A, the project completion acceptance can't fight against obvious quality problems. Case: Jiangsu Nantong Erjian Group Co., Ltd. and Wujiang Hengsen Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. Case Summary: (1) The construction projects delivered by the contractors shall meet the delivery conditions agreed in the contract and the relevant project acceptance standards. There are obvious quality problems in the actual project, and the people's court will not support the contractor's claim that the project quality is qualified with the project completion acceptance certificate. (2) In order to solve the contradiction between the two parties, the people's court may order the employer to entrust a third party to rectify the project quality with reference to the restoration design scheme, and the expenses required shall be borne by the contractor. Source: the Supreme People's Court Gazette No.8, No.2014 (No.214 in total) 2. Without the consent of the Employer, the Contractor shall organize the project acceptance by itself, and unilaterally handle the completion acceptance formalities with the quality supervision department. Does the acceptance report of the quality inspection department have legal effect? Informed case: Weihai Whale Garden Construction Co., Ltd. v. Weihai Welfare Enterprise Service Company and Weihai Shengfa Trading Co., Ltd. Summary: According to Article 279 of the People's Republic of China (PRC) Contract Law and Article 16 of the Regulations on Quality Management of Construction Projects, after the completion of the construction project, the employer shall timely organize the project acceptance in accordance with the relevant construction acceptance regulations, which is the employer's obligation. If the contractor organizes the project acceptance by himself without the employer's consent and unilaterally goes to the quality supervision department to handle the completion acceptance procedures, it will violate the contract. In this case, the acceptance report and project certificate issued by the quality inspection department for the project cannot have corresponding legal effect because they do not conform to the statutory acceptance procedures. Source: the Supreme People's Court Bulletin 20 13 No.8 (202 in total) 3. After the judgment came into effect, the plaintiff filed another lawsuit on the grounds that the actual disputed amount exceeded the original claim. Should the court accept it? Informed case: Heyuan Labor Construction Engineering Company and Longchuan County People's Government's construction contract dispute case Summary: In civil litigation, the principle of non bis in idem includes two aspects: first, the parties may not sue the case that has been brought to court again; Second, after the judgment comes into effect, the case has res judicata, and the parties may not sue again for the disputed legal relationship between the two parties. Therefore, after the plaintiff filed a lawsuit request and the court made an effective judgment, the judgment result became legally binding on the defendant, and then the plaintiff sued separately on the grounds that the actual disputed amount exceeded the original lawsuit request, which violated the principle of non bis in idem, and the court should rule to dismiss the lawsuit. Source: the Supreme People's Court Bulletin 20 13 No.6 (200 issues in total) IV. If the project cost cannot be determined according to the contract, the appraisal agency has given two reference standards: fixed price and market price, which standard should be based on? Announcement case: Summary of judgments of Qihe Huandun Steel Structure Co., Ltd. and Jinan Yongjun Materials Co., Ltd.: If the evaluation institutions make evaluation conclusions according to the fixed price and market price respectively, when determining the project price, the project price should generally be determined by the market price. This is because most of the project cost determined according to the quota can't reflect the construction, technology and management level of the enterprise, and the quota standard often can't keep up with the change of the market price, while the market price information released by the construction administrative department is closer to the market price and the actual cost of the construction project, which conforms to the relevant provisions of the contract law and is fairer to both parties. Source: the Supreme People's Court Bulletin No.9, 20 12 (No.912) V. Handling of infringement of project price priority through company formation and asset transfer: Summary of appeal judgment of Jilin Zhongcheng Construction Zhong Da Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.: In the name of setting up a new company, If the creditor's major assets, such as the project and related land, are changed to the name of the newly established company, and others control the majority of the equity of the newly established company, the newly established company will not bear the debt of the project price. This situation can be considered as the transfer of assets between the executed person and others and the newly established company, which infringes on the legitimate rights and interests of the creditors with priority in the project price. Other people and the newly established company, as the rights and obligations of the executed person, should be responsible for the creditors with priority. The enforcement court has the right to decide to add others and newly established companies as executors. Source: the Supreme People's Court Bulletin, No.2, No.2012 (No.20 184) VI. At the same time, apply for a court retrial, the procuratorate protests, and deal with it after the retrial reaches a settlement: Mudanjiang Hongge Construction and Installation Co., Ltd. v. Mudanjiang Hualong Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. and Zhang Jizeng. Summary of the judgment: The parties refused to accept the civil judgment of the court of first instance. While applying for a retrial, during the retrial, the parties reached a settlement and the parties have applied to the court to withdraw the lawsuit. Because the parties have the right to dispose of their civil rights and litigation rights freely within the scope prescribed by law, the intention of withdrawing the lawsuit is true and the application for retrial has been ruled to be withdrawn. The dispute between the parties in this case has been settled and does not involve the interests of the state, the public or the third party. Therefore, the basis for the procuratorial organ to protest no longer exists, and the case no longer needs to be retried according to the protest procedure, and the case will be closed for review according to law. Source: the Supreme People's Court Bulletin No.20 12 12 (totalNo. 