（2018年(nian)10月29日最高人民法院審(shen)判(pan)委員(yuan)會(hui)第1751次會議通過(guo)，自2019年2月1日起施行）

為正確(que)審(shen)理建(jian)設工(gong)程施(shi)工(gong)合(he)同糾紛案件，依(yi)法(fa)保護當事人(ren)(ren)(ren)合(he)法(fa)權益，維護建(jian)筑市場秩序，促進建(jian)筑市場健(jian)康發展，根(gen)據《中華人(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)共(gong)(gong)和(he)國(guo)民(min)法(fa)總則》《中華人(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)共(gong)(gong)和(he)國(guo)合(he)同法(fa)》《中華人(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)共(gong)(gong)和(he)國(guo)建(jian)筑法(fa)》《中華人(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)共(gong)(gong)和(he)國(guo)招標投標法(fa)》《中華人(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)共(gong)(gong)和(he)國(guo)民(min)事訴訟法(fa)》等法(fa)律規定，結(jie)合(he)審(shen)判實踐，制定本解釋(shi)。

解讀：本(ben)司(si)法解釋僅調(diao)整建(jian)設(she)工程(cheng)施工合同糾紛，不包括建(jian)設(she)工程(cheng)勘察合同糾紛、設(she)計(ji)合同糾紛等(deng)建(jian)設(she)工程(cheng)合同糾紛項下的其他糾紛。2017年實施的(de)民(min)法(fa)(fa)總則以及合同法(fa)(fa)、建筑法(fa)(fa)、招標(biao)投標(biao)法(fa)(fa)、民(min)事訴訟法(fa)(fa)等法(fa)(fa)律(lv)規(gui)定，均是制定本(ben)司(si)法(fa)(fa)解釋的(de)依據(ju)。

第一(yi)條(tiao) 招標人和中(zhong)標人另(ling)行簽訂的(de)建(jian)設工(gong)(gong)程施(shi)工(gong)(gong)合(he)(he)同(tong)約定的(de)工(gong)(gong)程范圍、建(jian)設工(gong)(gong)期、工(gong)(gong)程質量、工(gong)(gong)程價款等實質性(xing)內容，與中(zhong)標合(he)(he)同(tong)不一致，一方當事(shi)人請(qing)求按照中(zhong)標合(he)(he)同(tong)確定權(quan)利義務的(de)，人民(min)法院(yuan)應予支持。

招(zhao)標人和(he)中(zhong)(zhong)標人在中(zhong)(zhong)標合(he)同(tong)之外就明顯高(gao)于市場價(jia)格購買承建房產(chan)、無償建設住房配套設施、讓利、向建設單位(wei)捐贈(zeng)財(cai)物(wu)等另行簽(qian)訂合(he)同(tong)，變(bian)相降低工程價(jia)款，一方當事人以該合(he)同(tong)背離中(zhong)(zhong)標合(he)同(tong)實質性(xing)內容為由請(qing)求確認無效的，人民法(fa)院應予支(zhi)持。

解讀(du)：本條第一款是關于陰(yin)(yin)陽合(he)同(tong)的(de)(de)處(chu)理，簡(jian)單的(de)(de)說陰(yin)(yin)陽合(he)同(tong)以(yi)陽合(he)同(tong)為準。

本(ben)條第二(er)款(kuan)是(shi)關于(yu)另行(xing)簽訂合(he)同變相(xiang)降(jiang)低工程價款(kuan)如何(he)處理的規(gui)定(ding)(ding)。實踐中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，當事人另行(xing)簽訂合(he)同時并不直接變更中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)合(he)同工程價款(kuan)條款(kuan)，而是(shi)約(yue)定(ding)(ding)高價購買(mai)承建(jian)房(fang)屋、無償建(jian)設住房(fang)配套設施、直接讓(rang)利、向發包(bao)人捐贈財(cai)物等內容(rong)(rong)，變相(xiang)降(jiang)低了工程價款(kuan)，仍應(ying)認定(ding)(ding)屬于(yu)背離中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)合(he)同實質性內容(rong)(rong)的情形，此時雙方應(ying)按(an)中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)合(he)同約(yue)定(ding)(ding)的工程價款(kuan)進行(xing)結算。

第二條(tiao) 當事人(ren)(ren)以發包(bao)人(ren)(ren)未(wei)取(qu)得(de)建(jian)設(she)工(gong)程規(gui)劃許可證(zheng)等規(gui)劃審批手(shou)續為由，請求確認建(jian)設(she)工(gong)程施(shi)工(gong)合同無效的(de)，人(ren)(ren)民法(fa)院(yuan)應予支持，但(dan)發包(bao)人(ren)(ren)在起(qi)訴(su)前取(qu)得(de)建(jian)設(she)工(gong)程規(gui)劃許可證(zheng)等規(gui)劃審批手(shou)續的(de)除外。

發包人能(neng)夠辦(ban)(ban)理(li)審批手續而未辦(ban)(ban)理(li)，并以未辦(ban)(ban)理(li)審批手續為(wei)由請求確認(ren)建設工(gong)程(cheng)施(shi)工(gong)合同無(wu)效的(de)，人民法院不予支(zhi)持(chi)。

解讀：本條第一款是關于(yu)“四證”不齊，合同效力的規定。“四證”是指建設用地規劃許可證、建設工程規劃許可證、國有土地使用權證和建設工程施工許可證。（城鄉規劃法第三十七條、第三十八條）規定未取得兩規劃證的合同無效（兵馬未動、規劃先行）。至于國有土地使用權證，不影響建設工程施工合同的效力。建設工程施工許可，屬于行政管理范疇，并不影響建設工程施工合同的效力。這類案件通常審理周期較長，事實一般也復雜，如果將效力補正截止時間延遲至“一審法庭辯論終結前”，會導致合同效力問題在法庭審理之前存在不確定性，不利于當事人在起訴之前即形成合理預期和人民法院對案件的及時審結，因此將補正截止時間確定為“起訴前”。

本條第二款是關于發(fa)包(bao)(bao)人故(gu)意不辦理或者(zhe)拖延辦理相(xiang)關審(shen)批(pi)(pi)(pi)手續(xu)后果(guo)(guo)的(de)規定(ding)。如果(guo)(guo)發(fa)包(bao)(bao)人辦理相(xiang)關審(shen)批(pi)(pi)(pi)手續(xu)的(de)條件已(yi)成就，其一(yi)方(fang)面未(wei)積極(ji)辦理審(shen)批(pi)(pi)(pi)手續(xu)，另(ling)一(yi)方(fang)面又(you)以(yi)未(wei)辦理審(shen)批(pi)(pi)(pi)手續(xu)主(zhu)張合(he)同(tong)無(wu)效(xiao)，人民法院不應支(zhi)持其主(zhu)張，相(xiang)反應認定(ding)合(he)同(tong)有效(xiao)。

第三條(tiao) 建(jian)設工(gong)程施工(gong)合同無效，一方(fang)當(dang)事人請求對方(fang)賠償損失(shi)(shi)的(de)，應當(dang)就對方(fang)過(guo)錯、損失(shi)(shi)大小(xiao)、過(guo)錯與損失(shi)(shi)之(zhi)間的(de)因果關系承擔(dan)舉(ju)證責(ze)任。

損失大(da)小無法確定(ding)，一方當事人請求參照(zhao)合(he)同約(yue)定(ding)的(de)質量(liang)標準(zhun)、建設(she)工期、工程價款支付時(shi)間等內容確定(ding)損失大(da)小的(de)，人民法院(yuan)可(ke)以結合(he)雙方過錯(cuo)程度(du)、過錯(cuo)與損失之間的(de)因果關系(xi)等因素(su)作出裁判。

解讀：本條第一款是關于無效合同(tong)下損失誰(shui)主張誰(shui)舉(ju)(ju)證及舉(ju)(ju)證范(fan)圍(wei)的規定。

本條第二(er)款是關(guan)于損(sun)(sun)(sun)失大小如何(he)確定(ding)(ding)的(de)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)。在(zai)合同無效(xiao)的(de)情(qing)況下，當(dang)事(shi)人不(bu)(bu)能(neng)直接援引違約(yue)責(ze)任(ren)條款主張損(sun)(sun)(sun)失賠(pei)償(chang)。如果一方(fang)主張因工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質(zhi)量(liang)(liang)、工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)期延誤、停(ting)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)窩工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)等原因導致(zhi)的(de)損(sun)(sun)(sun)失賠(pei)償(chang)，不(bu)(bu)僅損(sun)(sun)(sun)失大小難以(yi)確定(ding)(ding)，而且(qie)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質(zhi)量(liang)(liang)是否存在(zai)問題、工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)期是否存在(zai)延誤、是否存在(zai)停(ting)窩工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)也都難以(yi)證明。基(ji)于這種考慮(lv)，允許(xu)當(dang)事(shi)人參照合同約(yue)定(ding)(ding)的(de)質(zhi)量(liang)(liang)標(biao)準、建設工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)期、工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價款支付時間(jian)等內(nei)容(rong)來證明工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質(zhi)量(liang)(liang)存在(zai)瑕疵、工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)期存在(zai)延誤、進(jin)度款支付遲延等事(shi)實(shi)，并以(yi)此為基(ji)礎確定(ding)(ding)實(shi)際損(sun)(sun)(sun)失的(de)大小。

