This case was reported by the plaintiff Shanghai Real Estate Consulting Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as company a): the defendant Tao used the sales information of a house on Zhuzhou Road, Hongkou District, Shanghai, provided by company a, and deliberately skipped the intermediary. Signing a house purchase contract directly with the seller privately violated the provisions of the "Real Estate Purchase Confirmation" and was a malicious act of "jumping off the building". The court was requested to order Tao to pay Company A liquidated damages of 1,650 yuan. Defendant Tao Mou argued that the original owner of the house involved, Li Mou, entrusted several intermediary companies to sell the house. This company did not have exclusive information about the house and did not act as the exclusive agent. Tao did not use the information provided by Company A, and there was no breach of contract by "jumping orders". After trial, the court found that in the second half of 2008, the original property owner Li Moumou went to several housing agency companies to promote the houses involved in the case. On June 22, 2008, a real estate agency in Shanghai showed Tao a house. 165438+On October 23, a real estate consulting company in Shanghai (hereinafter referred to as the real estate consulting company) took Tao’s wife Cao to look at a house; 165438+On October 27, a certain company showed Tao a house, and on the same day, she and Tao Signed the "Real Estate Purchase Confirmation". Article 2.4 of the "Confirmation" stipulates that Tao or its clients, agents, representatives, contractors and other persons related to Tao, within six months after viewing the house, take advantage of the information and opportunities provided by a company, but fail to do so. If a business transaction is reached with a third party through a certain company, Tao shall pay 65,438+0% of the actual transaction price reached with the seller to the certain company. At that time, a company quoted a price of 6.5438+0.65 million yuan for the house, and a real estate consulting company quoted a price of 6.5438+0.45 million yuan, and took the initiative to negotiate the price with the seller. 165438 + On October 30, through the intermediary of a real estate consulting company, Tao signed a house sales contract with the seller, and the transaction price was 13,800 yuan. After the buyer and seller completed the transfer procedures, Tao paid a commission of 13,800 yuan to a real estate consulting company. The Shanghai Hongkou District People's Court issued a (2009) III (Min No. 912) civil judgment on June 23, 2009: the defendant Tao should pay liquidated damages of 13,800 yuan to the plaintiff within ten days from the date of entry into force of this judgment. After the verdict, Tao appealed. On September 4, 2009, the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court issued the (2009) Civil Judgment No. 1508: First, it revoked the Shanghai Hongkou District People's Court (2009) Civil Judgment No. 912; Second, a company required Tao to pay for breach of contract. Gold 654.38 yuan + 0.65 million yuan, not supported. The lawyer interpreted the court's effective judgment that the real estate purchase confirmation signed by a company and Tao was an intermediary contract, and the agreement in Article 2.4 was a standard clause prohibiting "jumping orders" in the house purchase and sale intermediary contract. Its original intention is to prevent buyers from using the housing information provided by the intermediary company to "jump" the intermediary company to buy a house, so that the intermediary company cannot obtain the commission it deserves. This Agreement does not relieve one party from liability or increase the liability of the other party. According to this agreement, the key to measuring whether the buyer "jumps the order" is to see whether the buyer takes advantage of the housing information and opportunities provided by the agency company. If the buyer does not take advantage of the information and opportunities provided by the intermediary company, but obtains the same house information through other legal channels that are known to the public, the buyer has the right to choose an intermediary company with a low quotation and good service to facilitate the house sales contract. The establishment of "jump order" does not constitute a breach of contract. In this case, the original property owner listed the same house for sale through multiple intermediary companies. Tao and his family learned about the same house information through different intermediary companies, and facilitated the establishment of house sales contracts through other intermediary companies. Therefore, Tao did not take advantage of a certain company's information and opportunities, so it did not constitute a breach of contract and did not support a certain company's lawsuit.
Legal basis:
Article 18 of the "Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" The Intermediate People's Court has jurisdiction over the following first-instance civil cases: (1) Major foreign-related cases; (2) Cases with significant impact in the region; (3) Cases determined by the Supreme People's Court to be under the jurisdiction of the Intermediate People's Court.