海南某工程公司与陵水某投资公司建设工程施工合同纠纷案
Hainan X Engineering CompanyV.　Lingshui X Investment Company

(Dispute over the construction contract)

　　2016年7月14日，海南某工程公司中标陵水黎族自治县机关幼儿园工程第一标段工程。2016年7月27日，海南某工程公司与陵水某投资公司签订《建设工程施工合同》，约定陵水某投资公司将上述工程发包给海南某工程公司。海南某工程公司遂进场施工，施工过程中，经设计单位和陵水某投资公司的同意，变更了顶棚做法。施工完成后，2018年1月25日，涉案工程验收质量合格。2019年1月20日，陵水某投资公司委托某工程咨询公司对涉案工程进行造价审核，某工程咨询公司作出《结算审核书》，认定涉案工程结算审核金额为23224659.79元。海南某工程公司、陵水某投资公司、监理单位以及某工程咨询公司均在《竣工结算审定签署表》上盖章及签字。On July 14, 2016, Hainan X Engineering Company won the bid　　section of Lingshui Li Autonomous County Government Kindergarten Project　in　the　first section. On July 27, 2016, the engineering company signed a construction contract with Lingshui X Investment Company, under which the investment company shall award the above project to the engineering company.　During the construction process, with the consent of the designer and the investment company,　the engineering company　made a change of　the ceiling. After the completion of construction, on January 25, 2018, the quality of the　project was accepted after inspection. On January 20, 2019, the investment company entrusted an engineering consulting company to conduct a cost review on the　project, and the engineering consulting company issued the Settlement Review Report, determining that the settlement review amount of the　project was　RMB　23,224,659.79. The engineering company, the investment company, the supervisor and the engineering consulting company all　signed　and sealed　on the Completion Settlement Approval Form.

　　2020年1月10日，海南某工程公司、陵水某投资公司签订《建设工程施工合同补充协议》，约定双方就预算漏项漏量调整进行补充，再次对某工程咨询公司审定的总造价数额给予确认。2021年5月26日，某工程咨询公司出具说明函，载明各楼栋天棚面是按抹灰进行审核，后期发现施工单位未按图进行施工，属提供虚假资料，建议陵水某投资公司要求施工单位退还相关款项。因陵水某投资公司未付清剩余工程款，海南某工程公司遂诉请陵水某投资公司支付工程款3667262.42元及相应利息。
On January 10, 2020, the engineering company and the investment company signed the Supplementary Agreement to Contract of Construction Works, under which both parties shall supplement the adjustment for omitted quantity and items and confirm the total cost amount approved by the engineering consulting company again. On May 26, 2021, the engineering consulting company issued an explanation letter stating that the ceiling surface of each building was reviewed according to plastering practice. Later, it was found that the constructor failed to construct according to the drawing, therefore false information was provided. Therefore, the investment company claimed the constructor to refund the relevant amount.　Since　the investment company did not pay off the remaining project amount, the engineering company filed a lawsuit against the investment company, claiming that the latter shall pay the project amount of　RMB　3,667,262.42 and corresponding interest.

　　陵水黎族自治县人民法院作出（2021）琼9028民初1838号民事判决：限陵水某投资公司于判决生效之日起十日内向海南某工程公司支付剩余工程款3667262.42元及利息。陵水某投资公司不服，提起上诉。海南省第一中级人民法院作出（2021）琼96民终4158号民事判决：驳回上诉，维持原判。

Lingshui　Li　Primary People's　Court　issued the　Civil　Judgment　(2021) Qiong 9028 MinChu No.1838for this case: The investment company shall pay the remaining project amount of　RMB　3,667,262.42 and interest thereof to the engineering company within 10 days from the effective date of the judgment. The investment companydissatisfied with　the judgment,　filed　an appeal.　Hainan　First Intermediate People's Court　rendered the　Civil　Judgment　(2021) Qiong 96 MinZhong No.4158　for this case:　The appeal was　dismissed　and the　judgment of the first-instance court was affirmed.

　　陵水黎族自治县人民法院认为，根据《中华人民共和国合同法》第八条的规定，依法成立的合同均具有法律效力，当事人应当遵守。《补充协议》并不存在无效或者可撤销、可变更的情形。该结算协议是在涉案工程已经竣工验收合格，对已完成工程量进行核算并经协商一致的基础上，各方的真实意思表示，对双方当事人具有法律效力，不能随意变更或者解除。陵水某投资公司于2019年1月20日委托第三方对涉案工程出具《结算审核书》，确认了涉案工程结算项目、完工数量和金额，认定结算金额为23224659.79元，对此海南某工程公司、陵水某投资公司、设计单位和监理单位均盖章签字予以确认。2020年1月10日，海南某工程公司、陵水某投资公司在发现项目存在预算漏项漏量的问题后，双方就预算漏项漏量调整进行补充，并达成《补充协议》，即再次对第三方审计单位审定的总造价数额予以确定，确认项目总工程款价款为23224659.79元。该行为表明，双方对工程结算经过充分考虑，涉案全部工程款已经最终确认。陵水某投资公司以未核实涉案工程的各楼栋天棚面抹灰部分以及营改增部分税款为由，主张《补充协议》不应作为涉案工程的支付和结算依据，而应当就该部分重新进行鉴定。