第四條 缺乏資(zi)質的(de)單位或者個人(ren)借(jie)用有資(zi)質的(de)建(jian)筑施工企業名義(yi)簽訂建(jian)設工程施工合同，發(fa)包(bao)人(ren)請(qing)求出借(jie)方(fang)(fang)與借(jie)用方(fang)(fang)對建(jian)設工程質量不(bu)合格等因出借(jie)資(zi)質造(zao)成的(de)損失(shi)承擔(dan)連帶賠償責任的(de)，人(ren)民(min)法院應予支(zhi)持(chi)。

解讀：本條是關于(yu)出(chu)(chu)借(jie)資(zi)(zi)(zi)質(zhi)的(de)單位和借(jie)用(yong)資(zi)(zi)(zi)質(zhi)的(de)主體(ti)對(dui)發(fa)包(bao)人(ren)承擔(dan)連帶(dai)賠償責(ze)任(ren)的(de)規定(ding)。現實情形普(pu)遍存在，即掛靠(kao)經營。在掛靠(kao)關系下(xia)，由(you)掛靠(kao)人(ren)和被掛靠(kao)人(ren)對(dui)外(wai)(wai)承擔(dan)連帶(dai)賠償責(ze)任(ren)。此外(wai)(wai)，本條還強調了(le)賠償的(de)范圍(wei)限(xian)于(yu)出(chu)(chu)借(jie)資(zi)(zi)(zi)質(zhi)造(zao)成(cheng)的(de)損(sun)(sun)失(shi)。一般(ban)來說，如果(guo)出(chu)(chu)借(jie)人(ren)沒有(you)出(chu)(chu)借(jie)資(zi)(zi)(zi)質(zhi)，借(jie)用(yong)人(ren)就不(bu)可能得到實際承包(bao)工程的(de)機會(hui)，故對(dui)于(yu)工程質(zhi)量欠缺導(dao)致的(de)損(sun)(sun)失(shi)發(fa)生(sheng)很難說不(bu)是因為出(chu)(chu)借(jie)資(zi)(zi)(zi)質(zhi)造(zao)成(cheng)的(de)。言外(wai)(wai)之意，資(zi)(zi)(zi)質(zhi)出(chu)(chu)借(jie)人(ren)如果(guo)想擺脫責(ze)任(ren)承擔(dan)，則更多應由(you)其(qi)(qi)舉證證明損(sun)(sun)失(shi)的(de)發(fa)生(sheng)不(bu)是由(you)于(yu)其(qi)(qi)出(chu)(chu)借(jie)資(zi)(zi)(zi)質(zhi)造(zao)成(cheng)的(de)。

第(di)五條(tiao) 當事人(ren)對建(jian)設(she)工程開工日期有爭議的，人(ren)民法院應當分(fen)別按(an)照以下情形予以認(ren)定：

（一）開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)日期為(wei)(wei)發包人或者監理(li)人發出(chu)的開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)通知載明的開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)日期；開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)通知發出(chu)后，尚不具備開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)條件的，以開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)條件具備的時(shi)間(jian)(jian)為(wei)(wei)開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)日期；因(yin)承包人原因(yin)導致開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)時(shi)間(jian)(jian)推遲(chi)的，以開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)通知載明的時(shi)間(jian)(jian)為(wei)(wei)開(kai)工(gong)(gong)(gong)日期。

（二）承包(bao)人(ren)經(jing)發(fa)包(bao)人(ren)同(tong)意(yi)已(yi)經(jing)實際進(jin)(jin)場(chang)施工(gong)的，以實際進(jin)(jin)場(chang)施工(gong)時間為開工(gong)日期。

（三）發(fa)包人或(huo)(huo)者監理(li)人未發(fa)出開工(gong)通知，亦無相關證(zheng)據證(zheng)明實際(ji)開工(gong)日期(qi)的，應(ying)當綜合考(kao)慮(lv)開工(gong)報(bao)告(gao)、合同(tong)、施工(gong)許可證(zheng)、竣(jun)工(gong)驗收報(bao)告(gao)或(huo)(huo)者竣(jun)工(gong)驗收備案表(biao)等(deng)載明的時(shi)間(jian)，并結合是否具備開工(gong)條(tiao)件的事(shi)實，認(ren)定(ding)開工(gong)日期(qi)。

解讀：本條(tiao)是關于(yu)開(kai)工(gong)(gong)日期的(de)規(gui)定。開(kai)工(gong)(gong)日期的(de)確(que)定對(dui)判斷承包人是否按照(zhao)約定的(de)建設工(gong)(gong)期完工(gong)(gong)具(ju)有重要影響。本條(tiao)規(gui)定的(de)開(kai)工(gong)(gong)日期是實際開(kai)工(gong)(gong)時間(jian)，區分為幾(ji)種情(qing)形。1，開工日期以發(fa)包人(ren)或者監理人(ren)發(fa)出的開工通知載明的日期為準；2，開(kai)(kai)(kai)工(gong)通知發出(chu)后(hou)(hou)，如果工(gong)程尚不具備(bei)開(kai)(kai)(kai)工(gong)條件，則以開(kai)(kai)(kai)工(gong)條件具備(bei)后(hou)(hou)的時間為開(kai)(kai)(kai)工(gong)日期，但若因承包人的原因導致開(kai)(kai)(kai)工(gong)通知發出(chu)后(hou)(hou)又無法實際開(kai)(kai)(kai)工(gong)的，則仍以開(kai)(kai)(kai)工(gong)通知載(zai)明的時間為準；3，開工(gong)(gong)(gong)通(tong)知發出(chu)前(qian)，如果承包(bao)(bao)人經(jing)發包(bao)(bao)人同意已經(jing)實(shi)(shi)際進場施工(gong)(gong)(gong)的(de)，以實(shi)(shi)際進場時間(jian)為開工(gong)(gong)(gong)日(ri)期；第(di)四種情(qing)形，發包(bao)(bao)人或者監理人沒有(you)發出(chu)開工(gong)(gong)(gong)通(tong)知，現有(you)證(zheng)據也無法證(zheng)明(ming)何(he)時實(shi)(shi)際開工(gong)(gong)(gong)，則需綜(zong)合開工(gong)(gong)(gong)報告、合同、施工(gong)(gong)(gong)許(xu)可證(zheng)等(deng)載明(ming)的(de)時間(jian)和案件其他事實(shi)(shi)，認定(ding)開工(gong)(gong)(gong)日(ri)期。

第六條 當(dang)事人約定順(shun)延(yan)工期(qi)應當(dang)經發包(bao)(bao)(bao)人或者監理(li)(li)人簽證(zheng)等(deng)方式確認，承包(bao)(bao)(bao)人雖未取得(de)工期(qi)順(shun)延(yan)的確認，但(dan)能夠證(zheng)明(ming)在合(he)同(tong)約定的期(qi)限內(nei)向發包(bao)(bao)(bao)人或者監理(li)(li)人申請過(guo)工期(qi)順(shun)延(yan)且順(shun)延(yan)事由(you)符合(he)合(he)同(tong)約定，承包(bao)(bao)(bao)人以(yi)此為由(you)主張(zhang)工期(qi)順(shun)延(yan)的，人民法院應予支(zhi)持。

當事人約定承(cheng)包人未在約定期(qi)限內提(ti)出(chu)工期(qi)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)申請(qing)視為工期(qi)不順(shun)(shun)延(yan)的(de)，按照約定處(chu)理，但發包人在約定期(qi)限后同意工期(qi)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)或者承(cheng)包人提(ti)出(chu)合理抗辯的(de)除外(wai)。

