The Shock Of Personal Injury Compensation Dispute Case Analysis

The case of construction contract dissension is a kind of normal case among judicatory practise. In this case, the law relationship is complex, in which much more interest main bodies are involved. For lawyers, it is very difficult to deal with such kind of cases. Usually, dissension mainly focuses on construction price of contract and construction quality. In this paper, Pingliang Chaoyang kindergarten’s bringing an accusation against Pingliang Jinfo Construction Company is selected as an model case, and construction price of contract and construction quality are mainly analysed.On contract and construction price, it is common that construction unit and builder will submit a contract to court which benefits themselves separate. In some cases, one of them is unreal,but mostly, they are "black/white contract". For items through bidding, the payment basis is "white contract" which through bidding and reporting, according to Chinese law. However, for construction items which didn’t through bidding but reported, such like the case mentioned in the paper, there is no clear prescript to identify the efficacy of "black/white contract". Therefore, it is very difficult to hear such kind of cases. On construction quality, because of lack of knowledge on construction, some construction unit didn’t check the construction quality strictly which leads to many quality problems, some construction even didn’t meet the finish standard. When the construction unit advocates rights to the builders, the builders take responsibility only during the time of guarantee with repair, with an excuse that the project has already gone through the check-out which makes construction unit have not get the right relief.Focusing on two aspects problems above, according to the efficacy rank of evidence, Chinese law, regulation and original intention of legislation, this thesis firstly considers recorded contract as construction payment basis. In view of many similar cases in present judicatory practise, there is no direct legal evidence to decide the contract efficacy, which leads to the difficulty of bench’ cognizance. The paper suggests that it should be clearly regulated by law or judicatory explanation which takes the recorded contract as payment basis of construction projects. Secondly, after analysing Chinese Construction Law, although construction has been checked-out and brought into use, if serious problems has been found in construction quality definitely, construction project quality supervised organisation should depend on authority to order builders make correction and reorganise acceptance inspection. Theconstruction should be considered as unacceptable, therefore, the construction unit will get right relief fully. At last, the author combines the case’s real situation with case handling experience, makes conclusion of general thinking-from contract efficacy to construction quality analysis to responsibility cognizance of two parts, and gives reasonable advise to lawyers on using construction cost judicatory appraisal.