Code In Japan Civil Was Revised For The First Time In 120 Years.  Civil Code Amendment.

Hello. Giraffe (@kirinaccount) is.

 

Residential land and building broker in Japan

test 2016 fiscal year (2016) we tried to solve the past questions.

First, we will start from the past questions in FY2016.

After the Civil Code amended what to

Or interpretation can be the

It was spelling. 

Past questions Upon acquiring the

Residential land and building broker in Japan qualification

 It was solved

“Difficult to understand even read the answer.”

2016 fiscal year (FY 2016),  past questions correct limb (and correct) do not know, confusing scene

Also helps likely explanation you were beginners

It has a little mixes.

 

· Correct the problem limb

And revision of the Civil Code limb

· Civil Code amended

We explain by using the.

The test passed, I hope to help test preparation.

 

 

Civil Code amendment Question 1, Question 2

Question 1 civil and provisions

Limb 4 when one of the parties by (correct limb) contract was promises to benefits with respect to third parties, the

Third parties, that have the right to claim directly from the obligor

This limb is correct.

Because

(Formerly 537, paragraph 1)

Between the summary’s and , about who, causing the potency of third party beneficiary contract

was.

For example,

According to the new law contract to for a third party, at the time of its formation

– “If a third party is not actually resides.”

Or

– be a “case in which a third party is not specific”, not be prevented from taking effect (new 537, paragraph 2)

This is what was documented precedents doctrine under the old law.

Then the new law, in accordance with commonly accepted theory

In summary wants to cancel the contract after the beneficiary of the right has occurred was that it is necessary to obtain a “third-party consent”. (New 538, paragraph 2)

Question 2 civil and limited capacity to act

Limbs 2 if the person under curatorship is to sell the real estate, it is necessary consent of the curator, in the case of rejecting the offer of a gift, the consent of the curator is not required.

Limb 4 (correct limb)

The auxiliary people, to the acts must obtain the consent of the assistant, even though it does not have the consent, when I was convinced that the consent of the assistant to the other party by using the deception, the person under assistance can not you cancel the act.

Limb 2

It is now possible to substitute as a legal representative in the new law.

Because

The new law Article ten

Limited capacity to act the acts listed in each item before (minors, adult ward, the person under curatorship and

It refers to the auxiliary person who received the referee of Article 17 paragraph (1). same as below. )

It is as legal representative of.

It will be like.

For example, real estate rights acquisition and loss, is the rejection of the application of the gift.

Civil Code amendment Question 3 – Question 5

Mistake of Question 3 Civil Code motivation

Limb 3 (correct limb)

B purchased the instep land from A did not include the transfer of ownership registration. If the E is equipped with the transfer of ownership registration to purchase the instep land from A for the purpose of obtaining a profit sell shares at a high price to B is multiplied to this, E is not be able to claim ownership of the instep land against B .

Limb 4 sales contract between AB is, the case is one that is entered into if there is a mistake in the intention of the motives of B, even if B is equipped with a transfer of ownership registration, A is between AB because of the mistake of B it is possible to cancel the contract of sale.

Click here

Mistake of motivation

It can be canceled from invalid

It has changed.

Because

The new law, with respect to mistake of motive, we put the provisions of the clear No. 2 and Section 2 new Article 95 (1).

And, it is recognized as being important in light of the purpose and the conventional wisdom on the trading of its mistake laws act

The effect of the case, was renamed as “can be canceled” from invalid. (New Article 95 1 )

For example, it can not be canceled when there is gross negligence on A.

Question 5 civil and credit transfer

Limb 1 has authorized negotiable creditors of A to B, receiving the assignment of the claim with C to know the presence of the authorized

Long as, the significant per that subsequent acquirers D which has received the transfer of further receivables from C did not know the existence of the special contract

Even if there is no such fault, B can counteract the presence of a rider relative to D.

Limb 2 A is sending the notification of the receivables transferred to B, if the notification has not reached the B is, Steller sea lions B is the objection

Even if the fit without consent, B can reject the payment of obligations pertaining to the claims with respect to C.

Limb 3 (correct limb) without special agreement negotiable creditors of A to B, at the time, which is assigned to the C still has occurred

If a claim regarding no future transactions, the receivables of certain type of transaction, amount, duration and the like

When it was, as long as there are no special circumstances, receivables transferred from A to C is effective.

