|
After the lawmaking and operation of the “ conciliation” system in purchase law was functioned to the executing contracts disputation in the public works in our country, the enterprises now are rising an upsurge of applications “ to conciliate” . And after the accumulation of the conciliation cases, the common views of each kind of disputations in the view of law are shaping; therefore the enterprises extract their compensation of damage or atonement of loses claims to the government case by case with an awakening attitude. The focus of all struggles is no other than the problems which occurred in the execution of the contract. For example, there are some disputation types that happened in the five district engineering locations belong to the highest institution of Highway in the government; these cases happened after they published the packages of the public engineering and in the stage of executing contracts in recent two years. When we separate them into some categories according to its occurred frequencies, we can have some disputation types as following categories: “ deadline of executing contract ” 、“ way of valuation ” 、“ the increasing cost of extending the engineering time”、“ problems of contract”、“ the compensation of changing design ” 、“ relieve or terminate contract ” 、“ problems of discard earth ” 、“ problems of a price-hike of the sandstone or steel bar” 、“ problems of sharing the risks of accidental calamity ” and “ problems of pursue the engineering deadline” etc. And the former three types are the most easily happened ones. After some researches and studies, we can understand, the main reason which the disputations happened in the executing public engineering contract is that the unfair items in the shaped contract. In 247-1 item of the civil law there is a rule to announce null and void of the contract, when some conditions happened as follow, it says: “ (A). the litigant who was let of or ease off his duty of the contract item in beforehand subscription; (B) . to aggravate the duty of the litigant on the other party;(C).to make the litigant on the other party abandon his rights or to limit his executing rights;(D) . another aspects which concerned some significant harmful things with the litigant on the other party” . However, it is very easily to occurred the former conditions in the shaped contract of the public engineering, and then as the enterprises refuse to obey the rule, they will apply a conciliation to give relief for themselves. Besides, the idea of “ sharing risks” was generally acknowledged in the international engineering contract. In 227-2 item of the civil law in our country stipulate that “ the principle of the changing circumstances” can be applied in the engineering contract, and in 252 item of the civil law order that “ too high sum of money in breaking contract” should be rebated; these two items were embodied the fair principle of “ sharing risks” . And as the former exposing cases, those disputation types happened in the five district engineering locations belong to the highest institution of Highway in the government, could be categorized into the “ sharing risks” types; therefore, the cases of disputation are increasing. To eliminate this phenomenon, this paper has an intention to supply researched result ideas for the reference materials of both enterprises and related governmental institutions. And I hope that, with this effort, we can rectify those unfair and unreasonable attitudes and those different unfair treatments without any reason, and then can uphold the public benefit. In this paper the author has a plan, firstly to study the core problem of the executing contract disputation of the engineering with a view of law; secondly, to use inquiring test papers to investigate the ideas in both “ institutions” and“ enterprises” . The inquiring test papers were used with a function of “ analysis table and figure table with a hinge” to make a “ observation times” statistics; and when it is in a cross analysis, I key in an automatic formula to compute the “ theoretical expect times” . After that, I operate “CHITEST” in order to gain “P value” which is the lead number of statistic function, and then I can separate the remarkable degree. In the inquiring test papers, they showed that the majority of (about 48%) those executing contract disputation cases in engineering were abided by the “ conciliation” system to solve the problems; and about 12% of those enterprises didn’t agree the conciliation results and they propose a lawsuit in the court continually. Through cases study, when we compare the difference of the final judgments between “ conciliation” and “ lawsuit” , we find that both the committee members of conciliation and the judges have a same grasp of the spirit in purchasing law. However, both the “ institutions ” and the “ enterprises ” have a same conclusion that the specialty of the committee members of conciliation is better than the judges, but their ideas about the justice of the two sides are out of our commonsense; and both of them are valued reference materials in the field of law.
|