Recently, the civil and commercial litigation department of Jiangning lawyers handled the case of X Mou v. a H construction labor company, C Mou sale contract disputes after two final hearings won the case, and successfully assisted the client in recovering the project payment that had been owed for more than ten years.

I. Basic Case

In the second half of 2011, client X was introduced by an acquaintance to undertake the business of supplying cement, sand and other building materials to a construction site in Tongzhou, Beijing, and the contact person of the buyer was C, who claimed to be purchasing the building materials on behalf of H Construction Labor Company, and the two parties cooperated for about half a year without signing a written contract. After the settlement, C issued a note to X, stating that "I owe X a total of ** million yuan for sand and cement. Owed by: C." The note was signed and dated.

Thereafter, C immediately lost contact, H construction labor company also does not recognize the fact that the outstanding project payment, and told X "who issued the note to find who".

Litigation strategy and risk response

This case involves the legal relationship is not complicated, but the time is long, the evidence material is thin, even the party information is incomplete. After accepting the commission, the lawyer after material collection and analysis, from the perspective of the maximum possible protection of the interests of the parties, decided to C and H construction labor company sued together, and at the same time for property preservation. After the court feedback, C someone has enough to cover the subject matter of the case and has been successfully preserved, H construction labor company has no property can be preserved.

At the first trial, the two defendants recognized the fact that the plaintiff and H construction labor company established a contract of sale, but argued that C is the company's project leader, the issuance of the note belongs to the duties of the company, the consequences should be borne by the company. And H construction labor company has been out of business for many years, no solvency. After the trial, the contractor lawyer and the judge, the judge made it clear that the contract is the procurement of building materials, and the plaintiff sued also found that the establishment of the contractual relationship with the H construction labor company, the case may not be optimistic about the outcome of the judgment. Once C successfully exonerated, the plaintiff will be faced with the situation that even if the judgment is successful, it cannot be enforced.

Utilizing the search to turn the danger into an opportunity to overcome it

For the trial of the unfavorable factors, the contractor lawyer from three aspects of the search, one is the case of a construction site in tongzhou project involves other civil disputes can be done in this case for reference; Second, for the name of my signature on the note of the behavior of the practice of the determination; Third, on the "job" and "joining the debt". Third, on the "official behavior" and "debt joining" distinction between the existing theory research.

By summarizing the above three aspects of the search results, the contractor lawyer found that there is a C, H construction labor company in the case of a construction site project in tongzhou foreign procurement and arrears of building materials, although the case and the case is not identical, but the relevant factual findings can be used as a reference in this case; practice, there are many that the act of issuing notes in the name of an individual constitutes the debt to join the judgment, the company's shareholders, legal persons, Employees are not an exception; In addition, the contractor also submitted two articles published on the official website of the court, as the theoretical support for the determination that C constitutes a debt accession. After the above search work was completed, the contractor lawyer submitted to the court in the form of agency opinion, case search report, theoretical research collection, and communicated with the contractor judge for many times to clarify the point of view. Finally, the court of first instance found that C's behavior constitutes debt joining, and the lawyer's opinion on the statute of limitations was also adopted by the court, after the second trial, the client X finally recovered the project payment that was owed for more than ten years.

In this case, only for the preservation of personal property of the special circumstances, the contractor lawyer fully excavate the facts of the case, from the theoretical and practical aspects of the controversial issues in practice to provide sufficient basis for decision, and ultimately achieved good results, highly recognized by the client.