"As we all know, according to the General Principles of Civil Law, the arising of civil law disputes can be mainly summarized into four categories: debts for infringement, debts for breach of contract liability, debts for improper profits, and debts for unreasonable management..."

Feng Jianxiong was erratic and talked in public.

Although these words are understood by every law student, it is refreshing to say them in court. Because few people use this general theory that is more academic and rational to conduct court debates.

So, although everyone knows that Feng Jianxiong is right, he doesn't know which direction he will land in later.

If it is just empty to air and cannot be practiced by judicial practice, then will it be a dragon gate formation?

"Brother Lu, what is infringement... Anyway, it's those four kinds of debts? Why can't I understand?" A new female reporter from the audience who had just asked Xiaobai's questions had to whisper to her senior colleagues around her.

"Stupid! You are still using the legal version at your level?" The guy who was called Brother Lu was very disdainful, but he also lowered his voice and answered patiently.

"For example, if I hit you by driving, my dog ​​bites you for no reason, and I want to compensate you. This is called a debt for infringement.

I have a contract with you for buying a house/car. If I breach the contract, I will pay the penalty for liquidated damages. This is called a debt of breach of contract liability.

I picked up your wallet and got the money and put it in a vague way, so I should pay it back to you. This is called an unjust enrichment debt.

You and I are neighbors. In winter, I saw your dilapidated house collapsed by snow and you were not at home. I prepared tools at my own expense and spent time to shovel the snow on the roof of your house. When you come back, I asked you for tools and labor fees. This is called a debt of no cause management.

What I said may not be accurate, it is for the sake of easy understanding, and it is roughly like this. The arising of responsibilities for debts recognized by civil law can basically be classified into these four categories."

The new female reporter thought about it and asked: "What exactly did Feng Jianxiong want to do in his defense just now? After all, he still admitted that Ma Hesha was wrong. It just changed from this kind of mistake to that kind of mistake. Should he pay compensation? What's the use?"

Thinking of this, many onlookers who didn't quite understand the knowledge all suddenly saw the expectations of Feng Jianxiong.

After all, I am admitting my mistake! It’s just from this mistake to that mistake! What’s so good about this!

However, experts look at the tricks.

Some keen people have already smelled a slight danger.

The brother Lu who was asked just now made up for it and immediately pointed out the mistakes of the newbies around him: "You know nothing! If Feng Jianxiong can characterize the damage as a "debt of breach of contract liability", then the final treatment method will definitely not be possible with the form of "apologies"! You search the general rules, details, and the "Contract Law", and have you ever seen breach of contract and apologize?

Apology is only applicable to the debt of infringement! I have to apologize to you if I hurt you. I have cheated you in business with you, and I can just be found to lose money, but I have no moral obligation to apologize! Don’t think that ‘apology’ is very casual. In civil legal relations, this thing is bound to infringement. If you get money out of the way, it is not a pity.

Only infringement can be requested to apologize, or to ‘stop the infringement’ or ‘restore the original state’. If there is a breach of contract, for example, in the rental contract, the tenant is not allowed to decorate himself or destroy the original design, but the tenant is destroying it. The landlord can write in the claim that the original state is restored, but the tenant insists on not replying, and you have no choice. At most, he is sentenced to terminate the contract, move out, and pay for the money, and then the landlord takes the money to renovate the house to restore the original state.”

The new-looking female reporter thought about it and suddenly realized: "What do you mean is that Feng Jianxiong is planning to 'accept breach of contract, but refuses to repent and insists on continuing to infringement'?"

"It cannot be called 'persistence to continue to infringement', at most it can only be called 'persistence to continue to breach the contract'." Brother Lu corrected.

...

The whispers of the melon-eating crowd below became louder and louder, which forced Judge Wang H to maintain order many times.

However, Feng Jianxiong's detailed analysis on the scene gradually became clearer, and his intentions were outlined.

"So, in this case, the liability debt of our parties to Apple can undoubtedly be summarized as 100% liability debt of breach of contract. That is, when our parties purchased the mobile phone and used it, they clicked 'Agree User Agreement', and then violated it again, which also caused some consequences. We are blunt.

But since it is a debt of breach of contract liability, we have the right to choose to continue breach of contract in accordance with the law and bear the consequences of the breach of contract. The contract is never used to make people comply with it. As long as a person is willing to bear the breach of contract, then insisting on breach of contract is also a sacred right granted to her by the law. Otherwise, how can the concept of "absolute right of property rights and relative right of debt rights" come from?

That iPhone-3gs mobile phone was purchased by Miss Ma Hesha for money. She has the absolute property rights of the mobile phone, so she has the complete right to possess, use, earnings, and disposal. Any method and behavioral pattern she uses this mobile phone should be decided by her. As for violating certain contractual relationships in the process, it would be fine to be held accountable for breach of contract responsibility!"

At this point of debate on the topic, Du Qiuming suddenly realized that he had risen to the level of "absolute right of property rights and relative right of creditor rights".

