The Handling Of Disputes In The Operation Of Property Shops

In recent years,with the steady progress of the economy,the people's living standards have improved remarkably.People from all over the country have come and gone,and the profits of the malls are extremely impressive.The property shops that rely on the overall development of the shopping malls have become a good place for people to invest.However,with the rise of the network economy,online shopping has become a familiar consumption pattern,and online sales once surpassed offline retail.The originally concentrated business district is also facing many challenges.The overall sales of the shopping malls are lower,so the income of the owners of property shops who relies on the profitability of the shopping malls to extract revenues is gradually declining.Under this circumstance,the friction between the owners of property shops and the managers of the malls has intensified,and the proportion of corresponding disputes to the courts has been rising.The owner's appeals are mainly concentrated on the requirements of returning shops and compensating for losses.However,in the actual judicial trial,the proportion of property owners who win the case is very low.Based on the above reasons,this paper takes Yu v.a commercial management center in M City to entrust a business contract dispute as an example,and evaluates the disputed focus of this case: 1.Whether the owners of the property shops in this case has the right to return the property;2.In this case,whether the owners of the property shops can claim damages;3.Whether the property management in this case interferes with the exercise of property rights.Based on the current laws and regulations,judicial interpretation,and legal theory,the author get the conclusion that the owners of the property shops and the manager signed the “Entrusted Business Contract”,which transferred the management right instead of the ownership,so it did not have the right to return the property.The manager did not rent the shop again after the expiration of the contract.There is no relevant evidence to show the loss of Yu,and he is not supported for the claim of compensation losses.The owner's exercise of power is difficult for the property management company to close the entrance of the mall.Finally,the author takes this case as the starting point,it finds that there are many drawbacks in the investment method of property-based shops.It is not a profitable investment in the developer and management business.“One shop for three generations” is just a beautiful bubble.This paper grasps several key points and puts forward relevant suggestions for investors.It is hoped that investors can stay awake and evade the relevant minefields.I also hope that lawyers can improve their business level and better safeguard and realize the legitimate rights and interests of the parties.We expect that the legislature can provide more detailed rules on related issues to maintain the interests of the owners in all aspects.