“Limited time second kill” channel group buying car owners to deliver model 3, causing a storm. Tesla said the consumer canceled the order on suspicion of violating the “no resale” clause in the terms of the order. In this regard, a number of legal personages believe that Tesla’s practice constitutes a breach of contract, and the court will probably support consumers to protect their rights. < / P > < p > according to the information disclosed by the media at present, the vehicle is placed by the consumer on Tesla’s official website, and the purchase contract is signed between the consumer and Tesla. Pinduoduo and dealers are advised to buy a car and only provide subsidies for consumers in the payment process. Zhao Zhancheng, a lawyer from Beijing Zhilin law firm, believes that consumers place an order on Tesla’s official website, and the final payment is paid by pinduoduo or platform merchants. This can not be regarded as a Resale Behavior in violation of Tesla’s order terms. < / P > < p > “this payment method is to ensure the authenticity of the platform’s subsidizing consumers’ purchase behavior. In essence, what consumers have reached with pinduoduo and yibuyi is an” advance payment agreement “, and the payment behavior of pinduoduo and suitable car is not illegal.” Zhao said. It is worth noting that Tesla’s terms of purchase do not prohibit consumers from looking for a third party to pay for the car. < / P > < p > “as long as the consumer places an order and completes the payment, Tesla should fulfill the agreement. There is no legal basis for canceling the order and refusing to deliver the vehicle, which constitutes a breach of contract.” Zhao said. You Yunting, senior partner of Shanghai Dabang law firm, has a similar view. According to the existing information, the court will probably not support Tesla to terminate the contract. Tesla should continue to perform the contract and bear the loss of breach of contract. < / P > < p > the order terms show that Tesla’s determination of “Resale Behavior” mainly includes two aspects: constitute resale, or other non bona fide orders. “Resale means that the platform or the platform merchants buy the car first and then sell it to consumers. In this case, the consumer himself placed an order directly on Tesla’s official website. There is no evidence to prove that this is a” Resale Behavior. ” You Yunting said. However, the explanation of “other non goodwill orders” is more flexible. “Although Tesla can give a lot of non goodwill statements, such as unauthorized sales and unauthorized marketing activities, in order to maintain transaction security, China’s courts have always been very cautious about the termination of contracts that have been concluded,” you said < / P > < p > “if a party wants to terminate the contract, it must give a very strong basis.” “Tesla needs to prove that this order has caused significant damage to Tesla’s interests, which is quite difficult. I don’t think the court will support Tesla’s claim,” you said You Yunting said that Tesla’s unilateral termination of the contract lacks legal basis. If consumers Sue Tesla to continue to perform the contract and bear the loss of breach of contract, the court will probably support it.