Judicial Recognition Of The Actual Builder’s Right Of Preferential Compensation For Construction Project Price

With the acceleration of urbanization,the rapid rise of the construction industry has given rise to many problems.The increasing number of disputes over construction costs caused by subcontracting,illegal subcontracting,borrowing qualifications and affiliation has added new difficulties to the judicial authorities in determining the facts of the case and applying the law.Combined with the theoretical research of domestic scholars on the priority right to be reimbursed for the actual construction project price and the typical jurisprudence in judicial practice,this paper conducts in-depth research and analyzes the difficulties in judicial practice reflected in the selected cases regarding the priority right of the actual constructor to receive the construction price in judicial practice,in order to provide some help for the judicial authorities in handling related cases.Taking the case analysis as the starting point and the representative "Actual Constructor Zhang San v.Rongde Company etal.Construction Contract Dispute" as the starting point,this article summarizes the two focal points of the dispute involved in this case,namely,whether Zhang San is the actual constructor of the project involved in the case and whether he enjoys the priority right to be reimbursed for the construction project price.At the same time,the case analysis is carried out from the following aspects around the focus of the dispute in the case.First,the concept,manifestation and recognition conditions of "actual constructor" are explained at the academic level and analyzed in judicial practice.Second,it closely follows the conditions for realizing the "priority right to be reimbursed for construction project prices",and focuses on the subject of exercise and the conditions for exercising rights.It specifically analyzes the identity and status of Zhang San in this case,and points out that Zhang San is the actual constructor in this case.At present,laws and judicial interpretations do not clearly stipulate the scope of its subjects.Therefore,this article believes that the contractor covers the actual constructor,and Zhang San can be used as the subject of exercise.Next,this paper gives profound consideration to such cases around the analysis of cases,and suggests clarifying the identification method of the actual constructor and giving him the priority right to be reimbursed for the construction project price.However,since the relevant laws and judicial interpretations do not provide specific provisions for the time being,in order to properly handle similar cases,it is recommended to issue more detailed and specific judicial interpretations to facilitate the development of practical work.