质疑：“实际施工人”及其诉权——最高院[2004]14号司法解释第26条的缺陷与修复

Query about ＂actual contractor＂ and the right to sue---On defects and amending about the article 26 in No.1412004] Judicial Interpretation

最高人民法院[2004]14号司法解释以施工合同是否有效来区分“施工人”和“实际施工人”，并规定“实际施工人”可以起诉与之没有合同关系的“发包人”，违反债权相对性原则，也导致诉讼秩序混乱。必须予以匡正。审理建设工程施工合同纠纷案件，应根据合同性质和建设工程实际确定当事人的名称和诉讼权利，在遵循法律基本原则的前提下探寻完善保护工程承揽人、农民工合法权益的制度和路径。

The No.14[2004] Judicial Interpretation of Supreme Court differs ＂actual contractor＂ from ＂contractor＂ according to the effectiveness of construction contract, and states that ＂actual contractor＂ can sue the party issuing contract of construction project who did not contract with him. As it breaches the principle of privity of contract, results in litigation disorder and can＇t protect the legal rights of project owners and farmer workers, it should be corrected. Adjudicating on the cases on construction project contract should straighten out the relationship of parties and their litigation rights, according to the nature of their contract and the actual situation of construction project and seek for improving system and ways to protect the legal rights of project owners and farmer workers, on the premise of basic law principles.