Economic contract dispute case analysis of Yantai corporate lawyer

Analysis of economic contract dispute case

(source /Reprint: Yantai lawyer Pan Zuocheng 666888915953514639 Http://blog.sina.com.cn/ytqyls )

The main body of the case in a contract for the sale of goods is Chinese company B and C company of Japan, a hospital to sign the contract, just as the beneficiary contract for the sale of goods, declare to the trustees of the. According to the style China foreign trade management system and "on the foreign trade agency system Interim Provisions", a hospital is not qualified as a contract for the sale of goods is one of the main. The legal matter which exist in the contract for the sale of goods in the CT equipment the sale of legal relations, installation debugging protocol is the Japanese C company and Chinese Ding factory equipment provided to assembly, connection, debugging and acceptance based on legal facts. The agreement is the main body of the Quartet, namely, a hospital, China B company, C company and China Ding factory in japan.

The main contract refers to a contract does not depend on the other and exist independently of the contract, the contract refers to the existence of the conditions of contract for the exist of the principal contract. From the effectiveness of the contract attached to the main contract, and from contract effectiveness will not affect the main contract.

In this case, a contract for the sale of goods and installation and commissioning agreement between all independent legal relationship is still the principal and subordinate relationship?

A hospital is entitled to initiate arbitration

(source /Reprint: Yantai lawyer Pan Zuocheng 666888915953514639 Http://blog.sina.com.cn/ytqyls )

The legal analysis

Chinese Ding factory argued, supporting device of the factory was sold to CT in a hospital equipment complies with the contract, there is no quality bad situation, a hospital for return reason not established.

Japan C company that, according to Japanese and China B company signed a contract for the sale of goods, a hospital in the contract as the actual equipment buyers signed and sealed, their legal status has been clearly. Therefore, the arbitration clause in a contract shall be governed by the constraints in the hospital. The installation and debugging protocol, only on matters relating to installation and debugging were agreed, dispute resolution not involved, nor change the contract agreed to resolve disputes by arbitration, the installation and commissioning agreement is a contract for the sale of goods from the contract, therefore, a hospital has no right to give Chinese the courts to settle the dispute any arising from a contract for the sale of goods based on.

In 1996 February, a hospital to China court, requirements to the quality of the CT device does not comply with the provisions of the contract on the grounds: 1 scale, return the complete set of equipment of C company and Japan China Ding factories; 2 Japan C company and Chinese Ding factories to provide a full set of CT equipment contract requirements; the loss of 3 Japanese company C and China Ding factory should compensate for a hospital.

In the equipment installation process, because the CT equipment provided by the company in Japan C tube does not conform to the specification, and the Chinese Ding factory annex specifications cannot and Japanese host match, resulting in equipment installation has not normal. To the agreement should submit to use in 1995 October, has not yet been completed installation and commissioning work. A hospital and Japan C company and China Ding factory disputes, in 1995 November, the Japanese and the technical staff China Ding plant installation and commissioning of the withdrawal, the debugging work intermittently.

In 1995 June, the Japanese company C and Chinese Ding factories are provided equipment to a hospital. In order to ensure the smooth progress of the work, in 1995 August the CT installation and debugging equipment, a hospital, Chinese B company, C company and Japan China Ding factory signed a hospital in installation and debugging CT equipment protocol. Agreement, the installation of equipment by the Japanese company C and China Ding factory is responsible for, to be delivered in 1995 October; after installation and commissioning, used in a hospital staff after 10 days for approval; if quality problems, respectively, by the Japanese company C and China Ding factory is responsible for.

(source /Reprint: Yantai lawyer Pan Zuocheng 666888915953514639 Http://blog.sina.com.cn/ytqyls )