Relatively speaking, here, property rights are a kind of dominance. If the mobile phone is bought by Ma Hesha, she can dominate it. No matter how she uses it, it can be done.

A creditor's right is a claim. When her behavior constitutes a creditor's right, the creditor can only ask her to fulfill the debt responsibility. But how to perform and what model to perform, the right to choose is still in the hands of the property owner, the absolute owner, the dominant owner, and Ma Hesha.

He talked about those things he had said thousands of times when he was studying for a law degree, but he had never used words from this angle after 20 or 30 years of lawsuits. At this moment, he became so clear.

You should know that Du Qiuming had a lawsuit in his life and encountered the most common situations of property rights/debt rights analysis, which were nothing more than the classic model of "one house and two sale" - a signed a house purchase contract with B first, and then C signed a house purchase contract. Even B paid first, but B transferred the house to C, so B had no choice but to admit defeat. B could not force the transfer of C's house, and could only accept the compensation method of asking for liquidated damages.

In the years when housing prices soared, the absolute right to property rights and relative right to creditor rights were vividly interpreted by these "one house and two sale" and were transactions of these irreplaceable specific items.

However, in the field of movable property rights, especially in the field of movable property that can be mass-traded, generalized, and standardized, such laws have been almost never cited.

After all, the house is unique. The house has a unique apartment, area and location. After being breached, it is impossible to get a house that is absolutely identical to pay off the debt.

However, Apple phones and electronic products are highly standardized and mass-traded. If the property rights of a mobile phone are infringed, it would be fine if it is replaced with the same or even new ones?

It is precisely because movable property, especially movable property in electronic products, has strong substitutability for property rights. This research and judicial practice are very blank. No one has ever thought about the gap between competing for goods/debts.

However, today Feng Jianxiong argued, and he used such a rare and tricky but very legitimate angle.

In other words, even Apple uses such hypothetical and extreme behavioral patterns to solve problems, legally speaking, it is more appropriate than today's lawsuit: For example, Apple hopes that Ma Hesha will stop infringement, but in fact they can send someone to smash Ma Hesha's mobile phone, and then respectfully ask the person to compensate Ma Hesha for the material losses of the mobile phone.

Then, when Ma Hesha takes the money and goes to various Apple channels to buy iPhones, he will find a way to block it invisibly and prevent Ma Hesha from buying it (of course, Ma Hesha can still buy second-hand ones, and find someone else to come forward to purchase it, which is probably not blocked). If Apple does that, it is legally reasonable.

Unfortunately, it cannot be achieved.

...

"With a broken mobile phone, fighting for the 'absolute right of property rights, relative right of debt rights' tone? Feng Jianxiong can really cause trouble. Should we accept such a reason? There is no precedent in this regard in judicial practice."

Judge Wang H fell into deep thought.

He organized some debates on the application of the law between the two sides. Du Qiuming and Feng Jianxiong were naturally tit-for-tat and eloquent. When it comes to the reporters in the field behind, they simply couldn't understand, even if they were from the legal version.

Judge Wang H felt a split headache and asked again during the trial to confirm whether both parties were willing to accept mediation. At the same time, the court was adjourned for 15 minutes for both parties to communicate with their parties for instructions.

This approach is fine. After all, mediation is allowed in civil cases. If some difficult and unprecedented facts are possible, it would be better if both parties can reach an agreement and settle them on their own. (Except for personal relationship issues, mediation is not allowed or self-recognition. For example, if you ask for confirmation of who is, who is, who is, who is, who is, who is, or whether a man and a woman have a husband-and-wife relationship, such cases cannot be mediated or recognized. You must talk about evidence and facts.)

Du Qiuming immediately made some phone calls with Mr. Lamond. The other party seemed to realize that the problem was becoming more complicated and he let go of the problem of losing money that was originally unnecessary.

"Dear Presiding Judge, we are willing to accept mediation - as long as the defendant also accepts mediation, we can even give up the financial compensation request, as long as they apologize and stop the infringement."

Feng Jianxiong replied without thinking: "This is impossible! We must insist on breach of contract! Even if you pay the money, as long as you calculate how much you should be given, you can come over. However, it is impossible not to continue breach of contract! We have the sacred right to breach the contract according to law!"

"Defendant agent! Please pay attention to your attitude!" Judge Wang H was also a little angry.

What kind of person is Feng Jianxiong? Why is he so arrogant and so righteous to say that "the words are not worthy of your word, no integrity"?

Oh, by the way, the general principles of Civil Law have a general outline on "all civil behaviors should be based on the principle of integrity". Feng Jianxiong is so arrogant, can he be considered to have violated the principle of integrity or made a malicious contract... No, I have to organize the wording...

Let’s look at the leader’s opinions. Who can’t offend this case?

In domestic judgments, especially major cases, the oral outcome in court is not a decisive factor after all, and it depends on the influence of the case.
Chapter completed!