Comment On The Real Estate Contract Case Of Ding And Shi

The rapid growth of the illegal construction’s number brings challenge to thecourt who has to deal with real-estate contract cases. There is a typical kind of thisnew real-estate contract. The subject matter is a legal construction, however, it hasbeen reconstructed as a new illegal construction before the contract is concluded andboth party of the contract know nothing about it. Due to our country’s compulsoryregistration system, the transaction of the construction can’t be completed which leadto the dispute between the two parties. Whether the contract is valid or not? Whetherthe Substantial Performance of the contract is doable or not? These questions arenecessarily to be answered by the court. It’s the only way to make a right judgment ofthis kind of cases and it will be a good reference when dealing with other similarones.The subject matter of this contract is legal building rather than the illegalreconstruction.This contract is valid not because the buyer is a bona fide purchaserand "The principle of public summons and trust for real estate property registration"can not be quoted in this circumstance. It is valid because the contract meet all theelements of a valid contract, especially in following aspects. The intention Expressedis genuine; the subject matter is the legal construction; the loss of the subject matterdoes not necessarily lead to the invalidity of the contract; the registration can’t beperformed does’t effect the validity of the contract. The contract meets all the elementto perform substantial performance.Because of the limitation of the Creditor’s RightsExternalism Mode we should replace the registration externalism with registrationantagonism which could result in less illegal construction and civil disputes related.