【作者】 黄河；

【导师】 姚建宗；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 法律， 2013， 硕士

【摘要】 长期以来，我国建设工程施工合同纠纷中（尤其是在按法律规定实行强制招标投标的项目领域），经常出现承包人与发包人针对同一工程签订两份合同的情况。这种“两份合同”的现象往往被俗称为“黑白合同”。它是建设商发包方与建筑商承包方基于现有法律规定和客观经济政策环境而做出的一种利益最大化的行政规避行为。双方针对同一个工程项目签订的两份合同，在工程价款、质量、期限等方面有实质性内容的差异。一份依照法律规定和政策要求订立并依法到行政管理部门备案，但不作实际履行只为应付行政审批，而另一份合同由双方谈判达成一致意见，并作实际履行之用。因为平等主体之间建设工程施工合同具有行政色彩，需要受到行政监管，而建筑市场主体追求自身利益最大化的性格必然选择趋利避害，不愿意受到行政行为的干预，再加上国家监管与建筑行业现实状况脱节严重，使得“黑白合同”在建设市场上大量存在且容易产生纠纷。中国现有规范本类建设工程施工合同纠纷的法律（包括司法解释）主要有《中华人民共和国合同法》、《中华人民共和国建筑法》、《中华人民共和国招标投标法》、以及《最高人民法院关于审理建设工程施工合同纠纷案件适用法律问题的解释》。但是上述法律在解决“两种合同”问题上却存在大量的困难，这是因为在规范“黑白合同”的法律体系中，没有明确的法律条文直接判断“黑白合同”的效力，更没能给出工程款结算的依据；或者是即便有这样的条文但意义还存争议；或是涉及一般条款、法律原则性规范或者不确定的法律概念；或者是形式法律的适用会导致个案处理的不合理、不公平。于是，需要引入新的法律方法实现调和当事人的权益矛盾——利益衡量。利益衡量是解决现实的建筑领域内普遍利益冲突的有效方法，能弥补其他法律方法无法提供“更强理由”之不足。它更符合我国社会现实，并能间接推动建筑行业立法，具有现实操作的可行性和效益性，因此被我国司法机关在解决建设工程施工合同纠纷时广泛运用。本文依据实证主义方法，选取了三个在事实方面具有相似性的“黑白合同”典型案件，具体探寻、评析各承办法官在审理后得出不同判决的利益衡量过程。认为三个案例中的利益衡量过程在对建设工程社会性的认识、利益位阶的承认、克制保守的司法性格三方面上存在共性。但也存在不同程度上的法官恣意的不足，这种不足具体体现在事实情况认定不清、利益位阶理解僵化、为追求利益选择而违背基本形式逻辑方面。如何进行利益衡量使其既能发挥优势又能有效地防范可能带来的恣意，笔者认为司法机关在处理建设施工纠纷，尤其是处理“黑白合同”问题时应该有利益衡量的内在逻辑。这种逻辑是一种思维范式，它为我们在具体处理建设施工纠纷时进行利益衡量提供一种类型化思维方式和有效方法。这种逻辑也是一种实质法律推理（辩证推理），它将利益衡量作为确立大前提的一般方法和原则，在缺位的大前提“归位”之后，再沿着形式法律推理的程式，得出有效的案件处理结论。笔者提出建设工程施工合同纠纷利益衡量的内在逻辑是：立足于不同的案件事实基础，准确识别承包人、发包人、其他招标投标人利益乃至合同自由利益（平等与意思自治）、质量合格与安全达标的工程项目成果、招投标制度经济效益、建筑业的健康与发展繁荣、良好的市场经济秩序等社会公共利益诉求，进而依据利益位阶、社会效果、公共政策、弱势保护因素标准进行利益保护方案的比较、取舍，再与现行法律框架反复比对、权衡、检验与校正，形成最终的法律判决理由。这一逻辑过程可以保证司法机关得出裁判的审慎性和规范性，同时增强判决结果的可预测性，为解决当事人的权益矛盾、妥善解决纠纷提供具有实际操作性的新路径。更多还原

【Abstract】 For a long time, there are two contracts between employerand contractor in Chinese construction contract cases,especially in the compulsory bidding project cases. This "twocontracts" phenomenon is often known as "black and whitecontract". It is an illegal trading phenomenon in the field ofconstruction. The employer and the contractor choose a kind ofadministrative avoidance behaviors to maximize their owninterests, based on the law and the objective economic policies.They signed two contracts for one same project, which aredifferent on project price, quality, span and other substantivecontents. One is concluded in accordance with the law andpolicies, and submitted to the administrative departments forthe record, however, It is used to deal with the administrativesupervision but not to actual fulfill. The other is used forthe actual fulfillment after serious negotiation by bothparties. Because construction contract is administrative in nature, that need to be supervised and controlled. Constructionmarket entities choose to pursue more interests and avoid risksaccording to its character of self-interest maximization. Theydon’t want to be interfered by the administration, what’smore—there is a big gap between state supervision andconstruction industry situation. So a large number of “blackand white contracts” exist in the construction market andcause disputes.The laws (as well as judicial interpretation) regulated thistype of construction contract disputes in China are The PRCContract Law, Construction Law of The PRC, The Tendering andBidding Law of The PRC, and Interpretation of the SupremePeople’s Court on The Law Applicable to Construction ContractCases. But these laws have great difficulty in solving theproblem of "two kinds of contracts", because there is no clearlegal words directly determine the effect of two kinds ofcontracts, and these laws can’t provide the base for thesettlement of construction payment (There may exist the law as the base to deal with these problem, however, it remainscontroversial); Or these laws may include general clauses,principle or other uncertain legal concepts; Or the objectiveapplication of the law would lead to an unreasonable and unfairresult. Thus, we need to introduce a new legal method to settlethe dispute and to resolve both parties’ conflicts--it isinterest measurement. This method can solve the common interestconflicts in construction field and can complement the shortageof other legal methods. Interest measuring is more fitful toChinese current situation. It can indirectly promoteconstruction industry legislation as well. Therefore, Interestmeasurement is widely used in construction contract cases byour judicial office.Based on positivism, this paper choose three typical caseswhich have lots of similarities in “black and white contract”facts and try to explore and analyze these different interestmeasurements in each judgment. I consider that there areconsistent views here: First, they believed that construction project is social. Secondly, they recognized Interest Rank.Thirdly, they abide the restraint and conservative judicialcharacter. On the other side, this process of measuring existthe arbitrariness of the judge. It is reflected in unclear factidentified, inflexible understanding about Interests Rank, andpursuing interests balancing regardless of logic.In order to not only take advantage of interests measurement,but also restrict the arbitrariness of the judge, I think thejudicial office in handling construction disputes, especiallyin “black and white contract”, should take the internal logicof interests measuring. This internal logic is a thinkingparadigm, which provides a typed thinking way and effectivemethod for interest measuring. It is also a Material Reasoning(or Dialectical Reasoning), which using interest measurementas a general method and principle for establishing the missingmajor premise. After replacing the major premise, we concludein accordance with the formal logic reasoning. I put thisinternal logic forward—we should accurately identify the interest of employer, contractor, and other bidders, includingcontracting freedom, good market economic order and othersystem’s interests and public interests based on case facts,then we compare and choose the suitable scheme for interestprotecting over and over according to Interest Rank, socialeffect, public policy, and weak protection priority. Finally,we reach a verdict after comparing and revising with currentlaw system. With this judicial logic, referee’s prudentialand normative can be guaranteed. At the same time this logiccan enhance the predictability. I think this may solve thedisputes of the construction contract parties and provide amore practical path.更多还原