解(jie)讀：本(ben)(ben)條是關(guan)于工(gong)期(qi)(qi)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)的(de)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)。合(he)(he)(he)(he)同約(yue)(yue)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)工(gong)期(qi)(qi)應(ying)當(dang)經發包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)監(jian)(jian)理(li)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)簽證等(deng)方式(shi)確(que)認(ren)(ren)，但承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)往往提(ti)出(chu)工(gong)期(qi)(qi)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)申(shen)請(qing)(qing)后(hou)，發包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)監(jian)(jian)理(li)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)并未(wei)(wei)(wei)給予確(que)認(ren)(ren)，這使得承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)實(shi)際處于比較被動的(de)地位。在這種(zhong)情況下，如果機械按照合(he)(he)(he)(he)同約(yue)(yue)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)一(yi)概以(yi)發包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)監(jian)(jian)理(li)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)未(wei)(wei)(wei)確(que)認(ren)(ren)為由認(ren)(ren)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)工(gong)期(qi)(qi)不(bu)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)，對承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)是不(bu)公平的(de)。從某種(zhong)意義上看，發包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)監(jian)(jian)理(li)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)針對承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)的(de)合(he)(he)(he)(he)理(li)申(shen)請(qing)(qing)未(wei)(wei)(wei)予確(que)認(ren)(ren)，本(ben)(ben)身就是一(yi)種(zhong)違(wei)約(yue)(yue)行為。因(yin)此(ci)，本(ben)(ben)條第一(yi)款規(gui)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)，承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)申(shen)請(qing)(qing)工(gong)期(qi)(qi)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)未(wei)(wei)(wei)得到確(que)認(ren)(ren)，但只(zhi)要(yao)能舉(ju)證證明(ming)其是在約(yue)(yue)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)的(de)期(qi)(qi)間內(nei)申(shen)請(qing)(qing)，且(qie)申(shen)請(qing)(qing)的(de)事(shi)由符合(he)(he)(he)(he)合(he)(he)(he)(he)同約(yue)(yue)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)，人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)法院就可以(yi)支(zhi)持承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)提(ti)出(chu)的(de)工(gong)期(qi)(qi)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)的(de)主(zhu)張(zhang)。同時，本(ben)(ben)條第二款規(gui)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)，如果合(he)(he)(he)(he)同明(ming)確(que)約(yue)(yue)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)未(wei)(wei)(wei)在約(yue)(yue)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)期(qi)(qi)限(xian)內(nei)提(ti)出(chu)工(gong)期(qi)(qi)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)申(shen)請(qing)(qing)視為不(bu)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)的(de)，通常應(ying)按照約(yue)(yue)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)處理(li)。不(bu)過(guo)，存(cun)在兩(liang)種(zhong)例(li)外情形，如果發包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)明(ming)確(que)同意工(gong)期(qi)(qi)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)就未(wei)(wei)(wei)在約(yue)(yue)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)期(qi)(qi)限(xian)內(nei)申(shen)請(qing)(qing)提(ti)出(chu)了合(he)(he)(he)(he)理(li)的(de)抗(kang)辯理(li)由的(de)，人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)法院應(ying)支(zhi)持承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)提(ti)出(chu)的(de)工(gong)期(qi)(qi)順(shun)(shun)延(yan)(yan)(yan)的(de)主(zhu)張(zhang)。

第七條 發(fa)包人(ren)在承包人(ren)提(ti)起的建設(she)工(gong)程(cheng)施(shi)工(gong)合(he)(he)同糾紛案件中，以(yi)建設(she)工(gong)程(cheng)質(zhi)量不符合(he)(he)合(he)(he)同約定或(huo)者法(fa)律規定為由，就承包人(ren)支(zhi)付違(wei)約金或(huo)者賠償修理、返工(gong)、改建的合(he)(he)理費用等損失(shi)提(ti)出反訴的，人(ren)民法(fa)院可以(yi)合(he)(he)并審理。

解(jie)讀(du)：本條(tiao)是關于(yu)發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)如何提(ti)起(qi)反訴(su)(su)的(de)(de)(de)規(gui)定。實踐中，承包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)起(qi)訴(su)(su)發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)要求(qiu)支付工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)款(kuan)(kuan)，發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)往(wang)(wang)往(wang)(wang)以工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質(zhi)量(liang)不(bu)合格(ge)(ge)提(ti)出(chu)(chu)抗(kang)辯(bian)(bian)，請求(qiu)少(shao)付甚至不(bu)付工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)款(kuan)(kuan)。抗(kang)辯(bian)(bian)只能(neng)(neng)在本訴(su)(su)原(yuan)告的(de)(de)(de)訴(su)(su)請范(fan)圍內要求(qiu)減(jian)(jian)輕或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)免除自己(ji)的(de)(de)(de)責任，發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)如果認為工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質(zhi)量(liang)不(bu)合格(ge)(ge)，可以提(ti)出(chu)(chu)違約(yue)金(jin)請求(qiu)或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)賠償修(xiu)理(li)、返工(gong)(gong)、改建費(fei)用(yong)等(deng)損失(shi)主(zhu)張(zhang)，但發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)主(zhu)張(zhang)并(bing)不(bu)能(neng)(neng)直接減(jian)(jian)輕或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)免除其支付工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)款(kuan)(kuan)的(de)(de)(de)義務。因此(ci)，發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)以抗(kang)辯(bian)(bian)的(de)(de)(de)方(fang)式主(zhu)張(zhang)工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質(zhi)量(liang)不(bu)合格(ge)(ge)請求(qiu)少(shao)付或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)不(bu)付工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)款(kuan)(kuan)時，人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)民法(fa)院需釋明其應提(ti)出(chu)(chu)反訴(su)(su)或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)(zhe)另行起(qi)訴(su)(su)。如果發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)提(ti)出(chu)(chu)反訴(su)(su)的(de)(de)(de)，人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)民法(fa)院可以和承包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)的(de)(de)(de)本訴(su)(su)請求(qiu)合并(bing)審理(li)。如果發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)堅持提(ti)出(chu)(chu)抗(kang)辯(bian)(bian)的(de)(de)(de)，人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)民法(fa)院應駁回其抗(kang)辯(bian)(bian)主(zhu)張(zhang)。

第(di)八條 有(you)下列(lie)情形之一，承包人(ren)請(qing)求發(fa)包人(ren)返還工程質(zhi)量(liang)保證金(jin)的，人(ren)民法院應予支持(chi)：

（一）當事人約定的工程質量保證金(jin)返還期限(xian)屆滿(man)。

（二）當(dang)事(shi)人未約定(ding)工程質量保證金(jin)返(fan)還期限的(de)，自建設工程通過竣工驗收之日起滿二年。

（三）因發(fa)包人原因建設工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)未按約(yue)定期(qi)限(xian)進行竣工(gong)(gong)驗收(shou)的，自承包人提交(jiao)工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)竣工(gong)(gong)驗收(shou)報告九(jiu)十日后起當(dang)事(shi)人約(yue)定的工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)質(zhi)量保證金(jin)返還期(qi)限(xian)屆滿(man)；當(dang)事(shi)人未約(yue)定工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)質(zhi)量保證金(jin)返還期(qi)限(xian)的，自承包人提交(jiao)工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)竣工(gong)(gong)驗收(shou)報告九(jiu)十日后起滿(man)二年(nian)。

發包(bao)人返還(huan)工(gong)程(cheng)質量保(bao)證(zheng)金后，不影響承包(bao)人根據合同約定或者(zhe)法(fa)律(lv)規定履(lv)行工(gong)程(cheng)保(bao)修義務。

解讀：建(jian)設(she)工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)質(zhi)量保(bao)證金(jin)(jin)一(yi)(yi)般是指(zhi)發包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)與(yu)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)在(zai)建(jian)設(she)工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)合同中(zhong)約定(ding)(ding)，從應(ying)付的工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)款中(zhong)預留，用以(yi)保(bao)證承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)在(zai)缺(que)陷(xian)責(ze)(ze)任期內對建(jian)設(she)工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)出現的缺(que)陷(xian)進行維修的資(zi)金(jin)(jin)。缺(que)陷(xian)責(ze)(ze)任期內，承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)負責(ze)(ze)對工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)出現的各種缺(que)陷(xian)承(cheng)擔(dan)維修、鑒(jian)定(ding)(ding)等義務；如(ru)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)不(bu)履(lv)行缺(que)陷(xian)修復義務，發包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)可以(yi)按照合同約定(ding)(ding)扣除質(zhi)量保(bao)證金(jin)(jin)，并由承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)承(cheng)擔(dan)違約責(ze)(ze)任。本條第一(yi)(yi)款規定(ding)(ding)了保(bao)證金(jin)(jin)何時返(fan)還(huan)的三種情形：1、有約定從約定；2、未約定(ding)保證金返還期限但約定(ding)了竣(jun)工驗收日的，按(an)建設(she)工程(cheng)通過(guo)竣(jun)工驗收之日起(qi)滿二年(nian)；3、因發(fa)包(bao)(bao)人原因工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)未按約定期(qi)限(xian)竣(jun)工(gong)驗收的，此(ci)時再區分兩種情況(kuang)，一(yi)是(shi)如果(guo)當事人約定了保(bao)證金返還期(qi)限(xian)的，從(cong)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人提交工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)竣(jun)工(gong)驗收報告90日(ri)后開始起算約(yue)(yue)定的保證(zheng)金(jin)(jin)返還期限(xian)屆滿。二(er)是如果當事人(ren)(ren)未(wei)約(yue)(yue)定保證(zheng)金(jin)(jin)返還期限(xian)的，從承(cheng)包人(ren)(ren)提交工程竣工驗收報告90日后(hou)起算(suan)二年，二年屆滿后(hou)承包人才能主張返還。

