and Daqing Longfeng District Urban Construction Investment Development Co., Ltd.] case No.: (2021) Supreme People’s court min Zhong No.
In the affiliated relationship, whether the affiliated person can claim the rights from the employer based on the contract between the affiliated person and the employer mainly depends on whether the employer knows about the affiliated relationship at the time of signing the contract: the affiliated person can directly claim the rights from the employer based on the factual relationship; Otherwise, it is not allowed.
The court of second instance exempted tianhengji company from civil liability, which has a legal basis.
It was also found that there was nothing wrong with the result of the judgment to pay the project funds and interests.
In the relevant case (2021) supreme law minshen No.
2.
In this case, the affiliated company only appealed the facts identified in the judgment of the first instance, lacking the interests of litigation, and should not be included in the scope of the second instance review.
If the employer is informed, the attachment can directly claim the project funds from the employer based on the factual relationship.
After study, the reply is as follows: both the civil code of the people’s Republic of China and the construction law of the people’s Republic of China stipulate that the Contractor shall not subcontract all the construction projects he has contracted to a third party or subcontract all the construction projects he has contracted to a third party in the name of subcontracting.
(2021) Supreme People’s Court of Henan Province No.
The project internal contract signed by tianhengji company and Jiang Xiaohong and the construction project internal contract signed by Jiang Xiaohong and Xu Jinbin are invalid contracts due to the violation of the above legal provisions, and the original review is correct.
According to the above legal provisions, Xu Jinbin sued Huilong Tianhua company, tianhengji company and Jiang Xiaohong as co defendants.
Case index [civil judgment of second instance of construction contract dispute between Daqing Long’an construction and installation Co., Ltd., Daqing Construction and Installation Group Co., Ltd.
The copyright belongs to the original, and is infringed and deleted.
This article is only for exchange and learning.
Tianhengji company transferred the project to Jiang Xiaohong for internal contracting, and Jiang Xiaohong transferred part of the project to Xu Jinbin for construction.
Article 24 of the Judicial Interpretation II of the Construction Engineering Group stipulates that “if the actual constructor claims rights with the employer as the defendant, the people’s court shall add the subcontractor or the illegal subcontractor as the third party of the case.
Subcontractors are prohibited from subcontracting the contracted projects.
Therefore, there is no legal basis for a person who actually performs construction based on multiple subcontracts or subcontracts to claim the discount compensation due to construction from a person who has no contractual relationship with him.
Source: civil law reference.
In the lawsuit of this case, the affiliated company did not request the affiliated company to bear the responsibility, and the judgment of the first instance did not order the affiliated company to bear the responsibility.
The first civil division of the Supreme People’s court’s guiding case on whether the actual construction personnel can claim the project funds from the subcontractors and illegal subcontractors who have no contractual relationship with them.
985 case was initiated by: Arbitration Court of construction contract dispute of construction project: judgment date of the Supreme People’s Court: December 20, 2021.
Qingtian online team guiding case Supreme Court: whether the attachment of the borrowing qualification without contract relationship forms a factual legal relationship is judged by whether the employer is informed, and if the employer is informed, The affiliated person can directly claim the project payment from the employer based on the factual relationship key words: the employer’s affiliated person’s affiliated relationship the interest judgment gist of the construction contract lawsuit of the construction project 1.
Judgment reason: in the second instance of the Supreme People’s court, the Supreme People’s court held that there was no contractual relationship between Long’an construction company and Longfeng urban investment company regarding whether Long’an construction company could claim the project funds from Longfeng urban investment company, and it directly requested Longfeng urban investment company to pay the project funds, First of all, it is necessary to clarify whether it is a subcontracting, subcontracting or affiliated relationship with Jian’an group..
820].
As the contractor, tianhengji company has no contractual relationship with Xu Jinbin.
It is prohibited for the contractor to subcontract the project to units without corresponding qualifications.
The court of second instance determined that Jiang Xiaohong was an illegal subcontractor and Huilong Tianhua company was the employer.
103: we have received your request report on whether the actual constructor can claim project funds from subcontractors and illegal subcontractors who have no contractual relationship with him [(2019) Yumin Zai No.
Supreme Court: whether the attachment of the borrowing qualification without contract relationship forms a factual legal relationship is judged by whether the employer is informed.
1358 of the first civil trial division of the Supreme People’s Court on May 10, 2001, the court held that according to Article 4 of the judicial interpretation of construction engineering, the Contractor’s illegal subcontracting or illegal subcontracting of construction projects or the unqualified actual construction contractor’s signing of construction contracts with others in the name of a qualified construction enterprise is invalid.
After finding out the amount of the construction project price owed by the employer to the subcontractor or the illegal subcontractor, the people’s court shall decide that the employer shall be liable to the actual constructor within the scope of the construction project price owed.” In this case, Huilong Tianhua company contracted the project involved to tianhengji company.
Therefore, Xu Jinbin cannot claim the project funds and interests involved in the case according to the contract.