Limb 4 due date to A had a loan receivable arriving B is from A to receive a notification of the claim assignment, objections

Without the consent and do not have the, did not even intention of canceling. Then, B receives the payment request from C

When the, even if the intention of canceling the loan claims on A, it is impossible to combat C.

· Limb 1 is transferred to the C even if there is a treaty of non-negotiable in the new law is valid.

Even assignment in violation of the (new 466, paragraph 2) negotiable special contract receivables will be transferred to effectively assignor

If C is a malicious, gross negligence A will be able to refuse the fulfillment of its obligations with respect to C.

Because

Debtor is because can claim a defense against the assignee of the malicious-gross negligence.

For example, B can be obtained a disclaimer with a cancellation action against A, claiming to C.

Civil Code amendment Question 6 – Question 7

Question 6 of the Civil Code sales contract

Limb 3 error-is (correct limb) B, if the instep land of A ownership was entered into the matter contract knowing that it is the purpose of the mortgage, B of the execution of the mortgage loses ownership of the instep land even damaged, B can not be charged for a, damages.

The defect of the right in the old law

Uniform and clear law does not exist

was.

The reason is because the theory was divided.

For example, when there is a “hidden defect” in the subject matter of a sale, the seller will accept the collateral responsibility regardless of the presence or absence of negligence for its defects. For here the legal nature there was a conflict of legal liability theory and contract responsibility theory.

Buyer on the rules relating to defects in objects can now be charged to the seller in the new law. This is because the new law because a variety of law has become the uniform handling.

For example,

B → In the case of A is

Tsui complete claims (new 562 Article)

– Price reduction claims (new 563 Article)

And release rights (new 541, 542 Article)

· Damages claims (new Article 415)

The was formed.

Issue 7 civil and vicarious liability

Instep building A is to rent from B, and D, which are employed in the shipping company C has damaged a portion of the instep building plunges track to drive drowsy (hereinafter referred to as “the present accident.”) Relating to the following description among them, according to the civil Code provisions and precedents, or correct certain there. Incidentally, D is assumed to have been operating as a business C.

A A whereas B, according to the ratio of the loss portion of the upper building, it is possible to demand a reduction of the rent.

Lee A, the only remaining portion of the upper building may not be possible to achieve the purpose of rented, it is possible to cancel the lease contract with B.

C C is based on the user responsibility, when compensating the loss arising from the present accident against B, and it is possible to obtain reimbursement against D, is limited to limit its scope court believes it to be equivalent on good faith there is a case that.

Question 7 is all correct limb.

It is possible to claim the A reduction →

It is reduced

I think we can be interpreted as.

This is because (the new law six hundred and eleventh Article)

In the case where some of the leased thing is no longer able to use and profit by loss other reasons, when it is intended is due to reasons not attributable to blame the lessee, rents, the it is reduced in proportion to the value of the part that can no longer be used and revenue.

For example, in the (old law six hundred and eleventh Article)

When a portion of the leased thing is lost due to reasons not attributable to the negligence of the lessee, the lessee can, depending on the proportion of the lost part demand a reduction of the rent.

It will be.

CHILLY New six hundred and eleventh Article 2

In the case where some of the leased thing is no longer able to use and profit by other reasons loss,

When the remaining portion only can not lessee achieve the purpose of the lease, the lessee is, cancellation of the contract

It can be a to.

Civil Code amendment Question 8

Question 8 sublease

A is leasing the instep building a monthly 300,000 yen to B, B Which of the following statements in the case that is sublease in lawfully monthly 400,000 yen to the C to the instep building with the consent of A, the provisions of the Civil Code and according to the case law, any things that are wrong.

1 A limb, the rents of non-payment of B to cancel the lease contract of Party building to reason, with respect to C, must be given the opportunity to pay the rent of the Party building to demand their rent non-payment.

If limbs 2 B pays even when the due date of the rent of the upper building against A, A may request to pay directly to C, and rent 300,000 yen A.

If the limb 3 A has canceled the lease contract of Party building because of the debt default to B, even if there is no non-payment of rent for the C of B, A for C, it is possible to obtain the surrender of Party building .

If the limb 4 A have agreed cancel the lease contract of the Party building with the B, A for C, based on the agreement cancellation of the B, can not be obtained the surrender of the Party building in the course.