本條第二款是關于保(bao)證金退還和承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)保(bao)修(xiu)(xiu)(xiu)義務(wu)之(zhi)間關系(xi)的規定。工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)保(bao)修(xiu)(xiu)(xiu)期是指自工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)竣工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)驗(yan)收合格(ge)之(zhi)日起，在正(zheng)常使(shi)用(yong)條件下承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)對工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)擔保(bao)修(xiu)(xiu)(xiu)義務(wu)的最(zui)低期限。承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)對建設工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)在保(bao)修(xiu)(xiu)(xiu)期內所承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)擔的保(bao)修(xiu)(xiu)(xiu)義務(wu)屬(shu)于法(fa)定義務(wu)，不(bu)能(neng)通過合同約定予以(yi)排除。發(fa)包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)向承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)返還工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質量保(bao)證金，只表明缺陷責任期已經屆(jie)滿，承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)無(wu)須再向發(fa)包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)擔工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質量缺陷責任，但不(bu)影響承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)向發(fa)包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)承(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)擔保(bao)修(xiu)(xiu)(xiu)義務(wu)。

第(di)九條 發包(bao)人將(jiang)依(yi)法不(bu)屬于必須招標(biao)的(de)建(jian)設工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)進行(xing)(xing)招標(biao)后，與(yu)承包(bao)人另(ling)行(xing)(xing)訂立(li)的(de)建(jian)設工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)施(shi)工(gong)合同(tong)(tong)背(bei)離中(zhong)標(biao)合同(tong)(tong)的(de)實質性內容，當(dang)事人請求以(yi)中(zhong)標(biao)合同(tong)(tong)作為(wei)結算建(jian)設工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價款依(yi)據的(de)，人民法院應予支持(chi)，但(dan)發包(bao)人與(yu)承包(bao)人因客觀情況發生了在招標(biao)投標(biao)時難(nan)以(yi)預見的(de)變化而另(ling)行(xing)(xing)訂立(li)建(jian)設工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)施(shi)工(gong)合同(tong)(tong)的(de)除(chu)外。

解讀：本(ben)條(tiao)規定了(le)針(zhen)對(dui)不屬于必須招(zhao)標(biao)的(de)建設工(gong)程(cheng)，招(zhao)標(biao)后當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)又另(ling)行(xing)訂立了(le)背離(li)中標(biao)合(he)(he)(he)同實質性內容(rong)的(de)合(he)(he)(he)同時(shi)(shi)，仍需根據當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)請(qing)求以中標(biao)合(he)(he)(he)同作為結算依據。同時(shi)(shi)，如果當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)在招(zhao)標(biao)投標(biao)完成后，因(yin)客觀情況發生了(le)變化，確需另(ling)行(xing)訂立建設工(gong)程(cheng)施工(gong)合(he)(he)(he)同的(de)，基于合(he)(he)(he)同自由(you)的(de)考慮，人(ren)(ren)民法院(yuan)允許(xu)當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)按照另(ling)行(xing)訂立的(de)合(he)(he)(he)同進行(xing)結算。

第十(shi)條 當事人簽訂的建(jian)設工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)施工(gong)合同與招(zhao)標(biao)文件(jian)、投(tou)標(biao)文件(jian)、中(zhong)標(biao)通知(zhi)書載明的工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)范圍、建(jian)設工(gong)期、工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質量、工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款不一(yi)致，一(yi)方(fang)當事人請求(qiu)將(jiang)招(zhao)標(biao)文件(jian)、投(tou)標(biao)文件(jian)、中(zhong)標(biao)通知(zhi)書作(zuo)為結(jie)算(suan)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款的依據的，人民法院(yuan)應予支持。

解讀：本(ben)條強調當事(shi)人(ren)(ren)(ren)背離合(he)同實(shi)質性內(nei)容而另(ling)行簽訂建設工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)施工(gong)合(he)同時(shi)，無(wu)論該合(he)同是用(yong)于備(bei)案(an)或者實(shi)際(ji)履行所需(xu)，結算(suan)時(shi)仍須以招(zhao)標(biao)(biao)(biao)文(wen)件、投(tou)標(biao)(biao)(biao)文(wen)件、中(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)(biao)(biao)通(tong)(tong)知(zhi)書(shu)(shu)為依據(ju)。現實(shi)中(zhong)(zhong)，當事(shi)人(ren)(ren)(ren)之(zhi)間可能存(cun)在(zai)招(zhao)投(tou)標(biao)(biao)(biao)文(wen)件及中(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)(biao)(biao)通(tong)(tong)知(zhi)書(shu)(shu)、中(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)(biao)(biao)合(he)同、備(bei)案(an)合(he)同、實(shi)際(ji)履行的(de)合(he)同等(deng)四(si)份文(wen)本(ben)。招(zhao)投(tou)標(biao)(biao)(biao)文(wen)件和(he)中(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)(biao)(biao)通(tong)(tong)知(zhi)書(shu)(shu)屬于當事(shi)人(ren)(ren)(ren)訂立(li)合(he)同過程(cheng)(cheng)中(zhong)(zhong)的(de)原始(shi)文(wen)件，且招(zhao)標(biao)(biao)(biao)投(tou)標(biao)(biao)(biao)法第四(si)十(shi)六條明確規定(ding)，招(zhao)標(biao)(biao)(biao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)和(he)中(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)(biao)(biao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)應當自(zi)中(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)(biao)(biao)通(tong)(tong)知(zhi)書(shu)(shu)發出之(zhi)日起(qi)三十(shi)日內(nei)，按(an)照招(zhao)標(biao)(biao)(biao)文(wen)件和(he)中(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)(biao)(biao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)的(de)投(tou)標(biao)(biao)(biao)文(wen)件訂立(li)書(shu)(shu)面合(he)同，故(gu)如果就合(he)同實(shi)質性內(nei)容存(cun)在(zai)多份合(he)同文(wen)本(ben)時(shi)，以招(zhao)標(biao)(biao)(biao)文(wen)件、投(tou)標(biao)(biao)(biao)文(wen)件、中(zhong)(zhong)標(biao)(biao)(biao)通(tong)(tong)知(zhi)書(shu)(shu)作為結算(suan)依據(ju)。

第(di)十(shi)一條(tiao) 當事(shi)人(ren)(ren)就同一(yi)(yi)建設工(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)訂立(li)的數份建設工(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)施工(gong)(gong)(gong)合(he)同均(jun)無效，但(dan)建設工(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質量合(he)格，一(yi)(yi)方當事(shi)人(ren)(ren)請求參照實際履行(xing)的合(he)同結(jie)算(suan)建設工(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款的，人(ren)(ren)民法院應予支持。

實際履行(xing)的(de)合同難(nan)以(yi)確定，當事人請求參照最后簽訂的(de)合同結(jie)算建設工程價款的(de)，人民法院應予支持。

解(jie)讀：本(ben)(ben)條(tiao)確立了(le)在數份(fen)建設工程施工合(he)同均(jun)無(wu)效時結算規則。當事人就同一建設工程前后(hou)訂(ding)立了(le)數份(fen)合(he)同文本(ben)(ben)，但如果(guo)均(jun)被認定為無(wu)效，1、應(ying)參照實際履行的合(he)同進行結算；2、實(shi)際履行(xing)(xing)的(de)合(he)同(tong)難(nan)以(yi)確(que)定時(shi)，則參(can)照最(zui)(zui)(zui)后(hou)簽(qian)訂的(de)合(he)同(tong)進(jin)行(xing)(xing)結算(suan)(suan)。目的(de)是(shi)基(ji)于尊重當(dang)事人真實(shi)意(yi)思(si)表(biao)示的(de)考(kao)慮(lv)。即便難(nan)以(yi)確(que)定實(shi)際履行(xing)(xing)的(de)合(he)同(tong)而參(can)照最(zui)(zui)(zui)后(hou)簽(qian)訂的(de)合(he)同(tong)予以(yi)結算(suan)(suan)，也是(shi)在(zai)法律上推定最(zui)(zui)(zui)后(hou)簽(qian)訂的(de)合(he)同(tong)代表(biao)當(dang)事人最(zui)(zui)(zui)后(hou)的(de)意(yi)思(si)表(biao)示，此時(shi)按照最(zui)(zui)(zui)后(hou)簽(qian)訂的(de)合(he)同(tong)進(jin)行(xing)(xing)結算(suan)(suan)，對雙方都是(shi)公平的(de)。

