?sony Network Camera Snc-m1?

With the construction contract to the notary?

Basically a construction contract is complete informal. It was enough to fix such in writing from him. If, however, the purchase of land to, then there are situations where even the building contract must be certified before a notary. The Federal Court in a decision of 22.07.2010 - offered advice when that is the case - VII ZR 246/08. Then the following conditions are checked:

- Make construction contract and land purchase contract a legal entity? If so, the construction contract is in need of certification.

When is against this legal entity?

- This is the case if the will of the parties linked both contracts in such a way that they should stand and fall together. It ranges that only one party can recognize this unit will and the other party accepts it or accepts (BGH, Judgement of 12.02.2009, VII ZR 230/07)

- The Federal Supreme Court clarified that a legal unit also then there can be,

• 
  
  if the building contract, the land purchase not covered, be
• 
  
  if the parties to the construction contract were not identical with those of the property purchase agreement,
• 
  
  if both contracts were not included in a document, but would be successively closed and
• 
  
  if in a contractual right of withdrawal was agreed.

- If both contracts are not mutually dependent, a certification is required for the construction contract may only be considered if the land transaction depends on the construction contract. Reason: In the dependence of the real estate purchase contract by another contract to the protective function to be achieved by requiring certification for real estate transactions, extend to the other party (BGH, Judgement of 12.02.2009, VII ZR 230/07)

- A link will between construction contract and land purchase contract must be all parties be present. This would be considered,

• 
  
  if the parties to the construction contract and the property purchase agreement are identical
• 
  
  or the developer significant influence on the implementation of the sales contract has. This often manifests itself in that the development on a particular plot should take place.

If the contractor has no influence on the implementation of the land purchase contract, specific circumstances exist which would allow to conclude the building contract was in need of certification.

was the case decided by the Supreme Court building owners a contractual right to withdraw was granted by the building contract, because they first had to acquire another property. This land acquisition failed. The contractor did not want to accept the resignation, interpreted the statement as a denunciation of the owners and made it work compensation claims, less costs saved from the construction contract claims. In that regard, it came to the question of whether the building contract was concluded without form, and thus effective or whether a certification was required. A cure form of a possible defect was not given. In a certification of need would be the construction contract under § 125 sentence 1 BGB void. The Supreme Court remanded the case for further proceedings and decision to the Court of Appeal. (Copyright ago)