1. Error-correct limb
2. The new 613, Paragraph 1 of the preceding stage A can be claimed in the limit of the limit 300,000 yen to C.
3. New 613 paragraph 3 proviso will be able to claim to vacate from A than case law doctrine that assumes to C.
4. The new 613 paragraph 3 text, as long as there is no “special circumstances” such as the special relationship between the , causing the potency of third pC and the lessee B, A can not oppose the agreement released to the C, so as to vacate the Party building I can not claim to.

In here Question 8

I think we can interpret such there is no change in the old law and the new law.

Because

Although case law had been used in the old law

It has been clearly stated by the new law.

For example, the limb is 4.

613 paragraph 3 new law text you and the like.

Civil Code amendment Question 9

Question 9 civil and ruling

(Ruling)

One party to the contract, prior to the conclusion of the contract, in violation of the accountability on the principle of good faith, to conclude the agreement

Or when the absence information to influence the decision as to whether did not provide the other party, the one party is

Per damage suffered by the other party has entered into the agreement, it may bear the damages caused by tort

Is given special, it should say not bear Liability by failure to obligations the agreement. (Snip)

Liability in the case as described above are those generated by illegal activities. (Omitted)

② in violation of the error, (correct limb) principle of good faith on the accountability, the buyer of the claim for damages against the seller that the information should affect the decision on whether or not to conclude the agreement did not provide to the buyer, damage even if you do not buyer know that you have suffered, if not exercised for 10 years from the sales contract shall be extinguished by the statute of limitations.

Question 9

The answer is the same.

Limb 2 10 years What error.

Because

The new law changes the old law of precedents

After the amendment also damages claims based on tort and short-term disappearance aging of 3 years from know the damage and the perpetrator

Double of the period limitation that even without knowing them is the exercise period of 20 years from the “time of the tort” is

Unchanged, it is the same starting point.

Furthermore, the new law for the “damages claims by tort harming the life or body of people.”

And five years from the time of the short-term laches period victim was aware of the damage and the perpetrator.

It was defined as. (2 of the new Article 724)

For example, old law

Damages claims based on tort, will take to disappear aging of the short-term in the victim or 3 years from the legal representative know the damage and the perpetrator.

 

 

Hello. Giraffe (@kirinaccount) is.

 

Residential land and building broker in Japan

test 2016 fiscal year (2016) we tried to solve the past questions.

 

 

Civil Code amendment Question 1, Question 2

Question 1 civil and provisions

Limb 4 when one of the parties by (correct limb) contract was promises to benefits with respect to third parties, the

Third parties, that have the right to claim directly from the obligor

This limb is correct.

Because

(Formerly 537, paragraph 1)

Between the summary’s and about who, causing the potency of third party beneficiary contract

was.

For example,

According to the new law contract to for a third party, at the time of its formation

– “If a third party is not actually resides.”

Or

– be a “case in which a third party is not specific”, not be prevented from taking effect (new 537, paragraph 2)

This is what was documented precedents doctrine under the old law.

Then the new law, in accordance with commonly accepted theory

In summary wants to cancel the contract after the beneficiary of the right has occurred was that it is necessary to obtain a “third-party consent”. (New 538, paragraph 2)

 

Question 2 civil and limited capacity to act

Limbs 2 if the person under curatorship is to sell the real estate, it is necessary consent of the curator, in the case of rejecting the offer of a gift, the consent of the curator is not required.

Limb 4 (correct limb)

The auxiliary people, to the acts must obtain the consent of the assistant, even though it does not have the consent, when I was convinced that the consent of the assistant to the other party by using the deception, the person under assistance can not you cancel the act.

Limb 2

It is now possible to substitute as a legal representative in the new law.

Because

The new law Article ten

Limited capacity to act the acts listed in each item before (minors, adult ward, the person under curatorship and

It refers to the auxiliary person who received the referee of Article 17 paragraph (1). same as below. )

It is as legal representative of.

It will be like.

For example, real estate rights acquisition and loss, is the rejection of the application of the gift.

Civil Code amendment Question 3 – Question 5

Mistake of Question 3 Civil Code motivation

Limb 3 (correct limb)

B purchased the instep land from A did not include the transfer of ownership registration. If the E is equipped with the transfer of ownership registration to purchase the instep land from A for the purpose of obtaining a profit sell shares at a high price to B is multiplied to this, E is not be able to claim ownership of the instep land against B .

