Source: Taiwan Straits Network
On January 20, the Taiwan Straits Herald reported (Straits Herald reporter Chen Jielin Binbin correspondent Sifa) rented a storefront to spend money on decoration, ready to open, and the result came to "hit the head", was told that the store can not operate barbecues and food stalls, restaurant operators and landlords got into court. Who should bear the initial investment of more than 100,000 yuan? Recently, the Siming Court held a hearing on such a lease contract dispute.
In July last year, the owner, Mr. Li, leased the shop to Lao Wang through an intermediary to run a restaurant. The two parties signed a contract and agreed on a lease period of up to 6 years, with a monthly rent of 12,300 yuan. After that, Lao Wang renovated the shop, purchased equipment and supplies, and prepared for opening. Unexpectedly, during the renovation period, the property company came up with the "Xiamen Environmental Protection Regulations" and informed Lao Wang to prohibit business, because the area was a prohibited area for special catering projects. Therefore, Lao Wang decided to give up the lease and asked Mr. Li to refund the rent and deposit, and compensate for the initial investment of more than 150,000 yuan. Later, the two sides failed to negotiate, and Lao Wang sued the court, demanding that the contract between the two parties be terminated to refund the rent and compensate for various economic losses of more than 150,000 yuan.
The court held that Mr. Li's shop was located in a residential building, which belonged to the scope of the xiamen municipal environmental protection regulations prohibiting the establishment of a new catering industry, and did not have the conditions to operate as a special catering business place such as barbecue and street gear. Lao Wang's contractual purpose of operating a barbecue could not be realized, and he had the right to request the termination of the lease contract. In the process of concluding the contract and negotiating and signing the written contract, Lao Wang and Mr. Li had defects in the confirmation of the lease purpose, the on-site inspection of whether the leased property was in line with the lease purpose, and the guarantee obligation of the parties involved in the contract to the lease purpose. As a lessor, Mr. Li's shop is located on the first floor of a residential building, and there should be more consideration and reasonable reminders for the problems that may arise from operating catering; Lao Wang, as a catering operator for many years, should also have a clear and cautious understanding of the relevant environmental protection requirements and business risks when renting.
Therefore, based on the actual performance of the case and the fault factors of the two parties for the termination of the contract, the court made a first-instance judgment, determining the amount of compensation of 60,000 yuan, and ordered the defendant Mr. Li to return the deposit and part of the rent of Lao Wang.
Judge's Statement
Catering site selection should be cautious to avoid investment "water drift"
The judge said that the "Xiamen Environmental Protection Regulations" delineate the prohibition points for special catering formats that produce fumes, odors and exhaust gases, and the general public and friends have the obligation to abide by them. The Parties must not take any chances in relation to the relevant prohibitions and disregard the possible operational risks. As a catering operator, when opening a store, it should have a clear and prudent understanding of the special environmental protection requirements of the catering business premises that may produce fumes, odors, abandonment, etc., as well as the relevant business risks, to prevent "investment from drifting". As an owner, when renting a house, the specific business purpose of the house should not only be clear, but also give the tenant a goodwill reminder to avoid losses.