摘要
《司法解释》第22条"当事人约定按照固定价结算工程价款,一方当事人请求对建设工程造价进行鉴定的,不予支持"的规定,因该条款对固定价合同的概念没有做精确的理解与限定,故实践活动中对其引用容易引发歧义。在明确固定价合同的类型和特点的基础上,着重分析在施工图预算计价方式下和工程量清单计价方式下对固定单价、固定总价合同进行司法鉴定的方法,以及各种方法的异同点。最终得出了固定价、可调价、成本加酬金合同这种分类已不再适用的结论,明确了《司法解释》第22条的适用条件。
Article 22 of Judicial Interpretation stipulates：If parties agreed to settle the construction price by fixed price,the request of one party to authenticate the project construction price will not be supported by the court. Because this article does not define the concept of fixed price contract exactly,and the use of this article will cause ambiguity in practice. On the basis of defining the type and characteristic of fixed price contract, the judicial expertise method of construction drawing budget pricing system and bill of quantities valuation system which contains constant unit price and firm lump sum contract are fully discussed. Moreover, the differences between the judicial expertise methods of them will also be expounded. Finally, it comes to a conclusion that the classification of fixed price contract, adjustable price contract and cost-plus-fee contract is not applicable, and the application condition of Article 22 of Judicial Interpretation is clarified.
出处
《工程管理学报》
2014年第6期22-26,共5页
Journal of Engineering Management
关键词
司法鉴定
建设工程造价
固定价
施工图预算
清单
judicial expertise
construction project cost
fixed price
working drawing estimate
bill of quantities
