case_input dict | retrieval_labels dict | conflict_analysis dict | controlling_evidence dict |
|---|---|---|---|
{
"query_text": "如乙方希望行使首次续租权，最迟应在租赁期届满前多少日发出书面通知？主合同中的90日要求是否仍然适用？",
"contract_context": "甲方与乙方签订了商业用房租赁合同，主合同规定一般续租通知期限为90日。合同履行期间，双方另行签署了首次续租补充条款，将首次续租的通知期限调整为120日，并约定该条款与主合同不一致时优先适用。物业人员发送的提醒邮件仍沿用了主合同的90日表述。",
"jurisdiction": "中华人民共和国法域；期限判断以有效书面约定及其适用范围为依据。",
"candidate_evidence": [
{
"candidate_... | {
"ranked_candidates": [
{
"rank": 1,
"candidate_id": "N3",
"relevance_score": 0.99,
"control_effectiveness_score": 0.99,
"context_completeness_score": 0.99,
"selection_label": "金标准证据"
},
{
"rank": 2,
"candidate_id": "N1",
"relevance_score": 0.95,
... | {
"conflict_types": [
"后签版本优先",
"特定续租条款优先",
"适用范围区分",
"表面期限矛盾"
],
"conflict_summary": "N1规定一般续租通知期限为90日，N3针对首次续租将期限明确调整为120日并规定与N1不一致时以N3为准。N2规定的60日期限仅适用于租金调整申请，且明文排除续租通知。N4重复了N1的旧期限，但属于未反映补充条款的物业提醒。",
"conflicting_candidate_ids": [
"N1",
"N3",
"N4"
],
"applicable_resolution_rule... | {
"selected_candidate_id": "N3",
"controlling_quote": "就乙方首次续租事宜，乙方应在首个租赁期届满前至少120日向甲方发出书面续租通知。双方确认，本条与《商业用房租赁合同》第12.1条不一致时，以本补充条款为准；本条仅适用于首次续租，不改变后续续租的其他约定。",
"evidence_context": "引文同时说明了通知期限、适用对象、与主合同的冲突处理方式以及对后续续租的范围限制。N1的90日期限是一般规则，N4只是沿用旧文本的物业提醒；N2的60日期限明确不适用于续租通知。",
"control_reason": "N3是双方后签的正式补充条款，针对首次续... |
{
"query_text": "2025年7月1日至2026年6月30日期间，承租人应按每月54,000元还是50,000元支付租金？应优先采用哪一份合同依据？",
"contract_context": "甲方将一处办公场所出租给乙方。主合同约定租金按周年递增，但双方在主合同签署后又签订了书面补充协议，专门调整2025年下半年度至2026年上半年度的租金。物业管理方随后依据主合同旧条款发送了较高金额的缴款通知。",
"jurisdiction": "中华人民共和国法域；适用合同约定的书面文件优先规则。",
"candidate_evidence": [
{
"candidate_id": "C... | {
"ranked_candidates": [
{
"rank": 1,
"candidate_id": "C2",
"relevance_score": 0.99,
"control_effectiveness_score": 0.99,
"context_completeness_score": 0.98,
"selection_label": "金标准证据"
},
{
"rank": 2,
"candidate_id": "C4",
"relevance_score": 0.88,
... | {
"conflict_types": [
"版本差异",
"明示修订覆盖",
"特别书面约定优先",
"表面金额矛盾"
],
"conflict_summary": "C1规定一般性的年度递增机制，C2针对特定期间明确将月租金固定为50,000元并明示取代C1相关内容。C3依据旧条款计算出54,000元，但没有处理C2的后续书面修订，因此属于表面相关但不具控制效力的证据。C4提供了判断补充协议优先顺序的合同解释规则。",
"conflicting_candidate_ids": [
"C1",
"C2",
"C3"
],
"applicable_res... | {
"selected_candidate_id": "C2",
"controlling_quote": "双方确认，自2025年7月1日至2026年6月30日，涉案办公场所的月租金为人民币50,000元。本条取代《租赁合同》第5.2条关于上述期间年度递增租金的约定；除本条明确修改外，主合同继续有效。",
"evidence_context": "该引文同时包含适用期间、固定租金金额、被取代的具体条款以及未修改部分继续有效的限定。C1的年度递增规则仍可适用于其他未被C2覆盖的期间，但不能用于推翻C2明确规定的期间。",
"control_reason": "C2是双方后签并正式签署的补充协议，针对租金金额作出具体、... |
{
"query_text": "租赁物内一条未暴露的墙体供水管道发生爆裂，且现有材料不能证明乙方存在过错，维修费用应由甲方还是乙方承担？",
"contract_context": "甲方将一处带装修的商铺出租给乙方经营。主合同有一条概括性约定，要求乙方承担租赁物日常维修费用；合同附件则区分了结构性设施、隐蔽管线和承租人过错造成的损坏。双方后续签署的补充协议进一步确认了隐蔽管线的责任分配。",
"jurisdiction": "中华人民共和国法域；具体责任以有效合同文本和已证明事实为准。",