 

Limb 4 sales contract between AB is, the case is one that is entered into if there is a mistake in the intention of the motives of B, even if B is equipped with a transfer of ownership registration, A is between AB because of the mistake of B it is possible to cancel the contract of sale.

Click here

Mistake of motivation

It can be canceled from invalid

It has changed.

Because

The new law, with respect to mistake of motive, we put the provisions of the clear No. 2 and Section 2 new Article 95 (1).

And, it is recognized as being important in light of the purpose and the conventional wisdom on the trading of its mistake laws act

The effect of the case, was renamed as “can be canceled” from invalid. (New Article 95 1 )

For example, it can not be canceled when there is gross negligence on A.

Question 5 civil and credit transfer

Limb 1 has authorized negotiable creditors of A to B, receiving the assignment of the claim with C to know the presence of the authorized

Long as, the significant per that subsequent acquirers D which has received the transfer of further receivables from C did not know the existence of the special contract

Even if there is no such fault, B can counteract the presence of a rider relative to D.

Limb 2 A is sending the notification of the receivables transferred to B, if the notification has not reached the B is, Steller sea lions B is the objection

Even if the fit without consent, B can reject the payment of obligations pertaining to the claims with respect to C.

Limb 3 (correct limb) without special agreement negotiable creditors of A to B, at the time, which is assigned to the C still has occurred

If a claim regarding no future transactions, the receivables of certain type of transaction, amount, duration and the like

When it was, as long as there are no special circumstances, receivables transferred from A to C is effective.

Limb 4 due date to A had a loan receivable arriving B is from A to receive a notification of the claim assignment, objections

Without the consent and do not have the, did not even intention of canceling. Then, B receives the payment request from C

When the, even if the intention of canceling the loan claims on A, it is impossible to combat C.

· Limb 1 is transferred to the C even if there is a treaty of non-negotiable in the new law is valid.

Even assignment in violation of the (new 466, paragraph 2) negotiable special contract receivables will be transferred to effectively assignor

If C is a malicious, gross negligence A will be able to refuse the fulfillment of its obligations with respect to C.

Because

Debtor is because can claim a defense against the assignee of the malicious-gross negligence.

For example, B can be obtained a disclaimer with a cancellation action against A, claiming to C.

Civil Code amendment Question 6 – Question 7

Question 6 of the Civil Code sales contract

Limb 3 error-is (correct limb) B, if the instep land of A ownership was entered into the matter contract knowing that it is the purpose of the mortgage, B of the execution of the mortgage loses ownership of the instep land even damaged, B can not be charged for a, damages.

The defect of the right in the old law

Uniform and clear law does not exist

was.

 

The reason is because the theory was divided.

For example, when there is a “hidden defect” in the subject matter of a sale, the seller will accept the collateral responsibility regardless of the presence or absence of negligence for its defects. For here the legal nature there was a conflict of legal liability theory and contract responsibility theory.

Buyer on the rules relating to defects in objects can now be charged to the seller in the new law. This is because the new law because a variety of law has become the uniform handling.

For example,

B → In the case of A is

・complete claims (new 562 Article)

– Price reduction claims (new 563 Article)

And release rights (new 541, 542 Article)

· Damages claims (new Article 415)

The was formed.

Issue 7 civil and vicarious liability

Instep building A is to rent from B, and D, which are employed in the shipping company C has damaged a portion of the instep building plunges track to drive drowsy (hereinafter referred to as “the present accident.”) Relating to the following description among them, according to the civil Code provisions and precedents, or correct certain there. Incidentally, D is assumed to have been operating as a business C.

A A whereas B, according to the ratio of the loss portion of the upper building, it is possible to demand a reduction of the rent.

Lee A, the only remaining portion of the upper building may not be possible to achieve the purpose of rented, it is possible to cancel the lease contract with B.

C C is based on the user responsibility, when compensating the loss arising from the present accident against B, and it is possible to obtain reimbursement against D, is limited to limit its scope court believes it to be equivalent on good faith there is a case that.

Question 7 is all correct limb.

It is possible to claim the A reduction →

It is reduced

I think we can be interpreted as.

This is because (the new law six hundred and eleventh Article)

In the case where some of the leased thing is no longer able to use and profit by loss other reasons, when it is intended is due to reasons not attributable to blame the lessee, rents, the it is reduced in proportion to the value of the part that can no longer be used and revenue.

