Limits of the conflict of two rights in a suspended contract

Abstract

Due to the existence of differences in the validity and invalidity of suspended contracts, the Civil Law has not examined it case by case and has only specified the invalidity of several contracts in a few cases. According to the principle of subrogation, the seller can take any possession of his property, but this principle is limited due to the rule of harmlessness in favor of the primary right of the suspended buyer. The seller may transfer the seller to a third party despite the initial right of the buyer being suspended, and this action of the seller causes a conflict between the two rights, due to the silence of the legislator and the difference in jurisprudence, with descriptive and analytical examination, the results show that by accepting the theory Conveyance as the choice of the will of the parties to the pending transaction, the effect of the conveyance, which refers to the future, causes the shaky ownership of the second buyer to be valid until the realization of the suspension against, but since the realization of the suspension against, the conflicting transaction becomes suspended and irrelevant due to the buyer's preemptive right. The second transaction, the transaction is canceled, and the buyer opposes, in proportion to his ignorance or knowledge of the suspended transaction, in relation to the price and damages (due to the ignorance of the second buyer) to the seller as punitive damages of the seller or only the price (due to the knowledge of the second buyer and the rule of action) refer to the seller as possessing the bad for him.