[introduction to the lawyer of this case] Liu Hong is the founding partner and senior partner of Liaoning Tongfang law firm. He once served as a judge of the economic trial division of the Liaoning Provincial Higher People's court. He participated in the organization and research of some difficult economic dispute cases in the province and gave guidance to the economic trial of lower courts. He was in charge of the economic trial guidance of the intermediate courts in southern Liaoning (Dalian, Yingkou, Anshan and Liaoyang). In 1997, the case of whether non transferable bills of exchange can be pledged, which was tried by Liu Hong, was selected by the Supreme People's court.
[key points of adjudication] first, the validity of the lease contract; Second, on the dissolution of the lease contract; Third, the identification and treatment of liability for breach of contract; Fourth, the amount of decoration investment is determined and shared;
[basic case] in December 2011, the appellee handed over the leased site meeting the requirements of the appellant to the appellant, and the appellant has been paying the lease fee for the first few months after receiving the site. However, since March 2013, the appellant has only paid part of the rental fee, and the water, electricity and heating fees have not been paid in full. The appellee sent letters to urge him to pay as soon as possible, but the appellant not only ignored them, but also sent a letter to the appellant on September 30, 2013 requesting the cancellation of the lease contract between the two parties, and then the appellant moved out of the leased site.
[judgment result] the final judgment of Liaoning Provincial Higher People's court rescinded the contract, and the appellant paid the appellee's house occupancy and use fees, liquidated damages, decoration expenses and losses.
[reasons for judgment] the court held that the lease contract involved in the case was terminated due to the appellant's breach of contract, and the installation of mechanical and electrical equipment, fine decoration of the sky, ground and wall, and the procurement of all lamps and lanterns involved in the case were also completed by the appellee according to the design drawings and procurement plans provided by the appellant. Now the appellant rescinded the contract in advance. The above decoration reasons were designed by the appellant, regardless of the decoration style The use will have a serious impact on the appellee's continued effective use. According to the law, the Appellant was ordered to pay more than 40 million yuan for the appellee's house occupancy and use fees, liquidated damages, and decoration expenses.
[legal basis] according to paragraph 1 of Article 64 of the Civil Procedure Law of the people's Republic of China and articles 93 and 97 of the contract law of the people's Republic of China.
[lawyer's opinion] in this case, the appellant unilaterally rescinded the contract on the ground that there were operating risks in the lease contract, that is, the lessee can unconditionally terminate the contract when the market economy declines and the consumption power declines, which will inevitably cause great losses to the interests of the appellee. After many arguments with the appellant, the appellant recovered more than 40 million losses for the client.