第十二條 當事人(ren)在訴(su)訟(song)前(qian)已經對(dui)建(jian)設工(gong)程價款結算達成協議，訴(su)訟(song)中一方當事人(ren)申(shen)請(qing)對(dui)工(gong)程造價進行鑒定的，人(ren)民法(fa)院不予準許。

解讀：本(ben)條規定(ding)了當事人在起訴(su)(su)前已(yi)達成結(jie)算協(xie)議后不(bu)得在訴(su)(su)訟中又申(shen)請鑒(jian)定(ding)。根據《最高院民訴(su)(su)法解釋(shi)》第121條的(de)(de)(de)(de)規定(ding)，當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)提出鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)申(shen)請的(de)(de)(de)(de)，人(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)法院(yuan)需要就鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)事項對證明待證事實(shi)有(you)無意(yi)(yi)義，即鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)的(de)(de)(de)(de)必(bi)要性(xing)進行審查。若(ruo)當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)已(yi)(yi)經就工程價(jia)(jia)款結算(suan)(suan)達(da)成了(le)協(xie)議(yi)(yi)，表(biao)明當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)已(yi)(yi)自愿(yuan)達(da)成結算(suan)(suan)方(fang)面的(de)(de)(de)(de)合(he)同，根(gen)據誠實(shi)信用原則，當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)不得反(fan)悔。結算(suan)(suan)協(xie)議(yi)(yi)對雙方(fang)當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)均具有(you)約束(shu)力，一方(fang)當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)在訴訟中又申(shen)請對工程造價(jia)(jia)進行鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)的(de)(de)(de)(de)，相當(dang)于違背了(le)雙方(fang)已(yi)(yi)經達(da)成的(de)(de)(de)(de)結算(suan)(suan)協(xie)議(yi)(yi)。此(ci)時，當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)提出的(de)(de)(de)(de)鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)申(shen)請已(yi)(yi)無意(yi)(yi)義，人(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)法院(yuan)應按照當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)達(da)成的(de)(de)(de)(de)結算(suan)(suan)協(xie)議(yi)(yi)認定(ding)工程價(jia)(jia)款。

第十(shi)三條 當(dang)事人在訴訟(song)前(qian)共同委(wei)托有關機構(gou)、人員(yuan)對建設工程造價出具咨詢(xun)意見(jian)，訴訟(song)中一方(fang)當(dang)事人不認(ren)可該(gai)咨詢(xun)意見(jian)申請(qing)鑒定的，人民法(fa)院(yuan)應予準許，但雙方(fang)當(dang)事人明確表(biao)示受該(gai)咨詢(xun)意見(jian)約束的除外。

解讀：本(ben)條是(shi)訴訟(song)前(qian)當(dang)事人共同委托(tuo)造價(jia)咨(zi)詢(xun)(xun)的(de)規定(ding)。當(dang)事人在訴訟(song)前(qian)共同委托(tuo)有關機構、人員對建(jian)設工程造價(jia)出具的(de)意見(jian)，本(ben)質上屬于(yu)專業咨(zi)詢(xun)(xun)意見(jian)，不屬于(yu)民訴法63條規定的(de)鑒(jian)定意(yi)(yi)見，不具有司法鑒(jian)定意(yi)(yi)見的(de)效(xiao)力(li)。進入訴訟后，一方(fang)當事人(ren)不認可之前的(de)造價咨詢意(yi)(yi)見而申請鑒(jian)定的(de)，人(ren)民(min)(min)法院應(ying)予準許(xu)。但當事人(ren)之前已明確(que)表示均受該(gai)咨詢意(yi)(yi)見約(yue)束(shu)的(de)，相當于雙方(fang)達成了委托他人(ren)結算的(de)協(xie)議(yi)，雙方(fang)均應(ying)遵守(shou)。在這種(zhong)情況下，一方(fang)當事人(ren)反悔(hui)，并在訴訟中申請鑒(jian)定的(de)，人(ren)民(min)(min)法院不應(ying)準許(xu)。

第十四條 當(dang)事(shi)(shi)人對工程造價、質量(liang)、修(xiu)復費(fei)用等專門性問(wen)題有爭議，人民法(fa)(fa)院認為需要鑒(jian)定的(de)，應(ying)當(dang)向負有舉(ju)證責任的(de)當(dang)事(shi)(shi)人釋(shi)明(ming)。當(dang)事(shi)(shi)人經釋(shi)明(ming)未申請鑒(jian)定，雖申請鑒(jian)定但未支付鑒(jian)定費(fei)用或者拒不提供相關材料的(de)，應(ying)當(dang)承(cheng)擔舉(ju)證不能的(de)法(fa)(fa)律(lv)后果。

一審(shen)訴(su)訟(song)(song)中負有(you)舉證責任(ren)的當事人未申請(qing)鑒(jian)(jian)定，雖申請(qing)鑒(jian)(jian)定但(dan)未支付鑒(jian)(jian)定費(fei)用或者拒不(bu)提供相關材(cai)料，二(er)審(shen)訴(su)訟(song)(song)中申請(qing)鑒(jian)(jian)定，人民(min)法院認為確有(you)必要的，應當依照(zhao)民(min)事訴(su)訟(song)(song)法第(di)(di)一百七十(shi)條第(di)(di)一款(kuan)第(di)(di)三項的規定處理(li)。

解讀：本條第一款規定(ding)了人民(min)法院釋(shi)明(ming)義(yi)務。有關(guan)工程造價、質量(liang)、修復費(fei)(fei)用(yong)等專(zhuan)門(men)性問(wen)題，需通(tong)過司法鑒(jian)定(ding)予以查明(ming)。實踐中，人民(min)法院認為當(dang)(dang)(dang)事(shi)(shi)人提交的(de)(de)證據仍(reng)不(bu)充分時，應依(yi)職權(quan)向當(dang)(dang)(dang)事(shi)(shi)人進(jin)(jin)行釋(shi)明(ming)，告知有必要(yao)申(shen)請鑒(jian)定(ding)，并說明(ming)不(bu)申(shen)請的(de)(de)法律后果。如(ru)果當(dang)(dang)(dang)事(shi)(shi)人經釋(shi)明(ming)后仍(reng)不(bu)申(shen)請鑒(jian)定(ding)，或(huo)者申(shen)請鑒(jian)定(ding)后不(bu)支付鑒(jian)定(ding)費(fei)(fei)用(yong)、不(bu)提供相關(guan)材料，導(dao)致鑒(jian)定(ding)程序無(wu)法進(jin)(jin)行，法院可以判定(ding)承擔(dan)舉證不(bu)能(neng)的(de)(de)不(bu)利后果。

本(ben)條第(di)二(er)(er)款規定了一審(shen)不申請鑒(jian)定，二(er)(er)審(shen)再申請鑒(jian)定時如何處理(li)。法(fa)院認為(wei)鑒(jian)定的(de)事項與(yu)案件(jian)基本(ben)事實有關(guan)，且不鑒(jian)定無法(fa)查明相關(guan)事實時，二(er)(er)審(shen)應同意(yi)申請。但(dan)二(er)(er)審(shen)法(fa)院可以依照(zhao)民訴法(fa)第(di)170條第(di)一(yi)(yi)款(kuan)(kuan)第(di)三項的(de)(de)規定(ding)，以事(shi)實(shi)不(bu)清(qing)為由發回(hui)一(yi)(yi)審(shen)(shen)重審(shen)(shen)，并由一(yi)(yi)審(shen)(shen)組織司法(fa)鑒定(ding)。應該(gai)注(zhu)意(yi)的(de)(de)是，本(ben)條第(di)二(er)款(kuan)(kuan)適用的(de)(de)前提是，一(yi)(yi)審(shen)(shen)未(wei)曾向當事(shi)人作出釋明。如果一(yi)(yi)審(shen)(shen)已告知對待證事(shi)實(shi)需(xu)要鑒定(ding)，以及不(bu)申(shen)請(qing)的(de)(de)后果后，仍未(wei)申(shen)請(qing)，二(er)審(shen)(shen)中又(you)申(shen)請(qing)的(de)(de)，法(fa)院應不(bu)再準(zhun)許，繼續由該(gai)當事(shi)人承(cheng)擔不(bu)利后果。

第十五條 人民法院準(zhun)許當(dang)事(shi)(shi)人的鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)申請(qing)后(hou)，應(ying)當(dang)根(gen)據(ju)當(dang)事(shi)(shi)人申請(qing)及查明案件(jian)事(shi)(shi)實的需要，確定(ding)(ding)委托鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)的事(shi)(shi)項、范(fan)圍、鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)期限等，并組織雙方當(dang)事(shi)(shi)人對爭(zheng)議的鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)材料進行(xing)質證(zheng)。

