Brief introduction

Company A is a production enterprise that produces concrete admixture products, Company B is a concrete mixing station, and Company C is a real estate development company. Company A supplies concrete admixture to company B, and company B supplies concrete to company C. As of August 6, 2016, Company B has owed a total of more than 2 million yuan to Company A, and Company C owed more than RMB 3 million to Company B. The three parties reached an agreement on the arrears. The company C provided A company with a number of sets of properties to offset the company's arrears to company A. The three parties made a clear agreement on the specific house number, area, unit price and delivery time of the house. Later, the house was delayed due to the break of the capital chain of Company C. After the company A sued B company for payment of more than 2 million yuan and interest on overdue payment, our lawyer Song Lihua as the legal counsel of company A to represent the case. The defendant pleaded that the three parties signed the house to the top and that their debts had been transferred to Company C. The debts of Company A and Company B had been settled and they did not agree to pay the purchase price and the corresponding interest.

Court decision

The case was won by the first and second trials, and the company B repaid the interest of the company A and the overdue payment.

Lawyer

The supply contracts of both A and B companies are not legal and valid in violation of the mandatory provisions of the law, and both parties shall perform in good faith and comprehensively. A house-to-top agreement signed by the three parties A, B, and C. The agreement is an object-to-debt agreement and is not a debt transfer agreement advocated by the defendant. Insolvency refers to the legal act of the debtor to replace the debt he pays with his kind of payment. Such behavior is a practical legal act. Before the transfer of property rights is completed, the liquidation behavior is not yet established, and the original debt relationship between the original defendants has not been eliminated. By the time the plaintiff sued, the house was still not delivered, and the transfer of property rights was not completed. The agreement was not actually fulfilled. According to the operating status of Company C, it is possible that the contract cannot be realized. Therefore, the company A's claim was fulfilled.

Author: Song Lihua lawyer, director of law firm dedicated Tianjin Bo, founding partner, CPC member, China Law Society, Law Society of Civil credits Tianjin members. The cases he handled were reported in the "Tianjin Metropolis Report 60 points", "Tianjin Daily", "Daily News", "Tonight's Evening", "City Express", "Tianjin Workers" and "Tianjin Political and Legal News". . Many times, Tianjin Radio, Binhai Broadcasting, and Traffic Radio were invited to listen to the popular law. He has been invited to participate in large-scale public welfare popularization activities such as Tianjin Federation of Trade Unions, Tianjin Red Cross Society, Tianjin Peace Zone Women's Federation, and Hongshunli Street in Hebei District.

Consultant: Tianjin Hebei Comprehensive Law Enforcement Bureau, Tianjin Hongshunli Street, Hebei Tianjia Municipal Highway Engineering Co., Ltd., large state-owned enterprise, Tianjin Xinyongqiang Concrete Admixture Co., Ltd., Tianjin Shunyuan Environmental Protection Building Materials Co., Ltd. The company, Meihua Construction Engineering Co., Ltd., Tianjin Yuxing Engineering Co., Ltd. and high-end private perennial legal consultants.