Study On The Validity Of The Affordable Housing Index Contract

The economically affordable Housing is a supportability engineering which is providedby the government for the low-income family to protect their interests and rights, but inpractice, the people driven by interests usually make deals on the index of the affordablehousing by ignoring its security function, so it has caused many disputes. As whether the lawsand administrative regulations or the State Council department regulations and localgovernment regulations do not make specific provisions on the trade of the affordable housingindex, so the court’s decisions on the trade of the affordable housing index are not consistent.By collecting and analyzing all kinds of court’s judgments on the trade of the affordablehousing index, this paper will sum up the reasons why the court made such decisions, and willalso rethink the deficiency of the court’s decisions, then this paper will study the legal effectof the affordable housing index contract by measuring the public and private interests foundin the contract. In addition to the introduction, this paper is divided into six parts:The first part analyzes the court’s judgments on the trade of the affordable housing index.And it also points out the blank in the legislation and the confused judgment in practice. Aftersummarizing the main reasons why the court made such decisions on the trade of theaffordable housing index, this part rethinks the deficiency of the court’s decisions.The second part defines the legal attribute of the affordable housing index. The conceptsof housing rights, the administrative licensing and the administrative payment are easilyconfused to the affordable housing index, so we have to make a distinction between them. Theconclusion is that the affordable housing index is a creditor’s rights.The third part introduces the general theory of the validity of contract. The parties to thecontract have the capacity for civil conduct, the intention expressed is genuine and thecontract does not violate the law or the public interest is the general conditions for a contractto come into effect. But the valid contract should not only have the legitimacy, but also meetthe requirements of social appropriateness.The fourth part analyzes whether the transfer agreement of the affordable housing indexis illegal. After introducing the general theory on judging whether a contract is illegal, thispart distinguishes the transfer of affordable housing index from the transfer of the affordablehousing which is purchased less than five years, the transfer of the pre-sale of commercial housing. The conclusion is, the transfer of the affordable housing index is creditor’s right inthe nature, and it is legal.The fifth part analyzes whether the transfer agreement of the affordable housing indexdamages the social and public interests. A legal contract is not certainly effective, it must becensored by the social and public interests. The parties to the contract have the freedom totransfer the affordable housing index, but their transfer agreement violates the purpose of theaffordable housing policies which aims at balancing the social interests distribution, reducingthe gap between the rich and poor, guaranteeing the rights of the low-income families.The sixth part makes a typological analysis of the transfer of the affordable housingindex in practice. In the case that the assignee has the qualification to purchase the affordablehousing, the transfer agreement of the affordable housing index does not violate the purposeof the affordable housing policies, therefore, the private interests in the transfer agreementshould be protected by the law; under the condition that the assignee does not have thequalification to purchase the affordable housing, the transfer agreement not only against thepolicies’ purpose of balancing the social interests distribution, promoting the social justice,but also exacerbate the gap between the rich and poor, it is not conducive to the protection oflow-income people, therefore, the private interests in such transfer agreement are unworthy ofprotecting.