租赁合同优先承租权案评析

发布时间：2018-07-07 10:24

本文选题：租赁合同 + 优先承租权　；参考：《湖南大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着我国经济的高速发展，房屋租赁业也迅猛发展，由此产生的优先承租权纠纷呈上扬趋势。这是一起典型的优先承租权纠纷案件，被告将其长沙市车站南路二百多个门面中的一个出租给予承租人从事汽车修理业务，原、被告双方在租赁合同中约定：租赁期满后，在同等条件下，承租人有优先承租权。但合同届满前半年出租方将再次出租的条件之一单独出租改变为整体出租并已经出租给第三人。双方在诉讼中的焦点集中在租赁关系中，承租权是否有优先性，双方约定的“同等条件”该如何界定和认识。优先承租权是租赁权衍生出来的权利，是优先权的下位概念，其性质是约定权利而不是法定权利，是债权而不是物权，是期待权，是缔约请求权。在法律对优先承租权没有规定的情形下，本着意思自治原则，双方对优先承租权的约定系双方真实意思表示，，不违反法律法规禁止性规定，应受到法律保护。尽管我国立法对于优先承租权中“同等条件”未界定，但基于法理可知，“同等条件”主要是指价格的同等，价款支付的期限与方式的同等，还应当参照合同法及最高人民法院关于承租人优先购买权中同等条件的具体规定进行理解。在此案中，出租方改原来单独出租为整体出租方式，即使价格同等，价款支付的期限与方式同等，但原承租人所承租的门面占整体门面比例过少，不属于双方约定的“同等条件”，故承租人的优先承租权丧失。租赁双方在房屋租赁合同中若约定优先承租权，基于合同的约定与合同法基本原则诚实信用原则，出租人有满足承租人原来所租赁房屋优先承租权实现的义务，若双方在原合同中未对同等条件做出特别说明，出租方单方面改单独出租方式为整体出租方式使得承租人的优先承租权无法实现时，应当承担赔偿损失的违约责任。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of China's economy, the housing leasing industry has also developed rapidly, resulting in a rising trend of priority tenancy disputes. This is a typical preemptive tenancy dispute case in which the defendant gave one of the more than 200 facades of his Changsha Station South Road to the lessee to engage in car repair business. Originally, the defendant and the defendant agreed in the lease contract: after the lease expires, Under the same conditions, the lessee has the right of priority. However, six months before the expiration of the contract, the lessor changed one of the terms of the lease to a whole lease and has already leased it to a third party. The focus of both parties in the litigation is on the lease relationship, whether the lease right has priority or not, and how to define and understand the "equal conditions" agreed by both parties. The priority lease right is the right derived from the lease right and the lower concept of priority. Its nature is a contractual right rather than a legal right, a creditor's right rather than a real right, a right of expectation and a right of claim for a contract. Under the circumstance that the law has no stipulation to the priority lease right, in the principle of autonomy of will, the agreement of the two sides on the priority lease right is the expression of both parties' true intention, and it should be protected by law if it does not violate the prohibition of laws and regulations. Although the legislation of our country has not defined the "equal conditions" in the priority lease right, we can know from the legal theory that the "equal conditions" mainly refer to the same price, the same period of payment of the price and the same way of payment. We should also refer to the contract law and the specific provisions of the Supreme people's Court on the same conditions in the lessee's preemption right. In this case, the lessor has changed the original lease to a whole rental method. Even if the price is equal, the payment period and method are the same, but the original lessee's facade accounts for too little of the overall facade. It does not belong to the "equal conditions" agreed by both parties, so the lessee's prior lease right is lost. If the two parties agree on the preferential lease right in the housing lease contract, the lessor shall have the obligation to satisfy the realization of the lessee's prior lease right on the basis of the agreement of the contract and the basic principle of contract law of good faith. If the two parties in the original contract do not make a special explanation of the same conditions, the lessor unilaterally changed the separate rental mode to the overall rental mode, which makes the lessee's preferential lease right impossible to realize, and shall bear the liability for the breach of contract to compensate for the loss.
【学位授予单位】：湖南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】