|
*尊敬的用户，您好！本篇仅为该案例的英文摘要。北大法宝提供单独的翻译服务，如需整篇翻译，请发邮件至database@chinalawinfo.com，或致电86
(10) 8268-9699进行咨询。
*Dear user, this document contains only a
summary of the respective judicial case. To request a full-text translation as an
additional service, please contact us at: + 86 (10) 8268-9699 database@chinalawinfo.com
|
|
Yantai Kangda Real Estate Co., Ltd. v. Shandong Tianyu Technology Development Co., Ltd. (retrial of case regarding dispute over cooperative development contract)
(retrial of case regarding dispute over cooperative development contract)
烟台康达置业有限公司诉山东天宇科技开发有限公司合作开发合同纠纷再审案
|
[Key Terms]
cooperative development contract ; actual constructor ; project price
[核心术语]
合作开发合同;实际施工人;工程价款
|
[Disputed Issues]
Where a project construction party promises that if the project price exceeds a certain amount and the the excess is assumed by itself, the commitment is valid.
[争议焦点]
工程建设方承诺如果工程价款超过一定数额超出部分由其自行承担的，承诺有效。
|
[Case Summary]
A project cooperative development contract stipulates that owners shall bear the construction cost and divide parts of the land to the construction party in return and then the construction party is responsible for the construction. During the process of performance the construction party signs a construction contract with constructors and pays for parts of the project to fulfill the obligation of cooperative development. Then...
[案例要旨]
工程合作开发合同约定业主方承担建设费用并分割部分土地给建设方作为回报建设方负责施工。履行过程中建设方为履行合作开发义务...
|
Full-text omitted. | | 烟台康达置业有限公司诉山东天宇科技开发有限公司合作开发合同纠纷再审案 |
| | 最高人民法院 |
| | 民事判决书 |
| | (2016)最高法民申2000号 |
| | 再审申请人（一审原告、二审被上诉人）：烟台康达置业有限公司。 |
| | 法定代表人：逄传兰，该公司执行董事。 |
| | 委托诉讼代理人：李寅旭，山东常春藤律师事务所律师。 |
| | 被申请人（一审被告、二审上诉人）：山东天宇科技开发有限公司。 |
| | 法定代表人：张翠燕，该公司经理。 |
| | 再审申请人烟台康达置业有限公司（以下简称康达公司）因与被申请人山东天宇开发有限公司（以下简称天宇公司）合作开发合同纠纷一案，不服山东省高级人民法院（2015）鲁民一终字第390号民事判决，向本院申请再审。本院依法组成合议庭进行了审查，现已审查终结。 |
| | 康达公司申请再审称，其依据《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百条第二项、第三项、第八项规定申请再审。事实和理由：（一）二审判决认定的基本事实缺乏证据证明。1.康达公司一审中已提交建材购买合同、付款凭证等证据，足以证明康达公司支付了所有的建材款,不必申请主建材的造价鉴定。二审判决以康达公司对案涉建材未申请鉴定为由认定建材款不是康达公司支付错误。2.一审判决认定康达公司支付的案涉工程款为595.758万元，二审判决认为康达公司未上诉视为认可该金额是错误的。该金额未包括案涉全部建材款。康达公司未上诉是因未收到一审判决。3.二审判决认定整个工程造价不超过2154万元是错误的。烟台万泰建筑有限公司（以下简称万泰公司）起诉康达公司、天宇公司案中确认，除去主要建材的施工工程造价为2532.339495万元。（二）二审判决认定事实的主要证据是伪造的。1.天宇公司伪造甲方甩项项目付款明细。该明细所称甲方是康达公司，天宇公司用手写方式注明天宇公司是甲方，明显与事实不符。2.天宇公司伪造《承诺函》。天宇公司用康达公司法定代表人逄传兰的空白签字纸张伪造《承诺函》，该承诺与实际情况明显不符。（三）康达公司因不能归责于本人的事由未参加一审诉讼。康达公司授权李金菊律师查阅公司与其他当事人诉讼的卷宗材料，李金菊律师在取得该委托书后通过手写方式添加代理案件的授权，并将变造后的授权书交至法院取得“代理权限”，其无权代理此案，导致康达公司并未实际参与一审程序。 |
| | ．．．．．． |
|
Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.
1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.
2. Binding to the account with access to this database.
3. Apply for a trial account.
4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【￥300.00】 for your single purchase. | |
您好：您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录，进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息；如您还不是我们 的英文用户；您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买，支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
|
| | | | | | | | |
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content
found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright
owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.
Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations
of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language
versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly
or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.
We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve
the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
|
|