If a quality accident occurs due to the construction workers, they shall still bear civil liability according to law
.
However, the quality warranty responsibility refers to the responsibility of the construction unit to repair the original appearance and quality standards during the unconditional delivery of the construction project within the quality warranty period
.
2、 Whether the project has exceeded the quality warranty period can become a defense for the construction unit to exempt the quality responsibility
.
Brief introduction 1
.
However, in practice, after the construction project passes the completion acceptance and is delivered for use, sometimes there will be a variety of project quality problems
.
The court held that the focus of the dispute between the two parties was whether there was a causal relationship between the loss caused by the accident involved in the case and the original construction act, and whether the amount of loss determined in the first instance judgment was correct
.
Fourth, it is not improper for Huajin company to entrust other construction enterprises to repair and reinforce the project involved in the case
.
Dalian Municipal Corporation shall complete the contracted works by itself according to the requirements of engineering design and construction specifications; However, it subcontracts the project to others without the consent of Huajin company
.
3、 On May 20, 2013, Huajin company found that the underground crude oil pipeline of Yingkou Daqing Henan Branch surfaced in some oil pipes in the river
.
The warranty period is determined according to the principle of ensuring the normal use of the building within the reasonable service life and safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of users
.
Article 80 of the construction law of the people’s Republic of China stipulates: “within the reasonable service life of the building, if the building is damaged due to unqualified construction quality, it shall have the right to claim compensation from the person responsible.” Therefore, the acceptance of the project does not mean that the project is truly qualified
.
6、 The court of first instance held that Dalian municipal company and Dalian Shengou company should bear joint and several liability for compensation
.
The expiration of the warranty period shall not affect the construction unit’s requirement that the construction unit bear the responsibility for quality defects.
.
The plaintiff and the defendant filed a retrial application, and the Supreme Court finally ruled to reject the retrial application of both parties
There is no provision in any laws and regulations that once the project passes the acceptance, the constructor can be exempted from liability for any subsequent quality problems
.
The implementation of the warranty system for the quality of construction projects in China is determined in the form prescribed by law
.
The quality assurance responsibility of construction project always exists with the reasonable service life of buildings《 Article 80 of the construction law stipulates: “within the reasonable service life of a building, if damage is caused by unqualified construction project quality, it shall have the right to claim compensation from the person responsible.” Therefore, after the construction project passes the acceptance, if quality problems occur due to the construction party, it shall still bear civil liability according to law
.
In practice, the construction unit often claims to be exempted from the responsibility for quality defects according to the provisions on warranty period in articles 40 and 41 of the regulations on the quality management of construction projects
.
The municipal company argued that it should not bear responsibility on the ground that the project involved in the case had officially passed the completion acceptance, and the reason could not be established
.
Not supported
.
First of all, the project construction contract signed between Huajin company and Dalian municipal company in this case should be deemed valid because the subject is legal, the meaning is true, and the content does not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and regulations
.
In the legal responsibility of construction project quality, the completion of procedural obligations (project quality acceptance procedures) does not mean that the substantive obligations (project substantive quality) are fulfilled in place
. 
There is no provision in any laws and regulations that once the project passes the acceptance, the constructor can be exempted from liability for any subsequent quality problems
.
Third, in terms of accident liability, according to the judicial appraisal opinion issued by the judicial appraisal center for construction project quality of Beijing Construction Engineering Research Institute, the buried depth deviation near the floating section is huge, the designed buried depth of the pipe top is 15.502m, the measured buried depth of the pipe top is only 1.56m, and the error is as high as 13.942m
.
After the project is completed, it shall be accepted and delivered for use
.
The procedural performance rights of the quality responsible person shall ensure that the substantive obligations are fulfilled in place
.
Dalian Shengou company, as the actual construction party accepting subcontracting, did not construct according to the design requirements, and the buried depth of the Daqing Henan North Branch Oil Pipeline seriously deviated from the design and specification requirements, which was the direct cause of the losses involved in the case
.
Subsequently, both the plaintiff and the defendant appealed, and the court of second instance rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment
.
4、 After the accident, Huajin company convened a meeting between the supervision company and the construction party, which formed a meeting minutes
.
If a quality accident occurs due to the construction workers, they shall still bear civil liability according to law
.
The fact of quality defect damage caused by construction cannot be denied
.
The construction unit’s responsibility for project quality after passing the project acceptance refers to the evaluation of the project results by the person in charge of each responsible unit under the standardized procedures after the completion of the standardized survey and design, construction, material supply and quality control of the project
.
Then, with regard to the quality problems found after the completion acceptance of the project, does the construction unit have the right to require the constructor to bear the responsibility for the project quality? Can the constructor be exempted from liability because the project has passed the completion acceptance? Combined with a case ruled by the Supreme Court, the author makes a brief analysis for readers’ reference
.
Municipal companies and Shengou company not only did not correctly face the reality that there were serious problems in their own construction quality, but claimed that “there are many causes and one result” to shirk their responsibility on the grounds of heavy precipitation that year, which obviously deviated from the basic integrity
.
The acceptance and putting into use of the construction project is only a prerequisite for the construction unit to require the construction unit to accept the project and pay the price, that is, to deliver it for use
. 
However, the warranty period is not equal to the service life
.
According to Article 67 of the construction law, if the contractor subcontracts the contracted project, it shall be jointly and severally liable for the losses caused by the non-compliance of the subcontracted project or the illegally subcontracted project with the subcontractor
.
No laws and regulations stipulate that once the construction project passes the acceptance, the responsible party can be exempted from liability for subsequent quality problems
.
The municipal company argued that it should not bear responsibility on the ground that the project involved in the case has officially passed the completion acceptance
.
Practice summary 1
.
According to the judicial expertise opinion issued by the Judicial Expertise Center of Dalian University of technology, according to the standards agreed in the contract and the reasonable repair scheme, it is determined that the total reasonable cost of the emergency repair and reinforcement project of Daqing River crossing of the oil pipeline involved in the case is 15134187 yuan
.
2、 Dalian municipal company subcontracted the project to Dalian Shengou company
.
Reading tips according to the construction law and other relevant laws and regulations, the construction unit shall organize completion acceptance after receiving the construction project completion report submitted by the contractor, and the construction project can be delivered for use only after passing the acceptance
.
The reason is untenable
. 
5、 Huajin company suffered great losses due to rush repair and reconstruction, and Huajin company sued the above two companies to the court because the negotiation on compensation failed
.
Meanwhile, in order to prevent the floating underground oil pipeline from breaking and leaking oil, causing pollution to rivers and oceans, Huajin company organized construction personnel to erect temporary oil pipelines; And re commissioned the construction unit to construct separately according to the new construction drawing, crossing a new underground oil pipeline
.
Huajin company and Dalian Municipal Corporation signed a construction contract, and on November 25 of the same year, the two sides signed a supplementary agreement, which agreed to contract out the additional two working pipes of Yingkou Daqing Henan and North Branch directional drilling crossing project to Dalian Municipal Corporation for construction
.
However, Huajin company should choose a reasonable scheme for repair and reinforcement
.
Secondly, according to Article 80 of the Construction Law: “within the reasonable service life of the building, if the building is damaged due to unqualified construction quality, it has the right to claim compensation from the responsible person.” Therefore, the acceptance of the project does not mean that the project is truly qualified
.