For example, in the (old law six hundred and eleventh Article)

When a portion of the leased thing is lost due to reasons not attributable to the negligence of the lessee, the lessee can, depending on the proportion of the lost part demand a reduction of the rent.

It will be.

CHILLY New six hundred and eleventh Article 2

In the case where some of the leased thing is no longer able to use and profit by other reasons loss,

When the remaining portion only can not lessee achieve the purpose of the lease, the lessee is, cancellation of the contract

It can be a to.

Civil Code amendment Question 8

Question 8 sublease

A is leasing the instep building a monthly 300,000 yen to B, B Which of the following statements in the case that is sublease in lawfully monthly 400,000 yen to the C to the instep building with the consent of A, the provisions of the Civil Code and according to the case law, any things that are wrong.

1 A limb, the rents of non-payment of B to cancel the lease contract of Party building to reason, with respect to C, must be given the opportunity to pay the rent of the Party building to demand their rent non-payment.

If limbs 2 B pays even when the due date of the rent of the upper building against A, A may request to pay directly to C, and rent 300,000 yen A.

If the limb 3 A has canceled the lease contract of Party building because of the debt default to B, even if there is no non-payment of rent for the C of B, A for C, it is possible to obtain the surrender of Party building .

If the limb 4 A have agreed cancel the lease contract of the Party building with the B, A for C, based on the agreement cancellation of the B, can not be obtained the surrender of the Party building in the course.

1. Error-correct limb
2. The new 613, Paragraph 1 of the preceding stage A can be claimed in the limit of the limit 300,000 yen to C.
3. New 613 paragraph 3 proviso will be able to claim to vacate from A than case law doctrine that assumes to C.
4. The new 613 paragraph 3 text, as long as there is no “special circumstances” such as the special relationship between the sublease C and the lessee B, A can not oppose the agreement released to the C, so as to vacate the Party building I can not claim to.

In here Question 8

I think we can interpret such there is no change in the old law and the new law.

Because

Although case law had been used in the old law

It has been clearly stated by the new law.

For example, the limb is 4.

613 paragraph 3 new law text you and the like.

Civil Code amendment Question 9

Question 9 civil and ruling

(Ruling)

One party to the contract, prior to the conclusion of the contract, in violation of the accountability on the principle of good faith, to conclude the agreement

Or when the absence information to influence the decision as to whether did not provide the other party, the one party is

Per damage suffered by the other party has entered into the agreement, it may bear the damages caused by tort

Is given special, it should say not bear Liability by failure to obligations the agreement. (Snip)

Liability in the case as described above are those generated by illegal activities. (Omitted)

② in violation of the error, (correct limb) principle of good faith on the accountability, the buyer of the claim for damages against the seller that the information should affect the decision on whether or not to conclude the agreement did not provide to the buyer, damage even if you do not buyer know that you have suffered, if not exercised for 10 years from the sales contract shall be extinguished by the statute of limitations.

Question 9

The answer is the same.

Limb 2 10 years What error.

Because

The new law changes the old law of precedents

After the amendment also damages claims based on tort and short-term disappearance aging of 3 years from know the damage and the perpetrator

Double of the period limitation that even without knowing them is the exercise period of 20 years from the “time of the tort” is

Unchanged, it is the same starting point.

Furthermore, the new law for the “damages claims by tort harming the life or body of people.”

And five years from the time of the short-term laches period victim was aware of the damage and the perpetrator.

It was defined as. (2 of the new Article 724)

For example, old law

Damages claims based on tort, will take to disappear aging of the short-term in the victim or 3 years from the legal representative know the damage and the perpetrator.

 

Residential land and building broker in Japan

test 2017 tried to solve (2017 fiscal year) years past questions.

 

 

Civil Code amendment question 1 to question 4

Question 1 agency

Correct answer by limb 1 precedents

Limb 2 amendment after-correct answer

 Agent by the delegation, in addition to when obtaining the permission of the person, it is also possible to appoint a sub-agent when there is a compelling reason.

(Formerly Article 104)

 

Section 1 Old 105 Article assuming here (formerly Article 104), when any agent has been appointed by the subagent, the

We were shall be responsible for the principal only “about the appointment and supervision”.

The old Article 105 by this time of the revision was to be removed.