194) VII. Handling announcement cases when there are two versions of the construction contract: Anlintong District Construction Engineering Company, Summary of the judgment of Shaanxi Hengsheng Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.: Article 21 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on Applicable Legal Issues in the Trial of Construction Contract Disputes says that "if the substantive contents of the construction contract and the bid-winning contract for the same construction project are inconsistent, the bid-winning contract for the record shall be used as the basis for settlement of the project price", that is, if the parties sign two different versions of the contract for the same construction project, the bid-winning contract for the record shall be used as the basis for settlement of the project price instead of the contract text for the record. Source: the Supreme People's Court Bulletin, No.8, 2008 (No.8 142). Announcement on the object of payment for real estate cooperative development projects: Dalian Bohai Construction Engineering Corporation, Dalian Golden Century Housing Development Co., Ltd., Dalian Baoyu Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. and Dalian Baoyu Group Co., Ltd. Summary of the ruling: "* * * to invest, * * * to enjoy cooperative real estate development. The parties to a cooperative real estate development contract are not the parties to the construction contract and should not undertake the contractual obligations of the construction contract. At the same time, whether the contractual debt arises between specific parties, the creditor can only ask the debtor for payment, but not the third party for payment obligation. Therefore, the parties to a cooperative real estate development contract should not be jointly and severally liable for the repayment of the project funds in the construction contract. Creditors can only demand payment from specific debtors, and debtors only have the obligation to pay to specific creditors. Even if the creditor's rights can't be realized due to the behavior of a third party other than the parties to the contract, the creditor can't ask the third party to remove the obstruction according to the effectiveness of the creditor's rights, and can't break through the principle of relativity of the contract and ask the third party to bear joint liability for the debt. There is no legal basis. Source: the Supreme People's Court BulletinNo. 1 1 (No.145 in total) IX. Announcement on whether the creditor's rights under the construction contract of construction projects can be transferred: Shaanxi Xiyue Villa Co., Ltd. v. China Construction Third Bureau Jianfa Engineering Co., Ltd. and China Construction Third Bureau Third Construction Engineering Co., Ltd. Summary: According to the China People's Republic of China and Article 79 of the People's Republic of China (PRC) Contract Law, the creditor can transfer all or part of the rights under this contract to a third party, except those that cannot be transferred according to the nature of the contract, the agreement of the parties and the legal provisions. Laws and regulations do not prohibit the transfer of creditor's rights under the construction contract of construction projects. As long as the parties to the construction contract have not agreed that the creditor's rights under this contract shall not be transferred, and the creditor transfers the creditor's rights to a third party and notifies the debtor, the transfer of the creditor's rights is legal and effective, and the creditor does not need to obtain the consent of the debtor to transfer the creditor's rights. Source: the Supreme People's Court Bulletin,No. 12, 2007 (total 134) X. How can one party bear the loss if it dismantles the unqualified project without authorization? Informed case: the Supreme People's Procuratorate protested Tangshan Xinhua Metal Roofing Forming and Installation Co., Ltd. v. Feng Runjidong Building Materials World Development Co., Ltd. according to the trial supervision procedure. Summary: In the construction and installation project contract, the unqualified project can generally be treated by repair, reinforcement or demolition, and one party dismantles the project without proving that the completed project of the other party does not meet the repair or reinforcement conditions, so the expenses incurred shall be borne by itself. Source: the Supreme People's Procuratorate Bulletin No.4 (No.93 in total) XI in 2006. Circular on the case of contracting out construction materials and construction machinery: Yang Yuanzhang, Xie Guanchen and Xie were fined and detained for obstructing judicial personnel from performing their duties. Summary of judgment: The legal and effective construction contract signed by the construction team and the housing development company stipulates that the project will be contracted out, that is, the materials needed for the project will be solved by the construction team itself. According to the provisions of the construction contract, the construction team should go through the formalities of material settlement and have ownership of the purchased building materials and construction machinery. Housing development companies believe that these materials and machinery are owned by themselves and have no legal basis. If the construction team, that is, the debtor and the material supplier, that is, the creditor reach a legally binding civil mediation agreement, and the debtor still fails to perform it, the creditor has the right to apply to the court to enforce the property of the construction team, including materials and machinery; If the arrears are not repaid at maturity, you can use the property that can be sealed up to offset the debt. Source: the Supreme People's Court GazetteNo. 1987No. 1 12. Can the employer refuse to pay the materials paid by the contractor on the grounds that the contractor cannot provide the purchase invoice? Informed case: the Supreme People's Procuratorate protested the infringement dispute case of Fangtong Materials Co., Ltd. v. Baotou Steel Construction and Installation Engineering Company in accordance with the trial supervision procedure. Abstract: According to Article 84 of the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and the provisions of the General Principles of Civil Law, debt is a specific relationship of rights and obligations between the parties according to the contract or the law. Creditors are creditors and debtors are debtors. The creditor has the right to require the debtor to perform its obligations in accordance with the contract or according to law. The contractor advances some funds for building materials during the construction process, which is also recognized by the employer when both parties settle accounts. There is a debt relationship between the two parties, and the contractor has the right to ask the employer to pay off some funds for building materials advanced during the construction process. The employer thinks that the contractor cannot provide purchase invoices and should not claim rights. This reason violates the principle of good faith, because the employer has recognized the fact that the contractor has paid the money in advance when concluding the settlement agreement. If the facts implemented and finally confirmed by both parties are denied, according to Articles 2 and 76 of the Supreme People's Court's Provisions on Evidence in Civil Proceedings, the parties have the responsibility to prove the facts on which their claims are based or refute the facts on which the other party's claims are based. If there is no evidence or the evidence is insufficient to prove the facts identified by the parties, the parties with the burden of proof shall bear the adverse consequences. If the parties only state their claims and cannot provide other relevant evidence, their claims will not be supported. Except those approved by the other party. It can be seen that the employer has the obligation to provide evidence, otherwise it should bear the legal consequences of not providing evidence.