And filed a lawsuit with the court of first instance on December 17, 2018.
Therefore, the existing evidence in this case is difficult to support Chaoyang Zhongmao’s appeal opinion on the prior breach of Nantong second construction.
However, Chaoyang Zhongmao did not pay any project funds except for returning the deposit of 6 million yuan from Nantong second construction.
In case of no agreement or unclear agreement on specific matters, both parties can perform their obligations in good faith with reference to the signed construction contract.
3.
6.
Summary of the case 1 Chaoyang Zhongmao locates its development in Chaoyang City ×× street ×× street ×× The di project was contracted out to Nantong Second Construction Co., Ltd., and both parties signed a construction contract.
After Nantong second construction sued, Chaoyang Zhongmao still failed to pay the corresponding project payment or provide appropriate guarantee.
16 building and underground parking lot; 4、 Reject other claims of the plaintiff Nantong Erjian; 5、 The counterclaim request of the defendant Chaoyang Zhongmao was rejected.
After the constructor completes the construction, the employer shall pay the corresponding project funds in time.
In the second instance, although Chaoyang China trade provided the contract for the transfer of the right to use state-owned construction land and the notice of completion performance, it could not prove that the loss had actually occurred.
The suspension of construction by Nantong second construction company according to law is an act to protect its legitimate rights and interests and should not be considered as a breach of contract.
During the construction process, the constructor has constructed projects other than those agreed in the contract, and the construction scope has changed.
During the trial of the court of first instance, Nantong second construction company applied to the court of first instance for project cost appraisal, requesting judicial appraisal of the completed project cost involved in its construction case.
5.
On January 22, 2018, Shanghai Ruiye (Party A) and Nantong No.
Both parties fail to sign a written contract on the construction of some projects in time.
In case of no agreement or unclear agreement on specific matters, both parties can perform their obligations in good faith with reference to the signed construction contract.
Second, with regard to the amount of project funds owed, the first instance of this case mainly determined the amount of project funds based on the appraisal report.
Double Head Lifting Pin Anchor
Both parties shall perform their respective rights and obligations in good faith in accordance with the contract.
If the employer fails to pay the project payment, does the construction party stop construction when the construction party has reason to believe that the employer may lose the ability to pay the project payment or may refuse to pay the project payment constitute a breach of contract? Referee points 1 The construction contract signed by both parties is the true expression of intention of both parties, does not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and shall be legal and effective.
2 construction was officially started on April 1, 2018.
Nantong Erjian has reason to believe that Chaoyang Zhongmao may lose the ability to pay the project payment or may refuse to pay the project payment.
After disputes between the two parties, Nantong No.
2 construction (Party B) signed a strategic cooperation agreement.
2.
Judgment of the court of first instance: 1.
3 building, No.
Since the main construction of buildings 1 and 2 from the third floor to the top floor is completed and the masonry of floors 4-13 is completed, Chaoyang Zhongmao shall pay the corresponding project funds in time.
Since Nantong second construction did not breach the contract, Chaoyang China trade asked it to compensate for the losses, which has no factual and legal basis.
2 building, No.
The construction party’s suspension of construction according to law is an act to protect its legitimate rights and interests, and shall not be considered as a breach of contract.
After the contract was signed, Nantong No.
Therefore, the reasons for the appeal of Chaoyang China trade on the appraisal report shall not be accepted..
The appraisal procedure is legal, the appraisal basis is sufficient, and the appraisal results are appropriate and should be accepted.
2 construction within 30 days from the effective date of this judgment; 3、 The plaintiff, Nantong second construction, within the scope of the project principal owed of 76321630.51 yuan, has the priority to be compensated for the discount and auction price of the “Zhongmao residence” Project No.
1 building, No.
If both parties fail to sign a written contract on the construction of some projects in time, how to determine the rights and obligations of both parties when the specific matters are not agreed or unclear? 2.
During the construction process, the appellee Nantong Second Construction Co., Ltd.
The quality acceptance form of subdivisional works issued by the supervisor provided by Nantong second construction can explain that the project quality has been confirmed by the supervisor, and the alarm records and other relevant evidence provided by Chaoyang Zhongmao are not enough to prove his disagreement with the construction outside the contract.
The defendant Chaoyang Zhongmao shall pay the plaintiff 76321630.51 yuan for the second Nantong construction project within 30 days from the effective date of this judgment; 2、 The defendant Chaoyang Zhongmao shall pay the plaintiff interest on the project payment of Nantong No.
3.
2.
After the construction party sued, the employer still failed to pay the corresponding project payment or provide appropriate guarantee.
The first reason for the Supreme Court’s judgment is that the construction contract signed by both parties is the true expression of intention of both parties, does not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and should be legal and effective.
15 building, No.
After appraisal, the appraisal amount of the project is 77291519.21 yuan.
Both parties have not signed a written contract on the construction of buildings 1 and 2 and some underground parking lots in time.
constructed projects other than those agreed in the contract, and the construction scope changed.
There is nothing wrong with the failure to support the counterclaim request in the first instance.
2 was built in November 2018 and shut down until the end of December 2018.
Chaoyang China trade returned the performance security of RMB 6 million to Nantong second construction on June 1, 2018, but Chaoyang China trade did not pay the project funds involved in the case to Nantong second construction.
4.
The construction party has reason to believe that the employer may lose the ability to pay the project payment or may refuse to pay the project payment.
The appraisal report involved in the case was issued by a qualified appraisal institution.
Substantive questions 1 In the construction process, the constructor has constructed projects beyond the contract, and the construction scope has changed.
Both parties shall perform their respective rights and obligations in good faith in accordance with the contract.
However, he did not pay any project funds except for returning the security deposit of the construction party.
By November 2018, most of the construction had been completed.
In the first instance, the appraisal unit has replied to the questions raised by Chaoyang China trade against the appraisal conclusion one by one, and there is nothing improper.