This is because in the context of the ordinary creditor and the debtor, creditors and third parties in the fulfillment of its obligations to the debtor

And when it is licensed to be used, to the fulfillment of the debt the debtor is due to unavoidable circumstances

If using a third party, even further in a case where the debtor is using a third party to the fulfillment of its obligations in accordance with the nomination of the creditor, debtor

There is whether bear the debt default responsibility, in accordance with the general principles of debt default, and the spirit of each of the contracts, loans

Who should be the spirit that has been licensed the use of a third party, creditors is determined in light of the purpose or the like appoint a third party

A is, when appointed sub-agent to any agent (delegation contract mandatory) to process the delegated

Because there is reason to be reduced is not responsible for the uniform only.

 

 

For example,

Or any agent who has appointed the sub-agent is whether bear the default responsibility for the person in question, as well as other contract types

In, it will be judged in accordance with the general principles of debt default.

As long as the person is not otherwise excuse observed in the sub-agent, to the sub-agent, based on default on the delegation contract

It will be a brute damages can be claimed.

Limb 3 Cases

Civil and proxy-precedents (the correct answer)

Upon recovery agent to process the delegation office, I received the money, the time of the delivery of it to the agent, as long as there are no special circumstances, receipt of product delivery obligations to the attorney is extinguished, received product delivery to the person obligation does not disappear.

Limb 4 cases

 

 

Question 2 ownership

The efficacy of limb 1 aging is caused by going back to the starting date.

Limb second error

Incorrect by limb 3 Cases

If the limb 4 A is has been sold Ding land to B, where A canceled the sales contract because of the obsessive-compulsive of B,

Ownership of Ding land is returned to A, so that was not transferred from the beginning to the B.

 

[Third party in the fraud can cancel when good intentions Yu negligence, malicious. ]

This is because a result of the phrase “if it has been possible to know” has been added to the new 96, paragraph 2,

The person is not only knew that a third party has a display intention by it and deception acts of the other party, even if there is negligence on that you did not know this, third party cancel the display self of intention that it is possible is now clear.

For example, the old 96, paragraph 2 is, and if you make a third party fraud for the intention to the other party, it is possible to cancel the “only if it knew” intention counterparty that fact

It was prescribed.

 

 

 

Issue 3 of the Civil Code, sharing, and ruling

3-3 Civil Code, sharing and ruling

The correct answer is the limb.

Per building D and E share, if the D without consultation between DE has entered into a use loan contract with F, F is, the entire building exclusively for the E that has not approved the use loan agreement it is possible to claim the title to occupy.

 

This is a problem by the ruling.

 

Question 4 provisions problem

Limb 1,3,4 No defined in the Civil Code

Limb 2 This is not a problem

The owner of the land that does not lead to a public road and is surrounded by other land, in order to reach the public road, that which is capable of passing the other land that surrounds the land

Civil Code amendment question 5 to Question 7

For Question 5 all others products for sale

5-4 Civil Code, buying and selling contracts, others products trade

The automobile at the time of sale contract is not a property of A, even though the property of the father of A, the sales contract between AC is established effectively.

Establish that (old 560 Article) buying and selling of others is also effective.

It has changed the content defined for the seller of the collateral responsibility.

The reason is because in the old law of law variety of understanding are mixed, it had not been a uniform handling.

 

For example, the seller of Defaults which together events (such as the deliberate negligence) can be exemplified.

Under the new law if you about the liability of the seller the buyer can not obtain ownership

Buyer by mutatis mutandis of the subsequent completion claims (new 562 Article) will be able to claim the subsequent completion to the seller.

And although the price reduction claims also possible by mutatis mutandis of the new 563 Article,

Release, which is defined as not to interfere with the exercise by the new 564 Article (new 541 Article-542 Article)

And damages the (new Article 415) the buyer will be able to exercise.

 

Question 6 inheritance

This is not a problem.

6-3 civil and inheritance, precedents

If legacy division consultations have occurred rents receivable from a legacy real estate until satisfied, B and C are deterministically obtained as split alone claims the rent receivable in accordance with the inheritance, legacy If they require division consultations the real estate B acquires, C is not already necessary to liquidate per acquired rent receivables.

 

Question 7 contractors

7-3 civil and contract-precedents

3 If there is a defect in the subject matter of the contract, the order shall, without have received compensation for damages to replace the demand for repair of the defect from the contractor, unless there are special circumstances, must be paid a reward in full.


1, 2, 3 cases
limb 4

Even when the contractor agreed to a special provision to the effect that do not bear the warranty responsibility, knowing

For a fact that did not tell, can not escape its responsibility.


