A Study On Damages For The Tenant’s Right Of First Purchase

The so-called issue of damages for the lessee’s right of first refusal essentially contains two dimensions: First,the determination of the infringement of the right of first refusal;The second is how to calculate and determine the final amount of compensation on the basis of the compensation that has been determined that the right has been damaged.Judging from the current theoretical research and judicial practice,the most controversial contention for damages for the lessee’s right of first refusal is t he understanding of the constituent elements of the infringement of the lessee’s right of first refusal,the determination of the nature of the damage compensation,and the determination of the scope of compensation.Due to the lack of clear standards in the current legal provisions of the system,the resulting judgment results of such disputes are very different from case to case.In order to solve the problem of different judgments in the same case in such cases,it is first necessary to refine the constituent elements of the lessee’s right of pre-emption,and to judge and determine whether the right of pre-emption has been infringed by more detailed standards,so as to clarify the premise of infringement;Second,it is necessary to clarify the nature of the lessee’s pre-emptive right to damages,and disputes over the nature of the damages are subject to the determination of the nature of the lessee’s pre-emptive right,and must also consider the needs of practical litigation,combined with the above two,to determine it as liability for breach of contract to regulate the basis of its claim;Finally,by analyzing the losses after the tenant’s right of first refusal has been infringed,a reasonable scope of compensation is determined,specific suggestions are put forward for judicial operations,and then the adjudication ideas are unified,and finally the same judgment is achieved in the same case.The first part is intended to ask questions.By collecting and screening the typical cases required for the article,and comparing the focus of the dispute reflected in the typical cases and the results of the adjudication,the specific problems in practice are pointed out,which is used as the basis for the research of the article.The second part is aimed at analyzing the problem.Judging from the theory of the relevant adjudication,the differences in the main legal basis and the vague treatment of legislation in the academic circles are the main reasons for the inconsistencies in the adjudication,which involve both the dispute over the definition of the nature of the right of pre-emptive purchase of the lessee of the source of the right,and the consequences of the legislation due to inadequate technical treatment.Therefore,this part mainly makes a reasonable argument for the cause of the problem,paving the way for the suggestions made later.The third part aims to solve the problem.The improvement of the lessee’s pre-emptive right to damages system requires the refinement of its relevant contents.The content that is likely to cause controversy,such as the "equivalent conditions" and "notice" of the constituent elements of the lessee’s exercise of the pre-emptive right,should be further clarified,and the nature of the "liability for compensation" borne by the seller for infringement of the pre-emptive right should be determined by "liability for damages for breach of contract";As for the scope of damages,unless specifically agreed by the parties,the full compensation should be the main for the lessee who satisfies the interests of residence,and the direct loss should be the main direct loss for the lessee who claims his rights because of commercial interests,and should not include indirect losses.