"candidate_evidence": [
{
"candidate_id": "R1",
... | {
"ranked_candidates": [
{
"rank": 1,
"candidate_id": "R3",
"relevance_score": 0.99,
"control_effectiveness_score": 0.99,
"context_completeness_score": 0.97,
"selection_label": "金标准证据"
},
{
"rank": 2,
"candidate_id": "R2",
"relevance_score": 0.94,
... | {
"conflict_types": [
"一般条款与特别条款冲突",
"后签补充协议覆盖",
"过错例外条款",
"表面责任矛盾"
],
"conflict_summary": "R1以一般性措辞要求乙方承担日常维修，R2对墙体内隐蔽管线作出特别分配，R3又以更晚签署的补充协议明确规定隐蔽设施由甲方承担，但保留乙方故意或过失造成损坏的例外。R4仅依据一般条款提出先行付款建议，既未确认设施属性，也未证明乙方过错。",
"conflicting_candidate_ids": [
"R1",
"R2",
"R3",
"R4"
],
"applic... | {
"selected_candidate_id": "R3",
"controlling_quote": "除非甲方能够证明故障系乙方故意或过失直接造成，隐蔽设施的维修、更换及由此产生的合理恢复费用由甲方承担。本条在隐蔽设施责任范围内优先于主合同第8.1条及其他一般维修约定。",
"evidence_context": "R3定义了隐蔽设施的范围，包括墙体内未暴露的供水、排水及电气管线；同时保留了乙方故意或过失直接造成故障的例外。题设说明管道位于墙体内且没有证明乙方过错，符合R3的责任分配条件。",
"control_reason": "R3是后签的正式补充协议，直接处理隐蔽设施责任，并明示其优先于主合同的一般维修... |
Evidence Retrieval Dataset for Conflicting Clauses in Lease Agreements
This dataset contains challenging retrieval examples from lease agreements and related legal documents, covering version differences, exceptions, rules of precedence, amendment overrides, and apparent contradictions. Each example is organized around the original query, contract context, candidate evidence, conflict analysis, controlling-evidence decisions, and retrieval supervision labels. It supports RAG retrieval training and evaluation, legal evidence ranking, and lease dispute analysis.
Technical Specifications
| Field | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| case_input | object | The original query, contract context, and candidate evidence for a lease clause conflict retrieval task. |
| retrieval_labels | object | Ranking, positive-example, and hard-negative labels for training or evaluating retrieval systems. |
| conflict_analysis | object | Identifies clause conflicts and applicable resolution rules based on the original contract text and candidate evidence. |
| controlling_evidence | object | Marks the evidence with greater controlling effect among conflicting candidates while preserving necessary context. |
Compliance Statement
| Authorization Type | CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 (Attribution–NonCommercial–ShareAlike) |
| Commercial Use | Requires exclusive subscription or authorization contract (monthly or per-invocation charging) |
| Privacy and Anonymization | No PII, no real company names, simulated scenarios follow industry standards |
| Compliance System | Compliant with China's Data Security Law / EU GDPR / supports enterprise data access logs |
Source & Contact
- Downloads last month
- 44