and the effect is to be determined.

1. You are wrong to quote Article 144 of the Contract Law. Because the case is an agency consignment, not the purchase and sale of goods in transit.

2. A to the cause constitutes a breach of contract. The breach of contract was due to the fact that he should have found a qualified carrier in the consignment, and he failed to fulfill this obligation, resulting in damage to the goods in transit.

First, read the law yourself, Article 144 talks about the sale of goods in transit!! Goods in transit!! That is, when the contract is concluded, what about the goods that are on the transporter's vehicle!!

Second, B did not take ownership, delivery is delivery, which is so much understood, and it is not international**.

That is, B gets the goods and receives them, even if they are delivered.

ab is all wrong. The first point is that you have analyzed the reasons partly correctly, but the contradiction pointed out is incorrect, in fact, there is no contradiction, and the third party does not refer to the carrier. The second point is that the delivery without agreement is that when the nail goes through the consignment procedures, the ownership of the subject matter has been transferred to Party B.

1.The bus company should compensate Li for his medical expenses, because the ticket purchase was a transportation contract with the bus company, so the bus company should compensate. About the crystals (I kind of forget, but I remember that it should be compensated).

2.Zhang should not sue for breach of the transportation contract, but the owner of the bus, the driver, and the management company of the bus should jointly and severally compensate Zhang for his losses, because the free ride cannot exempt the bus management company, the owner and the driver from liability (but if there is a difference in liability between the three, it can be effective internally).

3.The bus company can refuse to compensate Cheng's request, because Chen did not fulfill his obligation to buy a ticket, so the bus company can refuse to compensate.

The right of avoidance is directed at the debtor's act of waiving the creditor's right or transferring property, so items A and C are wrong and item B is correct. Paragraph 1 of Article 25 of the Interpretation (I) of the Contract Law stipulates that: "If a creditor files a revocation lawsuit in accordance with Article 74 of the Contract Law and requests the people's court to revoke the debtor's act of waiving the creditor's rights or transferring property, the people's court shall hear the part claimed by the creditor, and if the act is revoked in accordance with law, the act shall be invalid ab initio."

Therefore, item D is incorrect.

The right of subrogation is applicable to the debtor who neglects to exercise his due creditor's rights and endangers the interests of the creditor, and the right holder can only file a subrogation lawsuit at this time.

Hello! Contract disputes are binding on the parties to the contract, and C is not a party to the construction contract. There are no claims and debts, and B and C have no right to fight against A if they sign an Internal Contracting Agreement. Therefore, a lawsuit cannot be brought against A, and he does not enjoy the priority of compensation.

According to the provisions of the Contract Law, among the following items, the creditor may not exercise the right of avoidance under the circumstances ( ).

a The debtor transfers property at an apparently unreasonably low price, causing damage to creditors and the assignee is aware of the situation.

b The debtor waives its due creditor's rights, causing damage to the creditor.

c. The debtor transfers property free of charge without prejudice to the interests of creditors.

d The debtor jeopardizes the interests of creditors by failing to exercise its rights.

Correct answer. C, D answer analysis.

This question examines the circumstances in which the right of revocation can be exercised. According to the provisions of the Contract Law, the creditor may exercise the right of avoidance under the following circumstances:

1) The debtor transfers property at an obviously unreasonable low price, causing damage to the creditor, and the assignee is aware of the situation. (2) The debtor transfers property free of charge, causing damage to the creditor. Option C does not cause harm to the creditor, so the creditor cannot exercise the right of avoidance.

3) If the debtor waives its due creditor's rights and causes damage to the creditor, the creditor may exercise the right of revocation. Option d states the conditions for the exercise of the right of subrogation.

You are doing the contract topic selection, you know it in your own heart, and you should solve the content yourself or ask others for advice.

The correct answer to this question is D

What are you asking, hit it clearly.

In 1900, the world's first "Labor Contract Law" was born in Belgium.

You should choose B and D.

If the creditor is detrimental to the interests of the creditor if he waives the due creditor's right or neglects to exercise his rights, the creditor can request the court to revoke it.

Detailed problem description and question: Party A sells a house worth 1 million yuan to Party B for 600,000 yuan**, what is the validity of the contract? (

a. If the parties are completely voluntary, the contract is not a manifestly unfair contract.

b. If the parties' expression of intent is flawed, it can be determined as an obviously unfair contract.

c. Whether it is obviously unfair depends on whether Party A submits a claim for revocation or modification to the court.

d. The sales contract between Party A and Party B is invalid.

Citizen A signed a contract for the sale and purchase of commercial housing with real estate developer B, and B proposed that part of the purchase price should be counted as decoration expenses in order to pay less deed tax, but A did not object. Later, a dispute arose, and A requested the court to change the decoration cost on the grounds that the decoration cost paid was much higher than the decoration standard. How should the validity of the renovation cost clause be determined?

a. It is the true expression of the intention of both parties, but it is invalid.

b. It is obviously unfair and can be changed.

c. Concealing illegal purposes in a lawful form is invalid.

d. Violation of legal prohibitions is invalid.

Company A owed Company B 20 million yuan, and Company B repeatedly failed to ask for money, and soon after Company B demanded payment, Company A sold its only fixed assets to Company C at a price lower than the market of 8 million yuan, and the price was 11 million yuan. In the process of negotiating the sales contract, Company C also knew that Company A was heavily indebted and that the price it paid was far from being able to pay off its debts. After Company B learned that Company A had sold the property, it urged Company A again that Company A was indeed unable to repay after repaying 11 million yuan.

Therefore, Company B sued the court, requesting that the sales contract between Company A and Company C in respect of the office building be rescinded. Which of the following statements is incorrect? (

A. Company B has the right to request the court to revoke the house sale contract between Company A and Company C.

B. The sales contract between companies A and C is an act between the two parties, and there is no reason for the contract to be invalid, and company B is not a party to the contract and has no right to claim the rescission of the contract.

c. If Company C accepts the transfer without knowing that the transfer of Company A is obviously unreasonable, the creditor Company B should not exercise the right of revocation.

d. Regardless of whether Company C knew that Company A's transfer was obviously unreasonable, Company B could exercise the right of revocation.

The following statement about the relationship between the formation and entry into force of the contract is correct ( ).

a. The contract shall come into force when the contract is established.

b. The contract shall be established when the contract comes into effect.

c. The contract is established, but the contract does not necessarily take effect.

d. The contract comes into effect, but the contract is not necessarily established.