[Analytical Rules] If a party applies for engineering quantity appraisal, the court will determine whether to agree to the appraisal by examining whether the existing evidence is sufficient to determine the engineering quantity.
In 2009, a construction company subcontracted the construction of some pipelines.
During the review process, the oil construction company applied for the identification of the amount of work in dispute based on the construction drawings and as-built drawings, but the construction drawings provided by the company did not recognize their authenticity and contradicted the content agreed in the contract.
On January 19, 2011, a construction company and an oil construction company signed a labor contract change agreement based on the number 227 contract 。 After the signing of the contract, a construction company submitted settlement statements to the oil construction company twice, and the oil construction company did not recognize the settlement amount claimed by the construction company.
If a party applies to the court for engineering quantity appraisal, the court needs to determine whether to agree to the application by examining the relevance of the evidence to the case, avoiding arbitrary and blind entrustment of appraisal and unnecessary multiple and repeated appraisal.
An oil pipeline project department signed a contract payment approval form on January 13, 2015.
After the agreement was signed, a construction company informed the oil construction company of the transfer of creditor’s rights.
After the project was completed and put into use on September 27, 2010, a construction company and an oil construction company (China Russia Pipeline Project Department of the Pipeline Company) signed a contract numbered 2010GDX11045 [Lot 1, 2, and 3 (Lot 3 of Earthwork Engineering)] on January 19, 2011 2010GDX11046 [Two copies of Construction Engineering Construction Contract for Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 (Lot 7, and Lot 9 of Earthwork Engineering).
[Method analysis] If the parties have disputes over the project quantity, which cannot be agreed upon or determined by other methods, the project quantity can be identified.
The appraisal of the engineering quantity can be entrusted by the parties themselves or applied for by the court.
The net audit deduction is 1396708 yuan.
If they still do not apply for appraisal, they shall bear the legal consequences of being unable to provide evidence.
The court entrusted appraisal has higher evidentiary and public credibility than the party entrusted appraisal.
The total amount paid for the project by the oil construction company is 16.1 million yuan.
Site inspection is also not feasible.”.
As of that date, the cumulative payment reached 98.91%, with an amount of 2937702645 yuan.
[See Article 17 of the “Answers to Several Difficult Issues in the Trial of Construction Project Construction Contract Dispute Cases” of the First Civil Trial Division of the Zhejiang Higher People’s Court.].
As the project is a national crude oil pipeline project, it is impossible to excavate at the construction site, and it has been several years since the construction site began.
On November 18, 2013, an oil pipeline project department, as the employer, signed the Supplementary Agreement (I) to the General Contract for Procurement and Construction (PC) of a Section of the Sino Russian Crude Oil Pipeline with the Oil Construction Company as the general contractor of PC.
The court of first instance held that regarding the application for appraisal by the oil construction company and whether the construction drawings presented by it can be used as the appraisal basis.
However, a company does not recognize that the construction drawings presented by the oil construction company are actually used construction drawings, and there is no drawing time, confirmation signatures from both parties, or written evidence of corresponding drawing review and technical disclosure.
The national engineering nature of the project in dispute and the fact that it has been completed for many years, the foundation sinks, and the boundaries cannot be distinguished also make it impossible to conduct appraisal through on-site investigation.
There is subsidence in some sections, and the boundaries cannot be distinguished.
If both parties do not apply for appraisal, they shall explain to the party who bears the burden of proof.
Due to the refusal of the oil construction company to settle the above project, a company filed a lawsuit in the court.
On October 29, 2013, an oil pipeline project department signed the “Construction Project Audit Report Form” with the oil construction company, indicating that the contract price of the disputed project had changed, increasing from 2374696249 yuan at the time of signing to 2988219006 yuan; The main reason for the contract change is the increase in winter construction costs (frozen soil excavation, broken backfill, and increased transportation distance of fine soil).
At the same time, for projects that are clearly stated in the contract that the construction drawings do not contain quantities, the construction drawings shown by the oil construction company all contain quantities.
Although both parties in this case agreed in the contract to rely on the quantity confirmation sheet signed for final acceptance, both parties agreed that there was no quantity confirmation sheet or completion acceptance sheet for the project in dispute.
In December 2013, a company signed a “Debt Transfer Agreement” with a construction company, and a construction company transferred the outstanding project payment debt of the above projects to a company.
The two parties have confirmed that for the three projects in dispute, the amount paid for Contract 045 is 4.67 million yuan, the amount paid for Contract 046 is 3.83 million yuan, and the amount paid for Contract 227 and the change agreement is 7.6 million yuan.
Both parties in this case have no objection to the unit price of the project determined in the contract between both parties, but each party holds its own opinion on the project quantity.
The only information that can be used as an application for appraisal by an oil construction company is construction drawings.
However, it also recognizes that the as-built drawings on which the appraisal is based do not reflect the quantities.
01 Brief Introduction to the Case: On November 18, 2009, an oil pipeline project department, as the employer, signed the General Contract for Procurement and Construction (PC) of the Mohe-Daqing Section of the Sino Russian Crude Oil Pipeline with the Oil Construction Company, as the PC general contractor.
A construction company and an oil construction company (14th Engineering Division of the Installation Company) signed a labor subcontracting contract for construction engineering with the number 2009AZX12227.
In the event that the authenticity and effectiveness of the contract cannot be denied, the construction drawings clearly contradict them.
If the contract agreement between both parties or existing evidence is sufficient to determine the engineering quantity and engineering price, the court should not entrust appraisal on the engineering quantity and engineering price.
The oil construction company denies the quantities already determined in the contract and advocates that they should be completely redetermined through appraisal.
“There is no work quantity in the as-built drawing.