Lingshui Li　Primary People's Court　held that, according to Article 8 of the　Contract Law of the People's Republic of China,　a contract formed in accordance with law is　legally binding on the parties to the contract　and shall be complied with by the parties concerned. The supplementary agreement is not invalid or revocable or　alterable. The　settlement　Agreement,　signed　after　the project　was　completed and accepted, and the completed quantities　was　calculated and agreed upon through negotiation,　reflected　the true intention of each party.　Therefore, the　Agreement　is legally binding on both parties and cannot be　modified　or terminated at will. On January 20, 2019, the investment company entrusted a third party to issue the Settlement Review Report for the project, confirming the settlement items, completed quantity and amount of the project, and determining that the settlement amount was　RMB　23,224,659.79. The engineering company, the investment company, the designer and the supervisor all sealed and signed the report for confirmation. On January 10, 2020, after the engineering company and the investment company found that some items, and quantities were omitted and not considered in the budget for the project, both parties supplemented the adjustment of omission in the budget via a supplementary agreement, i.e., the total cost amount approved by the third party audit firm was determined again, and the total project price was confirmed to be　RMB　23,224,659.79. This shows that both parties have fully considered the settlement of the project, and all the project amounts involved have been finally confirmed. The investment company claimed that the supplementary agreement shall not be used as the basis for payment and settlement of the　project, but the　said　part shall be re-identified and re-appraised on the grounds that it did not verify the plastering costs of the ceiling surface of each building and taxes arising from replacing business tax with VAT.

　　该院认为，顶棚做法的变更是经过设计单位和陵水某投资公司的同意，海南某工程公司已依照变更后的做法制作顶棚，双方依据何种方式进行结算即依据变更前的做法结算或者变更后的做法结算，属于双方的意思自治。此外，在《补充协议》中亦对营改增补税有所约定，并不存在未扣减营改增部分税款的情形。根据《最高人民法院关于审理建设工程施工合同纠纷案件适用法律问题的解释（二）》第十二条的规定，对陵水某投资公司该抗辩意见不予采纳。陵水某投资公司应根据《补充协议》确认的项目总工程款价款23224659.79元，扣除已支付的19557397.37元，向海南某工程公司支付工程款3667262.42元及利息。

The Court　held that the change of the ceiling practice was approved by the designer and the investment company. The engineering company has constructed the ceiling according to the changed practice. The selection of a settlement method by the two parties, including the settlement based on practice before the change or the settlement based on practice after the change is one of the autonomies of will that both parties are entitled to. In addition, the supplementary agreement also stipulates the provisions on supplementary tax for replacing business tax with VAT, and no part of the tax for replacing business tax with VAT needs to be deducted. According to the provisions of Article 12 of　Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Construction Project Contract Dispute Cases (II), the defense of the investment company shall not be upheld. The investment company shall pay a project amount of　RMB　3,667,262.42 and interest thereof to the engineering company according to the total project price of　RMB　23,224,659.79 as confirmed in the supplementary agreement, after deduction of the paid portion of　RMB　19,557,397.37.

　　发包方委托第三方对涉案工程结算进行审核，发包方对于所有结算资料的真实性、合法性、关联性均负有审查义务。在第三方出具《结算审核书》后，发包方应当在合理的期限内对《结算审核书》的内容进行审核并提出异议。在长达两年多的时间内，发包方均未对《结算审核书》中涉及到天棚抹灰工程造价和税款计算提出异议，且在第三方出具说明函后亦未提出撤销《补充协议》，怠于行使自己的权利，应当自行承担不利的后果。

The employer entrusted a third party to review the settlement of the project,　and the employer was obliged to review the authenticity, legality and relevance of all settlement documents. After the third party issued the Settlement Review Report, the employer shall review the contents of the Settlement Review Report and raise objections within a reasonable period. For more than two years, the employer has not raised any objection to the calculation of the cost of the ceiling plastering project involved and taxes thereunder, has not proposed to　revoke　the supplementary agreement after the third party issued the explanation letter, and　is indolent　in　exercising　its own rights, and shall bear the adverse consequences.

　　建设工程监理应当依照法律、行政法规及有关的技术标准、设计文件和建设工程承包合同，对承包单位在施工质量、建设工期和建设资金使用等方面，代表建设单位实施监督。工程监理人员认为工程施工不符合工程设计要求、施工技术标准和合同约定的有权要求建筑施工企业改正。涉案工程顶棚做法的变更是经过设计单位和监理单位的同意，如陵水某投资公司认为顶棚做法的变更未征得其同意因而对其造成了损失，可以依法追究相关责任人的赔偿责任，而非是径行对与承包方已签署协议结算确认的工程款予以扣减。
The construction project supervisor shall supervise the construction quality, construction period and use of construction sums of the contractor on behalf of the project owner, under laws, administrative regulations, relevant technical standards, design documents and construction project contracts. If the project supervisor believes that the project construction quality does not conform to the project design requirements, the construction technical standards, and the contract, it’s entitled　to require the constructor to make corrections. The change of ceiling practice of the　project was approved by the designer and the supervisor. If the investment company　thought　that　of the　other party changed the　ceiling practice　without　its consent and caused losses to it, the relevant liable person may be investigated for compensation liability under laws, instead of deduction from the project amount confirmed in the agreement signed with the contractor.

　　本案的处理结果，依法保护了中小投资者合法权益，督促大型企业及时依法审核工程结算资料，落实保障中小投资者的工程款及时支付，避免大型企业利用优势地位拒绝或者迟延支付款项，加大中小企业的流动资金压力，影响企业发展，在保护中小投资者合法权益方面具有典型意义。
The　Court　aims to protect　the legal rights and interests　of small and medium-sized investors　in accordance with the law, urges large enterprises to timely review the project settlement documents under laws, ensures timely payment of project amounts for small and medium-sized investors, presents large enterprises from refusing or delaying payment by taking advantage of their advantageous position, (otherwise, which may increase the working capital pressure of small and medium-sized enterprises, affect the development of enterprises); therefore the case is typically significant in protecting　the legal rights and interests　of small and medium-sized investors.