Old 640 Article has been removed.

When there is a “defect” in the finished target product, the contractor will be defined below the old 634 Article


We assume the warranty against defects.


– repairing responsibility (formerly 634, Paragraph 1 of the text, except that the excessive cost to the demand for repair in case the defect is not important

Result is negative, when required)


· Damages claims (the same Article the second sentence of paragraph, stand in the relationship of the simultaneous fulfillment is this damages claims)

· Contract termination (formerly 635 Article, contract purpose not achieved condition by the defect. However, the workpiece of buildings and other land Nitsu

There can not be released is)


The above responsibility • When the defect in the subject matter of the work is due to instructions given the nature or purchaser of the materials provided by the purchaser

Responsibility does not occur.


The above has been removed.

The reason is because lost its raison d’etre by the new law.

 

For example, in the new law


Provisions relating to warranty against defects of the contractor (formerly 634 Article, remove the old 635 Article


In the “defect” but, if the work desired product is one that “does not conform to the contents of the contract” with respect to the type or quality

For, make mutatis mutandis of the seller of the collateral responsibility provisions.


– repairing responsibility (does not specify the proviso) (is excluded when there is a Defaults which together cause the purchaser)


· Damages claims (possibility of Exemption occurs)


And release rights (workpiece of buildings and other land also can be canceled)


And Compensation reduction claims (remedies of the contractor in the case where the disclaimer is found)


It has associated basis by the new law.


The above responsibility • When the defect in the subject matter of the work is due to instructions given the nature or purchaser of the materials provided by the purchaser

Responsibility does not occur.


It was limited to the modification of expression.

Civil Code amendment Question 8 to Question 10

Question 8 joint and several liability 

8-2 civil and solidarity debt

A may intention indication to offset an equal amount of receivable 200 yen was D, solidarity liability than 200 yen for D B and C vanish with debt and, relative to D for D.

 

Limb 2 offset

 

In the Civil Code amendment before or after, for offsetting

I think we do not change the answer.

 

Because

Offset is an absolute efficacy, along with payment, etc. is because not change before and after the revision.

For example, the “All” has been only formal modifications revised to “all”.

 

 

Question 9 inheritance

1 to 4

Here is no problem.

9-3 civil and inheritance

D is 60 million yen, F is 60 million yen.

 

Question 10 pledge

1 to 4

Here is no problem.

10-1 civil and pledge

① in the real estate pledges, out of the interest of the secured claims, but is assured only for the last two years, which was the maturity, the ② mortgage, unless otherwise provided by the act of establishment, the interest of the secured claim It is not collateral.

 

Civil Code amendment question 11 to question 12

Question 11 of the Civil Code, the Land and House Lease Law

Limb 2

Cases where the duration of the lease and 10 years, while the duration when it is an object of the present contract owns the building to be used for an residence is 30 years, TLDA Material duration when it is an object to be used in raw land as yard is 10 years.

 

A residential lease … 30 years

The material storage … 10 years

 

For here

In any upper limit of the amendment after the lease is

It will be 50 years.

This is because by the lease and large projects of the grounds of the golf course in modern society

By a variety of factors, such as the cord in the lease agreement because it is necessary to determine the duration of more than 20 years.

For example,

From that in the old Civil Code it is rare also to improve the desired product of the lessor

Such adverse effects such as duration is preserved of the object is deteriorated becomes to long term results

Upper limit was 20 years in the old 604 Article from the point of view.

 

Question 12 fixed-term lease, Land and House Lease Law

12-4

12-4 is 〇.

This is because, a regular in the building lease, fixed-term lease contract will be terminated to be kept in the pre-lessor a notification.

 

Fixed-term lease (= fixed-term lease rights)

In the Land and House Lease Law, building lease is, if there is no justifiable reason to lessor, on the principle of updates even if the period has expired

But, in the case of fixed-term lease, “even if there is no justifiable reason” to the lessor and exit.

 

Lease contract between AB is in a fixed-term lease of the Land and House Lease Law Article 38, that there is no renewal of the contract

 

If those stipulated, describes the fact that before the agreement A is terminated by expiration of the time without updating the contract B

If was not described in issue a document, contract indicating that there is no renewal of the contract is invalid.

 

Be careful to health .

Please do its best to pass.

We support you.

Tweetよろしくお願いします!