Owners Of Property Fee Disputes Right Of Defense

Besides the introduction, this paper is divided into three parts. The first part is the theoretical discussion about owners’property fee dispute right of defense. This article begins with the basic concept of "Property Management" and "property services" division and their cross-theory. Because the owners of property service contract is the basis for the exercise of the right to defense, so first of all the author clarifies property services contract with the relevant property owners, property management and property services and concepts. In addition, from the nature of the contract, three aspects of the subject and object of the service contract on the property were analyzed. In particular, the property service contract is a mixed contract, with a dual nature of commission contract and labor contract related to the tripartite body, the subject of a contract is not easy to measure it’s the public and continuity features. Subsequently elaborated owners property fee disputes defenses that under normal circumstances, the owners right of defense shall belong pairs Contract Performance while fulfilling defense. Finally, the property services business property costs claims are briefly analyzed. This part of the theoretical discussion provide foundations for the case study in the following parts of the paper.The second part studied some typical dispute cases of Q City Intermediate People’s Court of second instance property services contract since2009. For example, charges for property owners to defend the right to dispute the empirical analysis. The article first of these cases the overall number, type, feature analysis, and then according to the different reasons of owners for the exercise of the right of defense, the seven typical cases are divided into two categories:The first category is a legitimate exercise of defense rights owner’s circumstances. Case one to three cases, the owners of property services companies were defective services, other owners of property services companies are not violated as a neighboring right, the property services company failed to fulfill its security obligations by exercising right of defense. The second category is the owner improper exercise of the right of defense of the case. In the case of four to seven, respectively, prior owners of property services contract is invalid. Moreover, the owners’committee is not established property service contract cannot be signed, the quality of housing and property services business tort exercise right of defense. More owners defenses were unsubstantiated Court, within the same legal relationship should not be prosecuted, property services contract effectively dismissed other reasons, the article should be prosecuted for the court finds certain verdict put forward different views. Therefore in conclusion:The court should not be generalized to the specific case without specific analysis.The third part of the article defends the right to dispute charges of principle from the regulation of property owners to. To propose five principles:honesty, safeguarding the public interest, prohibition of abuse of rights, equal protection and mediating contention. Then from the owners property fee dispute legitimate exercise of the right to protect and defend the owners undue restrictions on the exercise of the right to defend both proposals, the owners a legitimate exercise of the right to the protection of defense should be a reasonable allocation of the burden of proof, the judge discretion standardization, correctly handle "separate lawsuit" and "co-processing" relationship. In the end, the author provides suggestions regarding to improper exercise of the owners of the restrictions on the right of defense, the first of China’s current system, the system of property owners restrictive provisions right of defense analysis, and then restricting the owners made improper exercise of rights.