解(jie)讀：本條規定(ding)了人(ren)(ren)民(min)法院對于(yu)有爭議的鑒定(ding)材(cai)料需要組(zu)織質(zhi)證。鑒定(ding)材(cai)料屬于(yu)當事人(ren)(ren)提交的證據，人(ren)(ren)民(min)法院通(tong)常應嚴格(ge)按照民(min)訴法第68條“證據應(ying)當在法(fa)(fa)庭上出示，并由當事(shi)(shi)人(ren)相互(hu)質(zhi)(zhi)證”的(de)規定(ding)，對鑒(jian)(jian)(jian)定(ding)材料(liao)先(xian)組(zu)織(zhi)質(zhi)(zhi)證，再(zai)交(jiao)鑒(jian)(jian)(jian)定(ding)機(ji)構(gou)(gou)(gou)鑒(jian)(jian)(jian)定(ding)。如果將未經質(zhi)(zhi)證的(de)鑒(jian)(jian)(jian)定(ding)材料(liao)交(jiao)由鑒(jian)(jian)(jian)定(ding)機(ji)構(gou)(gou)(gou)自行甄別，需要時由鑒(jian)(jian)(jian)定(ding)機(ji)構(gou)(gou)(gou)自行和當事(shi)(shi)人(ren)核實，造(zao)成鑒(jian)(jian)(jian)定(ding)機(ji)構(gou)(gou)(gou)在一定(ding)程度上取代了人(ren)民法(fa)(fa)院(yuan)的(de)職能。但該種鑒(jian)(jian)(jian)定(ding)涉及的(de)材料(liao)繁(fan)多專業性極強(qiang)，因此為(wei)了提高審判效率，本條作(zuo)了部(bu)分(fen)變通，即允許人(ren)民法(fa)(fa)院(yuan)僅對當事(shi)(shi)人(ren)有爭議(yi)的(de)材料(liao)組(zu)織(zhi)質(zhi)(zhi)證，無爭議(yi)材料(liao)不需質(zhi)(zhi)證。

第十六(liu)條 人(ren)(ren)(ren)民法(fa)(fa)院應(ying)當(dang)(dang)組(zu)織當(dang)(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)對鑒(jian)定(ding)(ding)意(yi)見(jian)進行(xing)質證。鑒(jian)定(ding)(ding)人(ren)(ren)(ren)將當(dang)(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)有(you)爭議且未經質證的材料(liao)作為(wei)鑒(jian)定(ding)(ding)依據(ju)(ju)的，人(ren)(ren)(ren)民法(fa)(fa)院應(ying)當(dang)(dang)組(zu)織當(dang)(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)就(jiu)該(gai)部分材料(liao)進行(xing)質證。經質證認(ren)為(wei)不能作為(wei)鑒(jian)定(ding)(ding)依據(ju)(ju)的，根據(ju)(ju)該(gai)材料(liao)作出(chu)的鑒(jian)定(ding)(ding)意(yi)見(jian)不得作為(wei)認(ren)定(ding)(ding)案件事實的依據(ju)(ju)。

解讀：本條規定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)了人(ren)(ren)民(min)法院應當(dang)對鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)意(yi)見(jian)組織(zhi)質(zhi)(zhi)證(zheng)。對有爭議的(de)(de)鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)材(cai)料(liao)(liao)通(tong)常(chang)應先組織(zhi)質(zhi)(zhi)證(zheng)，再根(gen)(gen)據(ju)(ju)質(zhi)(zhi)證(zheng)情(qing)況提(ti)交鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)機構鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)。鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)機構出(chu)具的(de)(de)鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)意(yi)見(jian)，屬于新(xin)的(de)(de)證(zheng)據(ju)(ju)，需要再組織(zhi)質(zhi)(zhi)證(zheng)。在(zai)對鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)意(yi)見(jian)質(zhi)(zhi)證(zheng)的(de)(de)過程中(zhong)，如果(guo)發現鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)機構將當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)有爭議且未經質(zhi)(zhi)證(zheng)的(de)(de)材(cai)料(liao)(liao)作為(wei)根(gen)(gen)據(ju)(ju)的(de)(de)，為(wei)提(ti)高訴訟(song)效率，人(ren)(ren)民(min)法院應組織(zhi)補(bu)充質(zhi)(zhi)證(zheng)，經補(bu)充質(zhi)(zhi)證(zheng)不(bu)能作為(wei)鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)材(cai)料(liao)(liao)的(de)(de)，根(gen)(gen)據(ju)(ju)該材(cai)料(liao)(liao)所作的(de)(de)鑒(jian)(jian)定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)意(yi)見(jian)不(bu)能成(cheng)為(wei)認定(ding)(ding)(ding)(ding)案(an)件事實的(de)(de)根(gen)(gen)據(ju)(ju)。

第(di)十七條 與發(fa)包人(ren)訂立建設工程(cheng)施工合(he)同(tong)的承(cheng)包人(ren)，根(gen)據合(he)同(tong)法第二(er)百八十六條規定請(qing)求其(qi)承(cheng)建工程(cheng)的價(jia)款(kuan)就(jiu)工程(cheng)折(zhe)價(jia)或者拍賣的價(jia)款(kuan)優先受償(chang)的，人(ren)民法院應予支(zhi)持。

解讀：本(ben)(ben)條規(gui)定(ding)了(le)承包人享有建設(she)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款優(you)先(xian)受償權，同時也排(pai)除了(le)其他(ta)主體能夠請求建設(she)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款優(you)先(xian)受償權。本(ben)(ben)條遵(zun)循合(he)同法(fa)第286條和合同(tong)相對性原(yuan)則，規定承(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)就工(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)(kuan)享有(you)優(you)先受(shou)償(chang)權(quan)。實際(ji)施工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)和發包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)沒有(you)直接(jie)的(de)合同(tong)關系，對發包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)并不當然享有(you)工(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)(kuan)請求權(quan)，也就沒有(you)理由賦予(yu)其優(you)先受(shou)償(chang)權(quan)。此外，轉包(bao)(bao)、違法分包(bao)(bao)均被法律明(ming)確禁止(zhi)，如果再賦予(yu)實際(ji)施工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)優(you)先受(shou)償(chang)權(quan)，會對建設工(gong)程(cheng)市場(chang)秩序產生負面(mian)作用。故享有(you)優(you)先受(shou)償(chang)權(quan)的(de)主體只有(you)與發包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)訂立施工(gong)合同(tong)的(de)承(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)，不包(bao)(bao)括勘察人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)、設計人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)、實際(ji)施工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)以及次(ci)承(cheng)(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)和合法的(de)分包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)。

第十八條 裝(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)修(xiu)工(gong)(gong)程的(de)(de)承包人(ren)，請求裝(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)修(xiu)工(gong)(gong)程價款(kuan)就該(gai)裝(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)修(xiu)工(gong)(gong)程折價或者拍(pai)賣的(de)(de)價款(kuan)優先受償(chang)的(de)(de)，人(ren)民法院應予(yu)支持，但裝(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)修(xiu)工(gong)(gong)程的(de)(de)發(fa)包人(ren)不是該(gai)建筑物的(de)(de)所有(you)權人(ren)的(de)(de)除外。

解讀：本條規定(ding)了裝(zhuang)(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)(zhuang)修(xiu)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)的(de)(de)(de)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人對(dui)裝(zhuang)(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)(zhuang)修(xiu)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)(jia)(jia)款(kuan)享有優先(xian)受(shou)償(chang)權(quan)(quan)。裝(zhuang)(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)(zhuang)修(xiu)的(de)(de)(de)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人對(dui)發(fa)包(bao)(bao)人欠(qian)付(fu)的(de)(de)(de)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)(jia)(jia)款(kuan)就裝(zhuang)(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)(zhuang)修(xiu)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)對(dui)應的(de)(de)(de)價(jia)(jia)(jia)值范圍(wei)內享有優先(xian)受(shou)償(chang)權(quan)(quan)，但對(dui)發(fa)包(bao)(bao)人概念(nian)予以限制，即該發(fa)包(bao)(bao)人應當是該建(jian)筑(zhu)物的(de)(de)(de)所有權(quan)(quan)人。裝(zhuang)(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)(zhuang)修(xiu)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)是附(fu)屬于建(jian)筑(zhu)物主(zhu)體(ti)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)的(de)(de)(de)，如果發(fa)包(bao)(bao)人不是所有權(quan)(quan)人，說(shuo)明(ming)建(jian)筑(zhu)物所有權(quan)(quan)人不是欠(qian)付(fu)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)款(kuan)的(de)(de)(de)債(zhai)務人，不可能通過對(dui)該建(jian)筑(zhu)物進行折價(jia)(jia)(jia)或者拍(pai)賣來(lai)償(chang)還債(zhai)務，故此(ci)時不能認定(ding)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人對(dui)裝(zhuang)(zhuang)飾(shi)裝(zhuang)(zhuang)修(xiu)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)的(de)(de)(de)價(jia)(jia)(jia)款(kuan)享有優先(xian)受(shou)償(chang)權(quan)(quan)。

