In association with Picozzi & Morigi Law Firm.
If you had spent all of your savings to buy an apartment and then discovered that a murder had taken place in that same place you had just bought, how would you feel? This actually happened in Chengdu in 2007. Mr. Li (the plaintiff) spent more than ¥300,000 to buy a second hand apartment from Mr. Liu (defendant). After the sale, Mr. Li was told by his neighbours that a murder had been committed in the purchased apartment, when Mr. Liu’s son killed a 10 year-old girl. The story was later confirmed by the real estate management company.
Mr. Li was shocked by the news since Mr. Liu had not previously disclosed this information. Mr. Liu eventually admitted that his son had killed the girl in the apartment, but refused to terminate the house purchase agreement and pay back Mr. Li. The dispute was then submitted to The People’s Court.
There were two critical points that made up the crux of this case:
1. Is an apartment where a murder was committed livable?
2. Is a seller allowed not to disclose that a murder occurred on the premises of the property??
Mr. Liu insisted that the plaintiff’s objection to living in the apartment was merely superstition. However, Mr. Li argued that his opposition was based on a Chinese folk custom, not superstition. In regard to the second point, the defendant cited the clean condition of the apartment and held that the murder was not an attribute of the apartment that he was obligated to share with the purchaser.
Short Legal Analysis
When talking about the attributes of an apartment, we should contextualize them with background information. It is reasonable to assume that people desire a calm and comfortable living environment. The history of an apartment is an important factor to be considered before making the decision to buy.
In this case, it is a fact that the murder occurred on the apartment premises, so the event is indeed part of the apartment’s history. Although the apartment was not damaged physically by the homocide, the value of the apartment depreciates due to public perception since Chinese people commonly agree that the occurrence of a murder in a residence will influence the future tenants’ psychological well-being.
Hence, the court decreed that the seller, Mr. Liu, had an obligation to disclose the murder to Mr. Li since the result of the event is manifest as an attribute of the apartment In legal terminology this is called a defect of subject matter. In contract law, the seller is obligated to shoulder the liability for the warrant of defects. In the case that the seller fails to disclose the attribute of the apartment (defects), it is considered fraud since the seller is trying to conceal truthful information.
Based on the same viewpoint, the people’s court canceled the apartment purchase agreement. Mr. Li returned the ownership of the apartment to Mr. Liu and Mr. Liu returned the funds to Mr. Li.
This article is intended solely for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Although the information in this article was obtained from reliable official sources, no guarantee is made with regard to its accuracy and completeness. For more information please visit dandreapartners.com or WeChat: dandreapartners.
