In the visa form of a sub-project, the visa for the work is carried out in the form of signing a daily work during the construction of the sub-project. The second instance held that the number of daily worker visas for the sub-item was too large, and the work could have been priced by the method of quota group pricing, and should not be priced by signing the daily worker. Because the ** obtained by the fixed price method is much lower than the ** obtained by the daily labor method.
Keywords: visa
The core of this case is that for a project that should be priced according to a fixed amount, the two parties agree in the visa to be priced in the form of daily labor, so in the end, whether it should be priced according to the fixed amount or according to the visa. We say that the nature of the visa is a supplementary agreement, since the two parties have reached a supplementary agreement, and in the supplementary agreement, the original contract has changed the pricing method according to the fixed amount. Then, according to Article 19 of the Judicial Interpretation of Construction Contracts (I), "if the parties have agreed on the valuation standard or method of the construction project, the project price shall be settled in accordance with the agreement." Of course, this clause can also be understood to mean that if the parties have a change agreement on the valuation standard and valuation method of the construction project, the price shall be settled in accordance with the change agreement. Therefore, the auditor's view that the valuation should be carried out by means of a fixed amount is completely unreasonable.
Leave your controversial questions in the comment area, and the expert teachers will share them at 8 p.m. on Sunday!