|
In recent years, the way of resolving disputes in domestic construction engineering has been towards civil litigations. However, the litigation judges do not have the professional background, and whether they can fully understand the “facts and reasons” in statements from both parties. This paper is mainly to conduct analysis of construction lawsuits arisen from the principles of changed circumstances based on the professional construction background with a slight legal knowledge and from a third party’s objective point of view to study if the statements of “facts and reasons” from both parties will affect judge’s ruling subject to the principles of changed circumstances. Litigation judges have their professional background in laws but not in construction engineering; therefore, the litigant parties have to convince the judge. There are applicable principles of changed circumstances from construction disputes. It is necessary to give an adequate statement of five elements of principles for changed circumstances, which will be advantageous to the party who provides a sufficient statement relevant to court’s judgment. This paper divides the five elements of principles in constituting changed circumstances into two. Among which, first of all, there is a fact of changed circumstances; and secondly, the changed circumstances take place after the establishment of the legal relationship and before the eradication of legal effects. These two elements are the minimum threshold whether the case is established based on the principles of changed circumstances; therefore, we did not conduct quantification. Regarding “facts and reasons,” it is unconscionable such as it is not expected from the parties and it is non-predictability, occurrences that are not attributable to the parties, and even after the changed circumstances, the effectualness is still in the process of implementation. These three elements should be the main focuses of offense and defense for the parties. This paper conducts quantification on these three elements of offense and defense for both parties. Firstly, we gave weight scores to these three elements in accordance to their importance. And then we gave scores based on the detailedness in statements of “facts and reasons” towards the principles of changed circumstances from the parties. To avoid the impact on the results of case analysis, we deleted those cases that are not related to the construction disputes and those cases that adopted pessimistic attitudes with “facts and reasons.” From the analysis of example cases, the high and low of scores are obtained according to the detailedness and the completeness in the statements of “facts and reasons” from the parties. The scores of statements of “facts and reasons” are cross-referenced to the court’s ruling. We found that the party who won the case usually has the higher scores. The party who has the higher scores in the statement also has the bigger chance to win the case. The results of case analysis showed that in the litigation cases arisen from the principles of changed circumstances, if the party gives more detailed statement in the three elements of “facts and reasons” for changed circumstances, the party gets higher scores and the chance to win the case is also higher. The comparison of case analytical results to the court’s judgments, we learned that the interrelations ratio between statements of “facts and reasons” as well as litigation winning is high up to 91%. It can be determined that there is a very high correlation between a detailed statement of “facts and reasons” and the probability of obtaining a favorable judgment of civil litigation. This paper believes that in the future if there are disputes in principles of changed construction circumstances, having a detailed statement in the three elements of “facts and reasons” subject to the principles of changed circumstances, the probability of winning a favorable judgment is near more than 90%.
|