4.
The fees are required to be paid by the government and relevant authorities, including the five insurances and one fund paid for the employees and the sewage discharge fee of the construction site project as required.
1549 on the construction contract dispute between Shaanxi Jingwei Construction Group Co., Ltd.
(in this case, Huaxia Junan company and Dongyuan company are subcontracting.) The Supreme People’s court held that the project construction contract involved in the case was invalid, and the original judgment did not support the project management fee and safety reward and punishment.
3929.
Huaxia Junan company requests Dongyuan company to pay management fee according to the contract, which has no legal basis.
The affiliated person, subcontractor and illegal subcontractor cannot claim the management fee.
(in this case, China Railway Tunnel Group No.
Since the enterprise management fee has nothing to do with the qualification of the actual constructor, and pan moujin has carried out specific project management in the construction process, the management fee shall not be deducted from the project price due to pan moujin.
1142 of Supreme People’s Court of the people’s Republic of China held that after investigation, the contract involved in the case clearly agreed that the policy adjustment and the price adjustment by the cost management department belong to the scope of project price adjustment.
(2020) Supreme People’s court No.
(2020) supreme law min Shen No.
7.
Other cases: the Supreme People’s Court of the second instance civil judgment (2021) Supreme faminzhong No.
The actual constructor is entitled to profit.
Civil judgment of second instance (2019) supreme law Minzhong No.
The construction contract of Qinghai Xintian Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.
In the first instance, the management fees charged by Jingwei Company have been deducted in accordance with the provisions of the project construction power of attorney.
2.
5.
Therefore, the appeal reason of Jingwei Company for deducting construction profits cannot be established.
6123 held that with regard to Huaxia Junan company’s request for Dongyuan company to pay management fees and other issues, due to the project contracting cooperation agreement It is an invalid contract.
The interest of the project payment is the legal fruits.
Instead of illegal subcontracting, Jingwei Company has obtained the profits that the actual constructor should have obtained, which not only violates the provisions of the project construction power of attorney, violates integrity, but also is unfair.
Because the project involved in the case is constructed by the workers organized by Pan Chuanjin, the five insurances and one fund involved shall be borne by Pan moujin, so the fees shall not be deducted from the project price due to pan Chuanjin.
If the contract stipulates the labor cost adjustment, it can be implemented with reference to the agreement.
Therefore, according to the principle of equal rights and obligations, the court of first instance included the corresponding social security fee in the scope of unpaid project funds based on the agreement that Li mousheng and others should bear relevant responsibilities by themselves.
The agreement on 4% management fee and sharing public expenses in the contract does not have binding force on both parties.
If the affiliated person, subcontractor and illegal subcontractor fail to provide management, they cannot claim management fee.
and new century Construction Group Co., Ltd.
Dayou environment Co., Ltd.
If the actual constructor claims that the employer shall bear the responsibility within the scope of unpaid project price and interest, the court shall support it.
Xinyang Xiangru Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.
and Wanli Construction Co., Ltd Civil judgment of second instance (2020) Supreme People’s court No.
The construction contract of the construction project is invalid.
and Zhao moujie construction project contract dispute retrial review and trial supervision civil ruling (2020) supreme law min Shen No.
According to item 5 of Article 1, Zhao moujie shall pay 2.5% of the project payment to Dayou company based on the total project cost, which is also invalid due to the borrowing of qualification.
Ma mouying has no construction qualification and fee collection qualification, and it is not improper not to pay fees and enterprise management fees to Ma mouying.
Civil judgment of second instance on construction contract dispute between Qinghai Shengyuan real estate development Co., Ltd.
The original judgment determined that Yintai company should pay the interest of the project payment owed in the case according to Article 26 of the judicial interpretation of construction projects (I), which does not lack legal basis.
and Shanghai Ruihong Construction Management Co., Ltd.
If the profits are deducted again, the profits will be obtained by Jingwei Company.
and Juquan energy saving construction development Co., Ltd.
and wumou construction project The Supreme People’s court held that Jingwei Company held that the contract was invalid and Wu should not obtain project profits.
3.
Therefore, there is nothing wrong with the handling of the payment in the second instance judgment of this case.
2 stated that the indirect cost of 868820 yuan included enterprise management fees, fees and profits.
If the actual constructor employs workers, it shall bear the corresponding insurance premium.
Sichuan Huaxia Junan Construction Co., Ltd.
898 of the Supreme People’s court held that the tax on management fees, project fees, material invoices..
and Li Bin civil ruling on Retrial review and trial supervision of construction contract disputes of construction projects (2020) Supreme People’s Court of supreme law min Shen No.
If the contract is invalid and it is agreed that the adjustment of labor cost will not be calculated, it shall be implemented with reference to the agreement.
2721, the Supreme People’s court held that the agreement It is invalid due to the borrowing of qualification between Dayou company and Zhao moujie.
The Supreme People’s court held that Ma mouying and Runsen did not sign a written contract to specify the scope of payment of the project price, nor submitted evidence to prove that the fees and enterprise management fees were actually incurred, According to the notice of the Ministry of housing and urban rural development and the Ministry of Finance on printing and distributing the cost composition of construction and installation projects, the original judgment determined that the payer of fees and enterprise management fees is an enterprise rather than a natural person.
held that the appraisal opinion of Huakun consulting Jiajian (2019) No.
civil ruling on Retrial review and trial supervision of construction contract disputes (2021) supreme law min Shen No.
In this case, Jingwei Company subcontracted the project involved to an unqualified individual Wu, and Jingwei Company was at fault for the invalidity of the project construction power of attorney.
1606 Supreme People’s court held that although Li and others as individuals are not qualified to open social security accounts and pay social security fees, However, their due right to enjoy relevant social security shall not be substantially deprived due to the foregoing agreement.
412 on the construction contract dispute between pan moujin and China Railway 12th Bureau Group No.
The Supreme People’s court held that Baoling construction (Group) Co., Ltd.
The Supreme People’s court held that whether the joint and several liability of Yintai company in Zhuzhou includes the interest of the project funds is the civil ruling on Retrial review and trial supervision of disputes over the construction contract of the construction project of jinmou Xiang and Yintai Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.
The Supreme People’s court held that as for the insurance premium of 100000 yuan, Cai mouyong, as a labor contractor, established an employment relationship with migrant workers, and CAI mouyong was obliged to bear the insurance premium.
Although the contract involved in the case is invalid, the agreement is the true intention of both parties, and the court of first instance adjusted the labor cost of the project involved in the case according to the cost adjustment provisions of Qinghai Province with reference to the application, without delay Improper.
2 Co., Ltd.
and MCC Construction Group Co., Ltd.
6.
are illegal subcontractors.) 8.
2 Engineering Co., Ltd.
27 rules for project price settlement when the construction contract of construction project is invalid 1.
The actual constructor is not qualified to receive fees, and shall not receive fees and enterprise management fees.
cancelled the contract price adjustment in Article 27 of the record contract in the supplementary agreement (including labor cost adjustment) According to the provisions of the agreement, the original judgment finds that both parties have reached an agreement on not adjusting the labor cost, and it is not improper not to calculate the labor cost adjustment.
