论文部分内容阅读
2000年12月，王先生在日报上看到了 xx 花园的广告，觉得比较符合自己的需求，就到售楼处了解楼盘情况。王先生在听完售楼人员介绍，看了房屋模型后，觉得比较满意，于是在2001年买下了该花园4号楼的一套商品房。但是到了快入住的时候，王先生和另外12位买了4号楼房屋的业主却一起将该花园的开发商告上了法庭，并要求赔偿每位购房者损失2万元，原因就是4号楼建成后的实际情况与广告和模型里描述的情况产生了差距。当时的广告里说楼盘房前屋后有绿地，从模型上看，4号楼屋前地面上也绿草葱葱；按模型比例测量，4号楼与屋前的物业楼间距应为13.90米。但2003年6月，新建成的物业楼(共三层)与4号楼的实际间距只有9.10米，且4号楼屋前几乎没有绿化。业主们认为建造的物业楼跟广告和模型差距较大，严重妨碍了房屋通风采光。但房地产公司反驳说，售楼广告和商品房模型均不是商品房买卖合同的组成部分，属于要约邀请，所以自己不需要对其中所述内容承担法律责任。法庭审理后认为：房屋模型属于要约，房地产公司提供的模型与房屋实际情况之间差距较大，属于违约行为，房地产公司应承担违约责任，赔偿王先生等每人3万元。
December 2000, Mr. Wang saw in the daily xx garden ads, feel more in line with their needs, went to the sales offices to understand the real estate situation. After listening to sales staff introduction, Mr. Wang, after looking at the housing model, feel more satisfied, so in 2001 bought the Garden 4 Building a set of commercial housing. However, when it was time to check in, Mr. Wang and the other 12 owners who had bought Building No.4 together brought the developer of the garden to court and demanded compensation of 20,000 yuan for each homebuyer because of No. 4 The actual situation after the completion of the building has a disparity with the situation described in the advertisement and the model. At the time of the advertisement, there was green space in front of houses and houses. From the model point of view, building 4 was also lush green on the ground in front of the house. According to the model measurement, the distance between building 4 and the front of the property should be 13.90 meters. However, in June 2003, the actual distance between the newly completed property building (a total of three floors) and Building 4 was only 9.10 meters and there was almost no greening in front of Building 4. Owners believe that the construction of the property floor and advertising and the larger the gap between the model, seriously hampered the ventilation of the house. However, real estate companies retort that both sales advertisements and real estate models are not part of the real estate contract, which is an invitation to offer. Therefore, they do not need legal liability for the content described therein. The court held that: the housing model is an offer, the real estate company to provide the model and the actual situation of the larger gap between belong to the breach of contract, the real estate company should bear the liability for breach of contract, Mr. Wang and other compensation 30,000 yuan per person.