专业团队

<p，人身损害赔偿、离婚损害赔偿等最全的损害赔偿法知识。

　　2006年12月28日，江苏省南通A建设工程有限公司(简称A公司)与南通B服饰有限公司(简称B公司)签订建设工程施工合同，约定由A公司承建B公司位于南通经济技术开发区出口加工区内1号、2号厂房，竣工日期为2007年9月18日。2007年12月，虽消防设施大多未能安装，也未交付使用，但1号、2号厂房的主体工程已通过竣工验收，B公司领取了1号、2号厂房的房产证。2008年8月30日，A公司、B公司就工程款达成协议，明确了工程款的结算方式和支付方式。2009年5月31日，A公司向法院起诉，请求确认A公司对1号、2号标准厂房享有建设工程价款的优先受偿权。审理中，双方认可B公司于2008年3月上旬口头承诺如找到合作伙伴或者将2号厂房转让给他人，则优先支付给A公司工程款。

　　江苏省南通市经济技术开发区人民法院经审理认为，本案所涉1号、2号厂房在2007年12月主体工程已通过竣工验收，并且A公司、B公司约定的竣工日期是同年9月18日，故即使双方在2008年3月上旬口头协议B公司如找到合作伙伴或者将2号厂房转让给他人，则优先支付A公司工程款，已经超过行使优先权6个月的除斥期间，且也不存在中断的情形。法院判决：驳回A公司要求确认对1号、2号厂房及其相应土地使用权享有建设工程价款优先受偿权的诉讼请求。

　　A公司不服一审判决，提起上诉。江苏省南通市中级人民法院经审理认为，A公司与B公司于2008年8月30日就工程款达成协议，双方应清楚已终止合同履行，此时A公司应及时主张优先权。A公司就工程款事宜在2008年9月5日向法院起诉，也未提出优先权的主张。按合同终止之日起算，A公司于2009年5月31日提出本案之诉，已超过了6个月的除斥期间。A公司未在法定期限内向发包人主张优先权，应视为放弃该权利。法院判决：驳回上诉，维持原判。

　　之后，江苏省人民检察院对该案提起抗诉，认为A公司起诉要求确认建设工程价款优先受偿权并未超过6个月的除斥期间。

　　江苏省高级人民法院再审认为，A公司应从2008年8月30日双方就工程款达成协议时起6个月内主张建设工程价款优先受偿权，其于2009年5月31日提起本案之诉已超过行使优先权的法定期间。2011年5月10日，法院作出再审判决，维持原审判决。

评析

　　为了解决普遍存在的工程款拖欠和农民工工资拖欠等社会问题，合同法第二百八十六条及《最高人民法院关于建设工程价款优先受偿权问题的批复》特别赋予和规定了建筑工程承包人享有建设工程价款优先受偿权，同时，为平衡相关利害关系人的利益，规定建设工程承包人行使优先权的期限为6个月，自建设工程竣工之日或者建设工程合同约定的竣工之日起计算。司法实务中，有大量的案件是所建工程在合同约定的竣工日期之后仍在施工，而且工程实际没有全部施工完毕(即“烂尾楼”工程)，实际竣工日期难以认定，导致在如何认定行使建设工程价款优先受偿权的起算时间方面存在较多的争议，成为审判难点。

　　因本案诉讼时建设工程尚未实际竣工，因此，建设工程价款优先受偿权起算点以合同约定的竣工日起算并不合理。在缺乏直接明确的法律依据的情况下，法院从立法和司法解释的目的出发，确定以当事人就工程款结算达成协议的时间，即2008年8月30日作为优先受偿权的起算点，应该说是比较妥当的。建设工程竣工之日或者建设工程合同约定的竣工之日之所以被司法解释规定为建设工程价款优先权的起算点，是因为此时建设工程合同所约定的基本权利义务已经履行完毕，建设工程承包人由此获得了基于自己义务之履行完毕而向发包人索要相应建设工程价款的资格。2008年8月30日，A公司、B公司就工程款达成协议，明确工程款的结算方式和支付方式，建设工程合同终止履行，A公司此时有资格向B公司主张建设工程价款，其应自此时起6个月内向B公司主张建设工程价款优先受偿权。

