帮忙 商业法案例分析 中 德 澳洲！ 谢谢~

djsn212

Burns 公司(通过它的总经理莉萨)加入商议出租的前提和Moe公司。 前提未被建立，并且Moe需要从市场得到一些迹象关于合适的占有，在他修建大厦之前。 在讨论期间，莉萨保证Moe，Burns公司明确地将出租此空地，但是最后的细节可以以后解决。 Moe公司开始根据这个依据，他不可能长期等待的这个建筑项目，因为他有其他合同要开工。 Moe公司然后允诺King Kong建筑公司开始建筑。

3个月以后，在Burns 公司有人事管理的变动。 新的常务懂事Bart告诉Moe公司不希望提前出租并对此空地做了其他的安排。Moe’s的代表很懊恼。因为他们投入相当的时间和努力做准备，并且参加了一些会议在两公司之间。他们已经允诺King Kong建筑公司完成工作。 Moe公司决定无论如何要继续这个项目，希望其他的将出租此空地。

在King Kong建筑公司和Moe公司之间签署的是草拟合同，没有充分的关注到细节问题。 它根据Moe公司以前使用了的合同加以修改。 它包含以下特点：

要求King Kong建筑公司检查施工地和按时的完成工程，不允许变动合约，包括意想不到的场地情况，例如岩石 ，不顾忌下雨天所造成的延迟，也没有提起用哪种法案来解决双方的合同纠纷。

在工程建筑期间， King Kong建筑公司遇到恶劣的天气，并且由于延迟，要求额外费用给他们。 Moe公司拒绝支付，根据合同里的要求没有规定这些。 并且他们也发现在施工地表面之下有岩石和混凝土。 这将要求额外的劳动去处理，他们未考虑这些因素在价格里面。 他们声称他们是未察觉他们不能再次要求变动对此合同。 Moe拒绝支付他们任何额外的费用，声称他不知道有岩石和混凝土的存在在那里。

谈论Moe’s法律地位反对方  (a)Burns 公司 (b)Lisa和Bart(个人的);  (c)King Kong建筑。 您应该运用学习的三国的法律在这个案例中。 换句话说，运用澳洲的法律，中国的法律和德国的法律于被提及的每个争执。

如果这发生在现实中，哪种法律将治理这种情况？ 解释您的回答。



这个案例是属于德国哪个法律？ 能不能给个连接 能找到这个发的条款 谢谢～

djsn212

原味的如下
Burns and Co (through its Managing Director Lisa) enters into negotiations to lease premises
from Moe. The premises have not yet been built, and Moe needs some indication from the
market as to the likely occupancy before he constructs the building. During discussions, Lisa
assures Moe that Burns and Co definitely will lease the space but the final details can be
worked out later. Moe commences construction on this basis – he cannot wait any longer
because he has other contracts in place for future work. Moe then engages King Kong
Constructions to commence construction.
Three months later, there is a change of management at Burns and Co. The new Managing
Director Bart tells Moe that the company does not wish to lease premises from them, and
have made other arrangements. Representatives of Moe’s are annoyed because they have put
substantial time and effort in preparing for and attending many meetings between the
companies. They have already engaged King Kong to do the work. Moe decides to continue
with the project anyway, hoping that others will lease the space.
The contract between King Kong and Moe was drawn up quickly, without adequate attention
to detail. It was based on contracts Moe had used previously. It contains the following
features:
a. requires King Kong to inspect the site and conduct due diligence on the site
b. does not allow variations to the contract based on unexpected site conditions, such as
rock
c. makes no allowance for delays caused by wet weather
d. does not state which law will be applied to resolve any disputes in the contract
During construction, King Kong encounters bad weather, and claims extra expenses owing to
the delays and inconvenience caused to them. Moe refuses to pay this, claiming the contract
does not provide for it. They also discover rock and concrete beneath the surface of the
construction site. This will require extra work to remove, something they had not factored
into their price. They claim they were unaware they couldn’t claim a variation to the
contract for this. Again, Moe refuses to pay them anything extra, claiming he did not know
the rock and concrete was there.
1. Discuss Moe’s legal position against (a) Burns and Co (b) Lisa and Bart (personally);
and (c) King Kong Constructions. You should apply the law of each of the three
jurisdictions studied in each case. In other words, apply the law of Australia, the law of
China and the law of Germany to each dispute mentioned.
2. If this happened in reality, which law would govern the situation? Explain your
response.