Research On The Legal Issues Of "jumping Orders" In Housing Sales

In response to social needs,the “encyclopedia-style” civil code first set up a law related to the behavior of “Jumping orders”,Put differently,if the client uses the information and opportunity of the intermediary to achieve an agreement of the house sale in private.The client should pay the intermediary remuneration.Jumping orders is the most likely dispute between the client and the intermediary in the process of second-hand housing sales.Moreover,as house value rise and the uneven development of the house intermediary industry,the disputes over the behavior of Jumping orders continue to increase,the amount of such judicial case is raise,and the differences in handling cases are also increasing.So that both the judicial and academic circles and even the public are very concerned about how the court deals with the Jumping orders dispute.Although the Civil Code has made a response to the handling of the Jumping orders behavior of private contracting,it has not made a clear provision for the handling of the Jumping orders behavior of reaching an agreement through other intermediaries.Moreover,there are still many controversies in the practice of handling the jumping orders behavior of entrusting other intermediaries.Therefore,this paper focuses on the Jumping orders behavior of other intermediary type entrusted separately.After reading the relevant cases,it is found that there are different judgments in the same case and even different opinions on the same type of problems in judicial practice.Therefore,five typical cases are listed,focusing on problems when the court tries the Jumping orders dispute.At present,there are some controversial points in order to provide some ideas for the practical solution of the Jumping orders dispute.The first point of dispute is the issue of the validity of the prohibiting“Jumping orders clause.To judge the effect of prohibiting Jumping orders clause,we should analyze it in a logical order instead of one size fits all way.The most critical step is to see the content of the standard clause.If the content of the clause is reasonable and the intermediary also fulfills the obligation of prompt and explanation,the Jumping orders clause has legal effect.Secondly,whether the prohibiting jump order clause is effective or not will affect the constitutive elements that determine that the client who implements the“Jumping orders” behavior needs to bear legal responsibility.If the effect of the clause is worth affirming,the Jumping orders behavior meets the conditions of prohibition of jump agreed in the clause,and the buyer is subjective and malicious,then the “Jumping orders behavior should bear the responsibility of violating the agreement.If the validity of the clause is not worth affirming(or there is no clause),the client Jumping orders in order not to pay the intermediary fee,and the Jumping orders behavior makes use of the information and opportunities provided by the intermediary,the client should pay the corresponding service fee in proportion to the workload of the agency.The primary problem is,which elements should be used to judge the client’s use of the information and opportunities provided by the intermediary? Judging this problem,we can not only rely on the client can use other ways to obtain information or the other party can list and sell through multiple intermediaries to determine that the client has not used information and opportunities.In fact,we should also consider whether the information obtained is valuable,whether we have achieved our goal through the information,and then we should consider the time of obtaining the information.Finally,if the client does the ”Jumping orders” behavior which needs to bear the duty for break the legal contract and the intermediary contract with the available prohibiting “Jumping orders” clause is terminated,then the intermediary can still claim the client to accept the duty for break the legal document in accordance with the prohibiting “Jumping orders” clause.