The Validity Of The Purchase And Selling Contract Of "Haunted House"

During the past10years, China’s second-hand real estate market hasquite a few disputes over the purchase and selling contract of "HauntedHouse". Judicial practice and academia have different criteria how to dealthe disputes. China’s current law does not have relevant provisions andregulations concerning such disputes. This thesis is intended to have thelegal validity of the purchase and selling contract of haunted house as themain studying object, through analyzing the definition and standard of“Haunted House”, sorting related cases and theories, so that to bring outown opinions about the validity of the purchase and selling contract ofhaunted house.Other than the Foreword and the Ending, this thesis consists of3parts:The first part of this thesis is Definition of “Haunted House”. Socialviews and understanding about haunted house differs and varies. Listedtwo doctrines among the academia, one is restriction doctrine and anotheris expansion doctrine. The restriction doctrine advocates the standard should be strictly limited to the events happened inside the house, due tohuman factors and the scene of death. Based on the restriction doctrine,the expansion doctrine extends the scope to accidents, non-normal death,sensitive location and being relevant with illegal events.The second part of this thesis is Related Case Study and Doctrines.This part lists few relevant case studies including abroad and domesticones, introduces the cases from Taiwan and Hong Kong as well as fromBritish and American and analyzes two validity doctrines, valid doctrineand invalid doctrine. Valid doctrine is based on defects of the goods and“caveat emptor” while the invalid doctrine is based on the principle ofgood faith and disclosure duties. Therefore, narrates domestic case studiesand doctrines. China’s judicial practice has different standards which canbe divided into5types. And the academia has different doctrines. Thevalid doctrine is based on the purpose of contract, free will, warrantyliability and tort liability and the invalid doctrine is based on the principleof public orders and morals and the principle of good faith.The last part is My Opinion About the Validity of the Purchase andSelling Contract of “Haunted House”. The writer agrees to the restrictiondoctrine about the definition of the “Haunted House” and advocates a“Haunted House” should meet five elements: objectivity, severity orabnormality, places limitations, direct causality and timeliness. Secondly,the contract is valid, taboo of “Haunted House” shall not be considered as good morals, the principle of public order and morals shall not apply.“Haunted House” is a stigmatized object in legal nature. The seller shallbe liable for the guaranty. The seller is also in breach of good faith for notfulfilling the disclosure duty and should bear Culpa.