第十九(jiu)條 建設工(gong)程(cheng)質量合格，承包人請求其承建工(gong)程(cheng)的(de)(de)價(jia)(jia)款(kuan)就(jiu)工(gong)程(cheng)折價(jia)(jia)或(huo)者拍賣的(de)(de)價(jia)(jia)款(kuan)優先受(shou)償的(de)(de)，人民法院應予支持。

解讀：本條(tiao)(tiao)規定了無(wu)論(lun)合同效力如(ru)何，只要(yao)(yao)工(gong)程(cheng)質量合格，承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)就能享有(you)建(jian)設(she)(she)工(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)(kuan)優(you)先受償(chang)(chang)權(quan)。現(xian)實(shi)中(zhong)，無(wu)效合同普(pu)遍存在。如(ru)果將優(you)先受償(chang)(chang)權(quan)限定于有(you)效合同的(de)(de)(de)范疇(chou)，則(ze)會導致大量承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)對(dui)建(jian)設(she)(she)工(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)(kuan)失去優(you)先受償(chang)(chang)權(quan)，最終(zhong)使(shi)得承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)的(de)(de)(de)工(gong)程(cheng)債權(quan)無(wu)法(fa)受償(chang)(chang)，影(ying)響(xiang)到農民工(gong)工(gong)資權(quan)益的(de)(de)(de)實(shi)現(xian)。因此，本條(tiao)(tiao)明確(que)，只要(yao)(yao)建(jian)設(she)(she)工(gong)程(cheng)質量確(que)認合格，即使(shi)合同無(wu)效，對(dui)于承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)提出(chu)的(de)(de)(de)建(jian)設(she)(she)工(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)(kuan)優(you)先受償(chang)(chang)權(quan)主(zhu)張，人(ren)(ren)民法(fa)院均(jun)應予(yu)以支持。

第二十條 未竣工的(de)建(jian)設(she)工程(cheng)質(zhi)量合格，承包人(ren)(ren)請求其承建(jian)工程(cheng)的(de)價(jia)款就(jiu)其承建(jian)工程(cheng)部(bu)分(fen)折價(jia)或者(zhe)拍賣的(de)價(jia)款優先受償的(de)，人(ren)(ren)民法院應(ying)予支(zhi)持。

解讀(du)：本條規定了(le)未竣工(gong)(gong)的建(jian)設工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)，只要工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)質量合(he)格，承包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)就能(neng)享有建(jian)設工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)(jia)款(kuan)(kuan)優先受償權(quan)。建(jian)設工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)在實踐(jian)中的情況復雜，如果發包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)因資金短缺等原因導致中途停工(gong)(gong)，承包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)無(wu)法從發包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)處獲得工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)進度(du)款(kuan)(kuan)，又不能(neng)對(dui)(dui)現有工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)折價(jia)(jia)或拍(pai)賣價(jia)(jia)款(kuan)(kuan)主張優先受償權(quan)，對(dui)(dui)承包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)不公平。且(qie)實踐(jian)中有關(guan)工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)(jia)款(kuan)(kuan)的支(zhi)付(fu)(fu)期(qi)限和方式多種多樣，包(bao)(bao)(bao)括預付(fu)(fu)款(kuan)(kuan)的支(zhi)付(fu)(fu)、進度(du)款(kuan)(kuan)的支(zhi)付(fu)(fu)、竣工(gong)(gong)后(hou)付(fu)(fu)款(kuan)(kuan)、工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)尾(wei)款(kuan)(kuan)的支(zhi)付(fu)(fu)等。并不是只有工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)竣工(gong)(gong)驗收后(hou)，承包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)才能(neng)向發包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)主張工(gong)(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)(jia)款(kuan)(kuan)。從合(he)同法第286條(tiao)(tiao)條(tiao)(tiao)文(wen)看，也沒有要(yao)求(qiu)承包(bao)(bao)人(ren)必須以工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)竣(jun)工(gong)驗收作為享有優先受償(chang)權(quan)的先決(jue)條(tiao)(tiao)件。在中途停(ting)工(gong)導致合(he)同(tong)解除等(deng)原因下，對于未竣(jun)工(gong)的建設(she)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)，只要(yao)承包(bao)(bao)人(ren)能舉(ju)證(zheng)證(zheng)明工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)質量(liang)合(he)格(ge)，就能請求(qiu)建設(she)工(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價款(kuan)優先受償(chang)權(quan)。

第二十一條(tiao) 承包人建設工程(cheng)價(jia)款優先受償(chang)的范(fan)圍(wei)依照國務院(yuan)有關(guan)行(xing)政主管(guan)部門關(guan)于(yu)建設工程(cheng)價(jia)款范(fan)圍(wei)的規定確定。

承包人就逾期支(zhi)付建設工程(cheng)價(jia)款的利息、違(wei)約金、損害賠償金等主張優先受償的，人民法院不予支(zhi)持。

解(jie)讀(du)：本條第一款是關于(yu)建(jian)設(she)工(gong)程價(jia)款優先受償(chang)權行(xing)使范圍(wei)的(de)規定。建(jian)筑工(gong)程價(jia)款包(bao)括承(cheng)包(bao)人為建(jian)設(she)工(gong)程應(ying)當支付(fu)的(de)工(gong)作人員報(bao)酬、材料款等實際(ji)支出(chu)的(de)費(fei)用，不包(bao)括承(cheng)包(bao)人因發包(bao)人違(wei)約(yue)所造成(cheng)的(de)損失。結合(he)住房和城鄉(xiang)建(jian)設(she)部(bu)于(yu)2013年頒發的(de)《建設工程(cheng)工程(cheng)量清單計價規范》第1.0.3條以及住房和城鄉建設(she)部(bu)、財政(zheng)部(bu)于(yu)2013年發布的(de)(de)《建(jian)筑安裝工(gong)(gong)程費(fei)(fei)用(yong)(yong)項目組成》第(di)一條(tiao)第(di)一項等(deng)相關行政主管部門的(de)(de)意見，建(jian)設工(gong)(gong)程的(de)(de)價款(kuan)不應(ying)僅(jin)包(bao)括(kuo)承包(bao)人為建(jian)設工(gong)(gong)程應(ying)當支付(fu)的(de)(de)工(gong)(gong)作人員報(bao)酬、材料款(kuan)等(deng)實際支出的(de)(de)費(fei)(fei)用(yong)(yong)，還(huan)應(ying)當包(bao)括(kuo)施工(gong)(gong)機具使用(yong)(yong)費(fei)(fei)、企(qi)業管理費(fei)(fei)、利潤、規費(fei)(fei)和稅金等(deng)。

本條第二款(kuan)明確了哪些債(zhai)權(quan)請求不屬于建設(she)工程(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)優先受償的(de)范(fan)圍，將違約(yue)金(jin)(jin)、損害賠償金(jin)(jin)、逾(yu)期支(zhi)付(fu)工程(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)產生的(de)利(li)息均排除在外，維護了承包人、發包人和包括(kuo)抵押權(quan)人在內(nei)的(de)其他債(zhai)權(quan)人之(zhi)間(jian)的(de)利(li)益平衡。

第二十二條 承包人行使建設工程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款優先受(shou)償權的期限為(wei)六個月，自發包人應當給付建設工程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款之(zhi)日起(qi)算。

