| In recent years, real estate intermediary which mainly serves in the second-hand housing transactions is going through rapid development. It brings a lot of convenience to buyers and sellers in housing market, and also greatly improves the efficiency of housing transactions. In the intermediation contract of real estate sales, the clients have the right to decide whether or not to conclude housing sale contract while the middleman don’t involve in the housing sale contract directly, which results in the frequent "Jump List" phenomenon. Due to the relatively simple legal rule of intermediation contract, "Jump List" becomes a difficult dispute in judicial practices. In the case of Shanghai Centaline Property Consultants Ltd. V. Tao Dehua intermediary contract dispute issued by the Supreme People’s Court, it relates to some core issues of "Jump List" which can provide some guide to deal with future intermediation contract disputes with a view. In the article, the first chapter introduces the basic background of the above case, which leads to three controversial issues. The second chapter analyzes the legal nature of "real estate purchase confirmation". The third chapter discusses the effect of prohibiting jumping list clause. As a standard term, prohibiting jump list clause should be judged according to its actual content instead of denying all of them. In the meanwhile, the paper also distinguishes jump list from jump list breach. Jump list is an objective legal fact while jump list breach focuses on the liability of breach. The fourth chapter elaborates on the liabilities the clients should bear when they choose jump list. In the last chapter, the paper discusses how should the real estate intermediary prevent the risk of jump list. As a professional service agency, real estate brokerage should improve its own ability and provide high-qualified service. Additionally, they can make good use of legal measures to protect their legitimate rights and interests. |
PDF Full Text Request