On December 28, 2006, Jiangsu Nantong A Construction Engineering Co., Ltd. (referred to as Company A) and Nantong B Clothing Co., Ltd. (referred to as Company B) signed a construction contract, agreeing that Company A would undertake the construction of Factory Buildings 1 and 2 located in the Export Processing Zone of Nantong Economic and Technological Development Zone. The completion date was September 18, 2007. In December 2007, although most of the fire-fighting facilities were not installed or delivered for use, the main works of Factory Buildings 1 and 2 had passed the completion acceptance, and Company B received the property certificates for Factory Buildings 1 and 2. On August 30, 2008, Company A and Company B reached an agreement on project payments, clarifying the settlement and payment methods for project payments. On May 31, 2009, Company A filed a lawsuit with the court, requesting confirmation that Company A has the priority right to receive compensation for the construction project price of Standard Factory Buildings 1 and 2. During the trial, both parties acknowledged that Company B had verbally promised in early March 2008 that if they found a partner or transferred Building 2 to someone else, they would prioritize paying the project funds to Company A.

The People's Court of Nantong Economic and Technological Development Zone, Jiangsu Province, after trial, found that the main works of Factory Buildings 1 and 2 involved in this case had passed the completion acceptance in December 2007, and the completion date agreed upon by Company A and Company B was September 18 of the same year. Therefore, even if both parties verbally agreed in early March 2008, if Company B found a partner or transferred Factory Buildings 2 to others, they would prioritize paying Company A the project fee, The exclusion period has exceeded 6 months of exercising priority, and there is no interruption. Court ruling: Reject Company A's lawsuit requesting confirmation of the priority right to receive compensation for the construction project price for Factory Buildings 1 and 2 and their corresponding land use rights.

Company A appealed against the first instance judgment. The Intermediate People's Court of Nantong City, Jiangsu Province, after trial, found that Company A and Company B reached an agreement on project payment on August 30, 2008, and both parties should be aware that the contract performance has been terminated. At this time, Company A should promptly claim priority. Company A filed a lawsuit with the court on September 5, 2008 regarding the payment for the project, but did not raise a priority claim. Starting from the date of termination of the contract, Company A filed this lawsuit on May 31, 2009, which has exceeded the six-month exclusion period. If Company A fails to claim priority from the employer within the statutory deadline, it shall be deemed as a waiver of that right. Court ruling: Reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment.

Afterwards, the People's Procuratorate of Jiangsu Province filed a protest against the case, stating that Company A's lawsuit for confirmation of the priority right to compensation for the construction project price did not exceed a six-month exclusion period.

The Jiangsu Provincial High People's Court held in retrial that Company A should have claimed the priority right to compensation for the construction project price within 6 months from the time when the two parties reached an agreement on the project payment on August 30, 2008. Its lawsuit filed on May 31, 2009 has exceeded the statutory period for exercising the priority right. On May 10, 2011, the court made a retrial judgment, upholding the original judgment.

analyse and comment on

In order to solve the common social problems of project payment arrears and wage arrears of migrant workers, Article 286 of the Contract Law and the Reply of the Supreme People's Court on the Priority Compensation Right of Construction Project Prices specifically grant and stipulate that construction project contractors have the priority compensation right of construction project prices. At the same time, to balance the interests of relevant stakeholders, the deadline for construction project contractors to exercise the priority right is set at 6 months, From the date of completion of the construction project or the completion date specified in the construction project contract. In judicial practice, there are a large number of cases where the construction project is still under construction after the completion date specified in the contract, and the actual completion date of the project is not all completed (i.e. "unfinished building" project), making it difficult to determine the actual completion date. This has led to many disputes on how to determine the starting time for exercising the priority right to receive compensation for construction project prices, which has become a difficult point in the trial.

Due to the fact that the construction project was not actually completed at the time of this lawsuit, it is not reasonable for the starting point of the priority right to compensation for the construction project price to be calculated from the completion date specified in the contract. In the absence of direct and clear legal basis, it is appropriate for the court to determine the time when the parties reach an agreement on the settlement of project funds, that is, August 30, 2008, as the starting point for the priority right to compensation, starting from the purpose of legislation and judicial interpretation. The reason why the completion date of a construction project or the completion date agreed upon in a construction project contract is designated by judicial interpretation as the starting point for the priority of construction project price is because at this time, the basic rights and obligations stipulated in the construction project contract have been fulfilled, and the construction project contractor has obtained the qualification to demand the corresponding construction project price from the employer based on the completion of their own obligations. On August 30, 2008, Company A and Company B reached an agreement on the project payment, clarifying the settlement and payment methods of the project payment. The construction project contract was terminated, and Company A was entitled to claim the construction project price from Company B. From then on, Company A should claim the priority right to receive the construction project price from Company B within 6 months.

案例编写人：江苏省高级人民法院 杨志刚