Recently, focusing on the field of real estate construction engineering, Kyoto Law Firm, Shenzhen Branch, director of the Hou Zhichun team of lawyers, which represents a number of cases have achieved good results, and received a high degree of evaluation of the client and the case unit.
Performance one
Dismissed 40 million, another lawsuit won more than 100 million yuan
In 2004, a construction company general contracting N city residential and commercial projects, due to the owner's financial rupture, experienced a number of stops and resumption of work, and led to a large number of small owners petition. After the intervention of the relevant provincial and municipal departments, the residential part was completed and delivered (the lack of completion data, buried disputes), and for the commercial part of the podium, the owner notified the stoppage of work and then did not resume work. The project has not been settled.
In August 2015, the owner sued the client for the return of the overpayment of the principal amount of the project of nearly 40 million yuan and interest, as well as compensation for the loss of the commercial portion of the project which was not completed and delivered. Because the two sides have not been settled, the construction of the general contractor to complete the part of the cost appraisal needs to be carried out, but because of the long time, personnel mobility, coupled with mismanagement, the general contractor is seriously lack of construction information, cost appraisal results probability of the general contractor is unfavorable, so it and its agents at the time to use delaying tactics, a passive response to the case trial.
In November 2018, the general contractor to replace the agent, Hou Zhichun, Gao Xiaojie lawyer intervention, Hou lawyer team in-depth analysis and study of the case, to formulate a positive response to the program, proactive cooperation with the court cost appraisal, at the same time, filed a separate lawsuit, requesting the owner to pay the project payment of 60 million yuan of interest on the principal amount of interest and claims. Hou lawyer team visited the original project audit, supervision, design institute, quality inspection, urban construction archives and subcontracting unit, in view of the distance from the construction of the project time is long and repeated stoppages, part of the unit in the middle of the replacement, personnel mobility, file management, etc. Reasons, and the existence of some units and personnel are unwilling to cooperate, the data collection process is difficult to say. However, under the unremitting efforts of Mr. Hou, a large amount of project information was collected, which laid a solid foundation for the client's success in the case being sued and the other case.
After 6 years of first and second instance proceedings, the court finally rejected the owner's overpayment claim. For the separately sued case, the court of first instance ruled that the owner party should pay the principal amount of the project and the claimed damages to the principal of the client of nearly RMB 30 million, and other costs of nearly RMB 80 million, totaling more than RMB 100 million, and the owner party did not file an appeal in the end. After years of marathon case finally achieved a perfect result, the lawyer team's professionalism, responsibility, integrity has won the client's high appreciation, the contractor court also fully affirmed the active cooperation and professional ability of the lawyer team.
Performance two
Blending of legal and commercial thinking, win-win situation for all parties in the case
C city commercial center site along the Yangtze River Bridge, a Hong Kong-listed enterprise subordinate company funded with the owner of the site C city state-owned enterprises joint cooperative development, in the relevant government departments approved the record, a special construction company and the two signed a general contract, agreed that the project payment by the Hong Kong-funded company, has nothing to do with the land place.
Due to the financial constraints of the Hong Kong-funded company, resulting in non-payment of the relevant fees, the relevant authorities notified the project to stop work, while due to the fact that the project's business format is not residential, mainly commercial offices and a small number of apartments, it is difficult to depreciate the return of funds, coupled with the coinciding real estate regulation, lack of new funds, and ultimately, the project was completely halted in less than half of the development and construction.
At the end of 2018, the associate landlord filed a lawsuit requesting the termination of the contract with the Hong Kong-funded partner and compensation for losses, while the Hong Kong-funded party simultaneously filed a counterclaim requesting the landlord to return its inputs and damages totaling more than RMB400 million. Under these circumstances, the general contractor commissioned Hou Zhichun and Chen Boshen to represent the construction company in the lawsuit, requesting that the two joint venture partners of the project be ordered to pay the principal amount of the project, the security deposit, the claim and the interest thereon, which amounted to a total of approximately RMB 180 million. In light of the project's failure, even if the lawsuit was successful, the client was faced with the problem of enforcement. Hou has accumulated rich experience and resources in project reorganization and revitalization. If the project can be revitalized, it will form a win-win situation for all parties and solve the litigation and social conflicts from the root. C city high court as a platform, the litigation process and outside the litigation reorganization revitalization of two-pronged, the contractor judge, the litigation parties to enter the project investors and other rounds of communication and negotiation, although the final project involved in the transfer of the reason revitalization is not fully successful, but hou lawyers in the communication with all parties to establish a relationship of trust in the process of communication and exchange, for the final judgment of all parties do not appeal, on behalf of the fulfillment of the laying of an important foundation.
Finally, the court ruled that the Hong Kong capital party to pay the principal amount of 80 million commissioned by the general contractor, the deposit of 25 million, claims and other nearly 70 million, and the principal part of the right of priority, at the same time, the soil place does not bear the responsibility of joint and several payment.