解(jie)讀：本條(tiao)是優(you)(you)先(xian)受償(chang)權(quan)行使(shi)期限和起算(suan)(suan)(suan)點的(de)(de)(de)規定(ding)(ding)。行使(shi)期限確(que)定(ding)(ding)為(wei)六個(ge)月(yue)(yue)，自發包(bao)(bao)人應(ying)當給付(fu)建設(she)(she)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)之(zhi)(zhi)日(ri)(ri)起算(suan)(suan)(suan)，修(xiu)正了《最(zui)高人民法院關于建設(she)(she)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)優(you)(you)先(xian)受償(chang)權(quan)問題的(de)(de)(de)批復》第(di)四(si)條(tiao)從建設(she)(she)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)竣(jun)(jun)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)之(zhi)(zhi)日(ri)(ri)或者(zhe)建設(she)(she)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)合(he)同約定(ding)(ding)的(de)(de)(de)竣(jun)(jun)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)之(zhi)(zhi)日(ri)(ri)起算(suan)(suan)(suan)的(de)(de)(de)規定(ding)(ding)。由于建設(she)(she)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)結(jie)算(suan)(suan)(suan)周期長，流(liu)程(cheng)(cheng)較為(wei)復雜，工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)竣(jun)(jun)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)后六個(ge)月(yue)(yue)的(de)(de)(de)時間內往往難以完(wan)成結(jie)算(suan)(suan)(suan)，現實中(zhong)很多尚未(wei)結(jie)算(suan)(suan)(suan)完(wan)成就已經(jing)超過了優(you)(you)先(xian)受償(chang)權(quan)的(de)(de)(de)行使(shi)期限，對承包(bao)(bao)人顯然(ran)不公平。本條(tiao)規定(ding)(ding)建設(she)(she)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)優(you)(you)先(xian)受償(chang)權(quan)自發包(bao)(bao)人應(ying)當給付(fu)工(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)程(cheng)(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)之(zhi)(zhi)日(ri)(ri)起算(suan)(suan)(suan)，有利(li)(li)于保護(hu)承包(bao)(bao)人的(de)(de)(de)利(li)(li)益，也使(shi)得(de)優(you)(you)先(xian)受償(chang)權(quan)的(de)(de)(de)制度(du)真正得(de)以落(luo)實。

第二十三條 發包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)與承包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)約(yue)定放棄或者(zhe)限制建設(she)工(gong)程(cheng)價款(kuan)優先(xian)(xian)受償權，損害建筑工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)利益，發包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)根據該約(yue)定主(zhu)張承包(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)不(bu)享有(you)建設(she)工(gong)程(cheng)價款(kuan)優先(xian)(xian)受償權的，人(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)法院不(bu)予支持。

解讀(du)：本條(tiao)是關于(yu)當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)能(neng)否事先(xian)(xian)約(yue)定放(fang)棄(qi)或(huo)(huo)者(zhe)限(xian)制優(you)先(xian)(xian)受(shou)(shou)(shou)償(chang)(chang)權行使(shi)的(de)(de)規定。發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)和(he)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)原則上可(ke)以自由協商約(yue)定放(fang)棄(qi)或(huo)(huo)者(zhe)限(xian)制建(jian)(jian)設工(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)優(you)先(xian)(xian)受(shou)(shou)(shou)償(chang)(chang)權的(de)(de)行使(shi)，但如(ru)果(guo)雙(shuang)方(fang)的(de)(de)約(yue)定損害到(dao)建(jian)(jian)筑工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)利(li)益(yi)(yi)，該(gai)部分約(yue)定無效。現實中，承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)處(chu)于(yu)相對弱勢(shi)的(de)(de)地(di)(di)位，如(ru)果(guo)允許當(dang)事人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)約(yue)定方(fang)式任意處(chu)分優(you)先(xian)(xian)受(shou)(shou)(shou)償(chang)(chang)權，可(ke)能(neng)引誘發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)利(li)用自己的(de)(de)優(you)勢(shi)地(di)(di)位，強(qiang)制要求(qiu)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)接受(shou)(shou)(shou)放(fang)棄(qi)或(huo)(huo)者(zhe)限(xian)制優(you)先(xian)(xian)受(shou)(shou)(shou)償(chang)(chang)權行使(shi)的(de)(de)條(tiao)款(kuan)，這不僅會損害到(dao)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)的(de)(de)利(li)益(yi)(yi)，還可(ke)能(neng)影(ying)響到(dao)農民工(gong)工(gong)資的(de)(de)實現。因此，如(ru)果(guo)承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)事先(xian)(xian)放(fang)棄(qi)或(huo)(huo)者(zhe)限(xian)制優(you)先(xian)(xian)受(shou)(shou)(shou)償(chang)(chang)權，使(shi)得承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)無充(chong)分的(de)(de)責任財產支(zhi)付建(jian)(jian)筑工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)工(gong)資等債務，則可(ke)以認定雙(shuang)方(fang)的(de)(de)約(yue)定損害了建(jian)(jian)筑工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)的(de)(de)利(li)益(yi)(yi)。在這種情形下，發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)根(gen)據雙(shuang)方(fang)事先(xian)(xian)的(de)(de)約(yue)定抗(kang)辯承(cheng)包(bao)(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)不再享(xiang)有(you)建(jian)(jian)設工(gong)程(cheng)價(jia)款(kuan)優(you)先(xian)(xian)受(shou)(shou)(shou)償(chang)(chang)權的(de)(de)，人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)民法院不予支(zhi)持。

第二(er)十四(si)條 實際施工人(ren)(ren)以發包(bao)人(ren)(ren)為(wei)被告(gao)主(zhu)張權利的(de)，人(ren)(ren)民法院(yuan)應(ying)當追加轉包(bao)人(ren)(ren)或者違(wei)法分包(bao)人(ren)(ren)為(wei)本案第三(san)人(ren)(ren)，在查明發包(bao)人(ren)(ren)欠付轉包(bao)人(ren)(ren)或者違(wei)法分包(bao)人(ren)(ren)建設工程(cheng)價款的(de)數額(e)后(hou)，判決發包(bao)人(ren)(ren)在欠付建設工程(cheng)價款范圍內對實際施工人(ren)(ren)承擔責任。

解讀(du)：本條是關于實(shi)際(ji)(ji)施(shi)工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)向(xiang)沒有直(zhi)(zhi)接(jie)合(he)同(tong)關系的(de)發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)提起(qi)訴(su)訟(song)的(de)規定。為了保(bao)護實(shi)際(ji)(ji)施(shi)工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)所代(dai)表的(de)農民工(gong)的(de)合(he)法(fa)權(quan)益(yi)，本條對(dui)合(he)同(tong)相對(dui)性(xing)原則進行(xing)了適度突破，即允許實(shi)際(ji)(ji)施(shi)工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)直(zhi)(zhi)接(jie)向(xiang)發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)提起(qi)訴(su)訟(song)。在實(shi)際(ji)(ji)施(shi)工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)對(dui)發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)提起(qi)訴(su)訟(song)后，人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)民法(fa)院應(ying)當根據當事人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)申請或者依(yi)據職權(quan)追加實(shi)際(ji)(ji)施(shi)工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)和發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)之間的(de)轉包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)或者違(wei)法(fa)分包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)作為第三人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)參(can)加訴(su)訟(song)，并在查清發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)欠(qian)付轉包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)或者違(wei)法(fa)分包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)建(jian)設工(gong)程價(jia)款的(de)數額后，判決發(fa)(fa)包(bao)(bao)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)在欠(qian)付建(jian)設工(gong)程價(jia)款范(fan)圍內(nei)對(dui)實(shi)際(ji)(ji)施(shi)工(gong)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)承擔清償責任。

第二十五(wu)條 實際(ji)施工人(ren)(ren)根據合同(tong)法第七(qi)十三條規定(ding)，以轉包(bao)人(ren)(ren)或者違法分包(bao)人(ren)(ren)怠于向發包(bao)人(ren)(ren)行使到期債權，對其(qi)造(zao)成(cheng)損害為由(you)，提起代位權訴訟的，人(ren)(ren)民法院應予支持(chi)。

解(jie)讀(du)：本條(tiao)是關于(yu)實際(ji)施工(gong)人代位(wei)(wei)權訴訟(song)的規定(ding)。當轉包(bao)(bao)人或者違法(fa)分包(bao)(bao)人怠于(yu)向(xiang)發包(bao)(bao)人行(xing)使到期債權時，實際(ji)施工(gong)人有權行(xing)使代位(wei)(wei)權訴訟(song)。實際(ji)施工(gong)人行(xing)使代位(wei)(wei)權訴訟(song)和按照(zhao)第(di)二十四條(tiao)的規定(ding)直接起訴發包(bao)(bao)人，屬(shu)于(yu)兩種(zhong)不同的救(jiu)濟路(lu)(lu)徑。提起代位(wei)(wei)權訴訟(song)的條(tiao)件比(bi)較苛刻，但(dan)能主張(zhang)建設工(gong)程(cheng)價款優先受(shou)償權，而直接起訴發包(bao)(bao)人的條(tiao)件相對比(bi)較簡單，但(dan)不能主張(zhang)建設工(gong)程(cheng)價款優先受(shou)償權。實際(ji)施工(gong)人可以(yi)擇一(yi)而用(yong)，也(ye)可以(yi)在前一(yi)條(tiao)路(lu)(lu)徑行(xing)不通(tong)時再選(xuan)擇另一(yi)條(tiao)路(lu)(lu)徑，但(dan)不能同時選(xuan)擇兩條(tiao)路(lu)(lu)徑。

第二十六條 本解(jie)釋自2019年2月1日(ri)起(qi)施行。