Many people have encountered such a problem, if multiple materials are inconsistent, which one shall prevail?
Each side claims with material that is useful to itself, and it seems that there will never be a conclusion.
When Xiaoshuai and Xiaomei divorced, they reached a mediation agreement on the house and divided the marriage house. When the house was expropriated and moved, Xiaoshuai and Xiaomei signed an expropriation compensation agreement, and Xiaoshuai actually gained an additional area of 20.69 square meters. Later, Xiaomei and Xiaoshuai signed the "Transition Fee Receipt Form", and the determination of the area was different from the original "Divorce Agreement".
Then, both parties sued the court for the first trial, and both filed for the second instance, and both thought that they had lost their points.
Xiaomei believes that because the extra area identified in the "Transition Fee Receipt Form" is less than Xiaoshuai, she believes that the "Transition Fee Receipt Form" only represents that the two parties have received the transition fee, and does not represent the determination of the area by both parties;
Xiaoshuai believes that the real estate interests of both parties have been divided at the time of divorce, and he does not need to pay the difference in Xiaomei's price.
This kind of question is very common, and many people are confused and controversial about which one of the documents there are.
If the road is simple, and if there is a contradiction, the last one shall prevail. The reason is that the latter covers the former.
I am Lawyer Young Ahren, a lawyer who only tells the truth and only answers questions from real cases that can be found on the court's official website. Taking the case as a mirror, you can know the victory or defeat, and using others as a mirror, you can know the gains and losses. (2019) Hu 02 Min Zhong No. 10245 Judgment The court held that
According to the ascertained facts, in September 2013, due to the passive demolition of House No. 188, Xiaomei and Xiaoshuai signed the "Shanghai Compensation Agreement for Residential Housing on Expropriation of Collective Land" with the demolition unit, and then in the demolition compensation, Xiaomei and Xiaoshuai received compensation and transition fees according to the respective valid recognized areas of the two parties determined in the "Transition Fee Receipt Form", and Xiaomei and Xiaoshuai both signed and confirmed, and the court of first instance determined that the two parties should also divide the resettlement houses in accordance with their respective effective recognized area proportions, which is based on law and this court agrees.
In view of the fact that Xiaomei and Xiaoshuai have made their own choices for the resettlement house, and there is no dispute that Xiaoshuai has an extra area after accounting, it is not improper for the court of first instance to determine the amount of the difference that Xiaoshuai should pay Xiaomei based on the assessed market value minus the cost price of the purchased house.
Xiaomei and Xiaoshuai's respective appeals requesting that the difference in the price of the house be calculated according to the proportion of the area claimed by them lacked corresponding basis and were rejected by this court.
