论文部分内容阅读
根据法律和司法解释的规定,施工合同无效后的工程价款结算方式主要有两种:参照合同约定结算和按实结算。在无效施工合同纠纷中,发包人和承包人往往主张按照不同的方式来结算工程价款,而成为此类案件审理的主要争议焦点,并会增加法院和仲裁委员会处理此类案件的难度。本文作者作为首席仲裁员裁决的一件建设工程施工合同纠纷仲裁案件即涉及如何裁处施工合同无效后当事人所提出的不同结算请求的问题,该案仲裁裁决作出后经受了三级法院(包括最高人民法院)的司法审查,最高人民法院并对该案作出专门答复。本文介绍了该仲裁案件的基本案情、裁决情况及司法审查情况,并在此基础上总结该案仲裁裁决经受住三级法院司法审查的经验,与各位读者分享和交流,以期引起各界对施工合同无效后的工程价款结算方式的关注和研究。
According to the provisions of law and judicial interpretation, there are mainly two settlement methods of construction price after the construction contract is invalid: Settlement and settlement by reference to the contract. In the disputes of invalid construction contracts, the contractors and contractors often advocate settling the construction price in different ways, which becomes the main controversial focus of such cases and will make it more difficult for courts and arbitration committees to handle such cases. The arbitration case concerning the construction contract concluded by the author as the chief arbitrator relates to how to impose different settlement requests from the parties after the construction contract is invalidated. After the arbitral award was made, it has been subjected to three levels of court (including the Supreme People’s Court Court), the Supreme People’s Court made a specific reply to the case. This article introduces the basic merits, rulings and judicial review of the arbitration case. On the basis of this, it summarizes the case that the arbitral award has withstood the experience of the judicial review of the third-level courts and shares and exchanges with readers so as to arouse the public’s understanding of the construction contract After the invalid settlement of the project price of concern and research.