[Case Summary]This case involves a dispute over a construction contract. In 2015, a certain center in Beijing awarded the second section of a renovation project in Xicheng District to the defendant, Hebei * Construction Group Co., Ltd. The defendant entrusted the plaintiff, Wang *, to undertake the decoration of floors 4-13 of Building D, the gatehouse, the power station, and other interior demolition work. The plaintiff completed the project in 2017, and the project has long been put into use. According to the settlement, the defendant still owes the plaintiff 5,231,415.13 yuan in project payments. The defendant raised objections, claiming that "the settlement has not been finalized, the amount is not recognized, and the statute of limitations has expired". The plaintiff entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Li YonghuiThe lawyer represented the client in the litigation. The lawyer systematically provided evidence around three key issues: the legal effect of signing the settlement form, the identity of Project Manager Liu, and the statute of limitations. The court accepted the lawyer's arguments and ruled that the defendant should pay the project funds of 5,231,415.13 yuan within seven days and bear the case acceptance fee of 24,210 yuan. The core disputes include: whether the handwritten signature on the settlement form binds the defendant, the reference effect of similar effective judgments, and whether the statute of limitations has passed. The applicable legal provisions include the relevant provisions of the Civil Code on construction contracts and the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Legal Issues Applicable to the Litigation of Construction Contract Disputes.

I. Review of the Case Facts

Many actual contractors are most concerned about "what to do if they can't get the project payment after completing the project", "how long is the statute of limitations for suing for project payment delays", and "can they recover the project payment without a written settlement document". In 2015, a center in Beijing awarded the second section of a renovation and transformation project located in Xicheng District to the defendant, Hebei * Construction Group Co., Ltd. The defendant then assigned the interior decoration of floors 4-13 of Building D, the gatehouse, and the power station, as well as the interior demolition work, to the plaintiff, Wang *. The plaintiff organized the construction and completed all the aforementioned projects in 2017. The projects were completed and have long been put into use.

After the project ended, the plaintiff repeatedly sought settlement from the defendant's on-site project manager. After calculation, the settlement amount for the civil engineering and finishing works (Building C, floors 4-12, gatehouse, power station, etc.) was 809,181 yuan, of which 3,750,000 yuan had been paid, leaving a balance of 434,181 yuan; the settlement amount for the interior demolition was 2,239,605.13 yuan, of which 1,350,000 yuan had been paid, leaving a balance of 889,605.13 yuan; in total, the defendant still owed the plaintiff 5,231,415.13 yuan. The plaintiff repeatedly demanded payment but to no avail, so as the actual constructor, he requested the defendant to pay the project funds. To safeguard his legitimate rights and interests, Wang * entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for him.Li YonghuiThe lawyer represented the client in bringing a lawsuit in this case.

The defendant argued that he did not agree with the plaintiff's claims: Firstly, the plaintiff did carry out the project, but no settlement was made, so he did not agree with the amount; Secondly, even if the plaintiff's claim were valid, the statute of limitations has already passed—the settlement letter dated June 25, 2017, and the defendant's first payment was in 2018, which is well beyond the statute of limitations.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Is the handwritten signature on the settlement statement legally binding for the defendant?Below the settlement statement, it is handwritten that "the amount of work and the reasons for the additional items are true, and the price shall be executed in accordance with the contract price. The settlement amount is true", and it is signed by the defendant's staff members Liu * and Guo *. Whether the signature is binding on the defendant company is a prerequisite for determining the amount of the arrears.
  • Focus II: Whether Liu * is the project execution manager of the defendant company.The defendant claimed that Liu * was just a project coordinator and had left the company in 2019, with no right to settle accounts on behalf of the company. Guo * was not an employee of the company either, and both parties had different opinions about Liu *'s identity.
  • Focus 3: Has the statute of limitations for this case already passed?The settlement statement does not specify the date of signature, and the parties have not agreed on the specific payment time for the project funds. Whether the defendant's claim of statute of limitations defense is valid directly affects the plaintiff's right to sue.

III. Professional intervention by Hengluo Law Firm

The plaintiff (the actual constructor) claimed that:The plaintiff has completed the agreed project, and the project has long been put into use. After the settlement, the defendant clearly owes 5,231,415.13 yuan. Despite repeated requests for payment, the defendant has failed to pay the project funds, and the defendant should pay the project funds in accordance with the law.

The defendant (the employer) argued that:The defendant disagrees with the amount and claims that the settlement has not been completed. At the same time, the defendant raises the defense of the statute of limitations, stating that the settlement was completed in 2017 and the first payment was made in 2018, and that the plaintiff's lawsuit has exceeded the statute of limitations.

