Judicial Case Study Of Validity Of Construction Contract

In judicial practice,when the court tries the construction contract dispute,it needs to determine the validity of the contract involved,and reasonably allocate rights and obligations accordingly to make a fair and reasonable judgment.According to the current trial practice of construction contract disputes in China,there are some problems and disputes in the local courts for the validity of these types of construction contracts: first,the use of qualifications;Second,subcontracting;Third,illegal subcontracting;Fourth,the "substantive content" of the contract awarded is changed;fifth,Winning the bid at a price lower than cost.China’s relevant laws have clearly stipulated that the qualification contract,subcontract and illegal subcontract are invalid construction contracts.However,when some courts define whether the contract involved belongs to the above circumstances,there are some problems: the identification standards for the act of borrowing qualifications are not uniform,the act of confusing subcontracting and its similar acts,and the act of confusing illegal subcontracting and labor subcontracting.There are also some disputes about the "material content" change contract and the contract below cost price: there are disputes about what contract content is "material content" and the effect of the "material content" change contract,and there are disputes about the effect of the contract below cost price.These problems and disputes generally exist in judicial practice,affecting the local courts’ determination of the validity of construction contracts,and even leading to different district courts’ determination of the validity of the same or essentially identical contracts,that is,the phenomenon of "different judgments in the same case" occurs from time to time,which causes the public to question the judgment results and judicial authority.So,in order to solve the above problems and disputes,we should unify the identification criteria for the behavior of borrowing qualifications,clarify the distinction standards for subcontracting and similar behaviors,clarify the distinction standards for illegal subcontracting and labor subcontracting,improve the provisions on the content and effectiveness of the "substantive content" change contract,and clarify the invalidity of the contract awarded at a price lower than cost.