目前,在工程建设领域所发生的纠纷,许多情况下都需要通过司法鉴定才能判明是非曲直,确定具体额度。建设工程领域司法鉴定的专业性非常强,这就导致有资质的鉴定机构中有资格的鉴定人所做出的鉴定结论,往往变成了准判决。原告是主动提起诉讼的一方,其对于如何提起鉴定掌握主动权,并期望通过鉴定斩获利益。那么,被告如何有效避免被原告一“鉴”封喉呢?本文作者结合自身承办的案件,阐明在鉴定与反鉴定的争夺战中,律师应当找到法律与专业的结合点,充分阐述意见,以最大限度地维护当事人的合法权益。 At present, disputes that have taken place in the field of engineering construction need to be identified through judicial examination in many cases to determine the merits and demarcation of a specific quota. Forensic expertise in the field of construction engineering is very strong, which leads to the conclusion of the appraisals made by qualified appraisers in qualified appraisers, often becoming a quasi-verdict. The plaintiff is the party that took the initiative to file a lawsuit, which holds the initiative of how to bring the accreditation and hopes to pass the accreditation. So, how can the defendants effectively prevent the plaintiff from being a “reference”? The author combined his own case to show that in the battle between appraisal and anti-appraisal, the lawyer should find the combination point of law and profession, To maximize the legitimate rights and interests of the parties.