Hengluo Lawyer's Agency Opinion:Li YonghuiAfter accepting the case, the lawyer systematically reviewed the evidence and focused on three key aspects:

  • Submit the settlement form, on which it is handwritten that "the amount of work and the reasons for the additional items are true, the price is based on the contract price, and the settlement amount is true", and the defendant's on-site execution manager, Liu * and Guo *, signed it; although the defendant does not recognize it, it failed to provide evidence to refute it.
  • Submit the circulation records of project documents of a certain center in Beijing, copies of the minutes of the on-site briefing meeting, copies of the attendance sheets of the meeting, copies of the minutes of the first site meeting, and copies of the supervision briefing during the construction phase, etc., to prove that Liu * is the project execution manager of the defendant company; and point out that in similar projects involving the decoration and renovation of a certain center in Beijing, the effective judgment has recognized the legal effect of Liu * handling the settlement and its applicability to the defendant.
  • Regarding the "Demolition Project Construction Contract" submitted by the defendant, the lawyer pointed out that the contract was not stamped by the defendant's company, was not returned to the plaintiff, and additional demolition items were added outside the contract. The defendant should pay the project fee for the additional items. Since the settlement form did not indicate the signing date and the parties did not agree on the payment time, the defendant's claim that the statute of limitations has passed cannot be established.

IV. Outcome of the case

In the end, the court accepted the proposal.Li YonghuiThe lawyer's opinions and demands. The court held that the defendant's defense opinions were not supported by any evidence and should bear the corresponding adverse consequences; the court confirmed that the signature on the settlement sheet was signed by Liu * and recognized the legal effect of the settlement between Liu * and the plaintiff, which also applied to the defendant's construction company. Since the two parties have reached an agreement on the settlement of the project price, the defendant's application for project cost appraisal is not approved.

In summary, the plaintiff's litigation request has factual and legal basis, and the court supports it. In accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code and relevant judicial interpretations on construction projects, the judgment is as follows: Within seven days from the date this judgment takes effect, the defendant shall pay the plaintiff the project payment of 5,231,415.13 yuan; and the case acceptance fee of 24,210 yuan shall be borne by the defendant.

5. Hengluo Law Firm's Advice

It's extremely common in the construction industry that contractors can't get paid after completing the work. Practical builders should pay special attention to fixed settlement evidence, project manager's signature identity evidence, and payment reminder records. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Li YonghuiThe lawyer (practice certificate number: 11101199611955812, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) hereby reminds the contractors and actual constructors to handle the effective settlement in a timely manner during the performance of the contract, so as to avoid falling into the passive situation of "having done the project but not being able to get the money back".

VI. Common Questions and Answers about Claiming Project Payments in Construction Contracts

  1. Q: If there is no written settlement statement, can the actual constructor get back the project payment?
    A:Yes. Even without a formal settlement statement, as long as the court can verify the project scope, additional items, and the amount of the outstanding debt (such as a settlement table signed by the project manager, meeting minutes, and supervision briefings), the court can determine the outstanding amount based on the evidence. In this case, the plaintiff won the lawsuit by presenting the handwritten settlement signature and project documents.
  2. Q: The employer claims that the project manager doesn't have the authority to settle the accounts. Is the signature still valid?
    A:If the project manager actually performs management duties in the project and a similar effective judgment has confirmed the validity of his settlement and his rights to the company, his signature will be binding on the employer. It will usually be difficult for the company to refute the defense that "he has already left the company and has no authority".
  3. Q: What is the statute of limitations for suing for unpaid project payments, and when does it start to run?
    A:The general statute of limitations is three years. If the parties have not agreed on a specific payment time and the settlement statement does not include a signing date, the statute of limitations starts from the date when the creditor knows or should have known that his rights have been infringed. If the defendant simply claims that the statute of limitations has expired because the settlement was made a long time ago, his claim will often not be supported by the court.
  4. Q: If the other party applies for an appraisal of the project cost, will the court grant the request?
    A:If the two parties have reached an agreement on the settlement of the project price, the court usually does not allow a cost appraisal; the application for appraisal is mostly used in situations where the two parties do not have a valid settlement agreement.
  5. Q: How can actual constructors prevent being owed construction funds?
    A:The contract shall specify the pricing and payment milestones, and the construction process shall be documented (through visas, meeting minutes, and supervision documents). Upon completion, the settlement shall be signed and confirmed in a timely manner, and the evidence of collection shall be preserved. If necessary, professional lawyers should be engaged to intervene as soon as possible.