On Priority Of Compensation For Construction Project Price

The system of priority of compensation for construction project price has been established for the first time since 1999,Article 807 of the civil code of the People’s Republic of China stipulates: "If the lessor fails to pay the contract price,the contractor may require the lessor to pay the price within a reasonable period;if the lessor fails to pay the price within a reasonable period,the contractor may negotiate with the lessor to recover the project cost or request the approval of the people’s court;the project cost shall be transformed or auctioned." The basic right to recover the purchase price of construction projects aims to protect the interests of contractors and builders.This paper combines the opinions of the theoretical world and the academic community with their own understanding and attempts to make a valuable proposal to improve the priority system of project cost reimbursement.This document is divided into five sections:Part 1 expounds the basic connotation of the priority of compensation for construction project price.This article aims to understand the definition,features and types of privileges.This file is full of uniqueness of recovery priority.The dispute over priority with respect to reparation arises mainly from the lack of a clear definition of the nature of priority with respect to reparation.There are three main perspectives on nature now.This paper adopts the theory of comparative law and systematic interpretation to demonstrate,because in the legislative background of similar priority exists in other laws of Our country,we believe that the superiority of compensation should be interpreted as a legal superiority.The second part analyzes the main dispute problem of preferential compensation rights of construction projects.Subcontractors,decorative decoration project contractors,actual construction people,etc.also belong to the main body of the construction project.Based on documented surveys and subject analysis,this document suggests that subcontractors can be preferentially preferred as a direct contractor or as a special affiliated company.This right may be granted to contractors and contractors who conclude construction contracts or design contracts.In the reality,the actual construction person is an invalidated construction contract,which is an invalidated construction contract,so this article believes that the actual construction person should not enjoy preferential payment rights in the social context of legal and maintain social context.Part 3 analyzes the timing of exercise of the right to receive priority payments for construction work priority period,which should be understood as a period,including the starting time node,the ending time node and the interval from the beginning to the ending time.The author analyzes and affirms "the date on which the project price should be paid" and sums up different starting methods for possible situations.For the termination time nodes of the exercise period,other termination time nodes are summarized in combination with the cases in practice,except the "time advocated by the contractor".Part 4 describes how priority is exercised over the price of construction projects.Due to the expanded interpretation of the law,the exercise of rights in practice has given rise to disputes such as whether "reminder" is a necessary way to exercise rights,and whether rights can be confirmed by the mediation statement of a court or arbitration institution.This understanding confuses the two concepts of the exercise of rights and the realization of rights.Clarifying the dispute is conducive to clarifying how to realize the right.Based on the current judicial interpretations and the jurisprudence of the Supreme People’s Court,the effective ways to realize the right of priority to reimbursement are elaborated one by one.The fifth part discusses the abandonment and restriction behavior of the preferential reference of the construction project.The Contractor undertakes to abandon the law or limit its effectiveness.This paper defines the "difference in effectiveness",respects the concept of the parties and the original intention of the legislative purpose and takes into account the priority of construction projects.The refusal of the contractor does not harm the interests of construction personnel,otherwise it is considered valid.