Study On Term Of Priority Of Repayment Of Construction Project Price In China

With the continuous development of the real estate industry,the scale of the construction industry is expanding rapidly,and China's economy is booming.However,many contradictions and conflicts have arisen,among which the more obvious is the problem that the project payment paid by the employer to the contractor is not in place,and the problem of wage arrears for migrant workers.In order to solve these contradictions and conflicts effectively and safeguard the rights and interests of contractors,article 286 of “The Contract Law of the People's Republic of China”(hereinafter referred to as the “Contract Law”?)stipulates the contractor's priority right to compensation for the construction project price.This article has laid a solid foundation for the solution of the above contradictions which have existed for a long time,but in view of its general content,its application is still controversial,therefore,in 2002,the Supreme People's Court issued the "Approval on the Application of Law in the Trial of Construction Contract Disputes"(hereinafter referred to as "Approval")to make this issue more specific,but there are still many disputes in practice,with the promulgation of the “Interpretation on the Legal Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases of Construction Project Construction Contract Disputes(II)”(hereinafter referred to as the “Judicial Interpretation of Construction Projects(II)”)by the Supreme People's Court in 2019,the Supreme Court has given clear regulations on the existence of many contradictions and conflicts,among which there are many progressive and worthy of affirmation,of course,there are still some shortcomings,there are still problems that cannot be solved in judicial practice.Through the study and practice of a large number of court judgments,we can find that whether there is a priority right to compensation for construction project price is the focus of controversy in many cases of construction project,and the issue of the time limit is the most critical factor to determine whether the obligee has the priority right to compensation for the price,so it is very necessary to study the time limit of the right.However,in China's relevant provisions on the priority payment of the price,the nature of the term is not clear.Moreover,Article 286 of the Contract Law refers to the reminder system,but neither the subsequent "Approval" nor "Judicial Interpretation of Construction Projects(II)" mentions the reminder system,so it is not clear whether the reminder procedure must be applied in the exercise of this right.In addition to the most important issue of the starting point of time limit,there is a great controversy of the application of the starting point stipulated in the "Approval" and the provisions of new "Judicial Interpretation of Construction Projects(II)" are more general,which still have perfect space and value.This paper lists three typical cases.In the process of combing and analyzing the cases,the most common problems in judicial practice are summarized,and summarizes the judgment ideas and theoretical understanding disputes in the trial process of construction project price priority right cases.This paper consists of four parts:The first part is the introduction.While introducing the background and significance of this study,this paper summarizes the current research on the term of the priority right to compensation of construction project price,and then the research methods used in this paper are elaborated.The second part summarizes three typical cases.List the same points and differences in the three issues concerning the term of the priority payment of the price,and find out the focus issues in the case.Firstly,the nature of the term of the priority of payment of the price;secondly,whether the system of reminder should be applied to the priority of payment of the price;and thirdly,the starting point of the term of the priority of payment of the price.The third part is the legal analysis.Analyzing the identification and application of relevant cases in the process of trial,and combining the controversial focus on the term of the priority payment of the price,and analyze it accordingly,and draw my own opinion.The fourth part is the conclusions and inspirations obtained in the process of analyzing and researching the case.From the conclusion,the following suggestions can be put forward: setting up a public announcement system and clarifying the applicable standards for the starting point of the priority period for the payment of the project price under various circumstances.